Jump to content

Pet peeves - let's hear them


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>Wow, with so many English grammar-related posts that I think we have more English teachers than photographers on this board :P I kinda assumed we would stick to photography-related pet peeves in the casual photo conversations forum, but I guess I was wrong. </p>

<p>I have to concur about the lens-hood-on-backwards faux pas...cracks me up whenever I see that, especially when people shoot all day like that (why not leave hood at home?). Reminds me of umbrellas w/ built-in retractable hard plastic cover. Just looks funny when it's not fully extended.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I get asked often, "What camera should I buy?" I ask what they will be doing, and all the right questions. Usually I recommend they get a $200 P&S. They inevitably buy a gigantic $1,000 dSLR, which they need like a hole in the head. Ok, the pet peeve is coming up now. They come to me with their new SuperNovaXtreme 4000GX/12i, and want me to unbollox the unit which has been accidentally set to some absurd condition by pressing menu after menu. Asking if they read the manual, is of course, hopelessly optimistic. "No, I didn't understand all that gobblygook."</p>

<p>A few times I showed my impatience with, "This is why I told you to buy the Simple1000 model." "Yeah, but my husband said this one was a lot better." Well, for the next 6 months I am the "go to guy" to set/fix/reset/configure/reconfigure the camera. Of course, all they ever do is put it on AUTO and zoom away. I am learning patience. It is a small pet peeve and frankly more amusing than annoying.</p>

<p>Since I answered a photographic pet peeve, does that earn me a small shot at the language question? I was once a strict language nazi myself, and was disgusted with all the LOLing about. No more. I now believe that it's every bit as absurd to demand strict formalized written language as it would be to suggest that no one should use Photoshop to play with "formally recorded images." Communications techniques are redefining language exactly as Photoshop is redefining the image. Stiff branches break off in the wind.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>The up in listen up is used to emphasize the seriousness and need to actually listen. Wait up is a request or directive for someone to stay in the position they are currently in in order for the speaker to 'catch up' to them.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I know what they mean, why they mean it is what I don't understand.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>I kinda assumed we would stick to photography-related pet peeves in the casual photo conversations forum</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A foolish presumption but lets see if we can steer it back to your original intention!</p>

<p>Referring to items of equipment (usually lenses) as copies e.g. "I think I might have a bad copy of this lens as mine is not sharp" leads me to think that the writer should have bought a real one rather than a copy.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting comments about lens hoods. It makes me want to set up a test of with/without hood shots. It would be

interesting to see if anyone can actually identify the shots with the hood consistently. Except for lighting that might

cause flare, I'll bet that the results would average out to about the same as a coin toss.

 

 

When did "shooting" or "making an exposure" become "capture?"

 

 

When did pictures become photographs, and when did photographs become images?

 

 

And what is a digital photographer? Someone who takes photographs of fingers? Either you're a photographer or

you're not. Are you defined by your skills and knowledge and vision, or are you defined by the gear that you used for a particular project?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>People, from any country, who happily correct others but don't know quotation marks go on the <em>outside </em>of sentence ending punctuation, not inside.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I would have once agreed with this, but not any more. It logically just makes so much more sense to not have extraneous material inside the quotation marks which is NOT part of the quotation. Not to mention how much easier it is to type with the marks in order with the meaning, not the convention. It's not that we don't "know", it's that we have moved on from the outdated constraints of the printed page.</p>

<p>Here are some very useful German phrases for this sort of thing:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Ha - Das war nichts. [Ha, that's nothing]<br /> Gestern warf ich ein Gummipapier auf dem Marktplatz! [Yesterday, I threw a gum wrapper on the square]<br /> Ich bin ein Anarchist/Amerikaner. [i am an anarchist/American.]<br /> w/ apologies to <em>Wicked German for the Traveler</em></p>

</blockquote>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have two, they're both related, and they annoy the hell out of me.<br>

1. People who seemingly have no clue what a turn signal lever is used for. This includes both making a turn and lane changes.<br>

2. When making a turn, the turner turns not into the lane closest to them, but crosses that lane and goes into the other, ie. person makes a left turn onto a roadway with two lanes of traffic in both directions, but instead of turning into the inside lane, they go directly to the outside lane. They should instead, turn into the inside lane and once there, use their turn signal to indicate a lane change into the outside lane.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>On the subject of turn signals, here is one which I hate. (US residents who drive on the wrong side of the road will have to swap left and right to understand this).</p>

<p>When approaching a roundabout to turn right (third exit of a four junction roundabout) the correct procedure is to indicate right, then just before exiting the roundabout, indicate left so that drivers waiting to join the roundabout know where you are going.</p>

<p>About half of the drivers I see in the UK do not indicate at all. A big percentage of the half that do manage to keep their right indicator on when exiting the roundabout.</p>

<p>Not using indicators is the height of laziness as they are probably the easiest to operate of all of the controls in a car and your hand is right next to the lever whilst you are driving.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>David W - </p>

<p>Two to add to yours - <br>

1) Masters of the pump fake - people that are turning in one direction but go to the opposite direction to make the turn - so if they are turning right - they swing into the left lane to make the turn.... Come on folks - you're not driving a bus or 18 wheeler!</p>

<p>2) The fake turners or undecided... they use turn signals - but then go straight or turn the opposite... </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>From the <em>OED</em>, v. 2</p>

<p>f.III.22.f transf. intr. and trans. To take a snapshot (of) with a camera; to photograph (a scene, action, person, etc.) with a cinematographic camera; to take (cinematographic film), to film; occas. with the actor as subject. <br>

<br /> 1890 Anthony's Photogr. Bull. III. 3 Beside him is another sort of shutter operator with an ordinary camera and fairly good shutter.‥ Does he shoot when his companion did? 1892 Photogr. Ann. II. 51 We at first tried the other method, namely, looking at the object and shooting at the critical moment. 1896 Punch 30 May 264/2, I even bless the Kodak now With which, dear Nell, you ‘shot’ me. 1916 ‘B. M. Bower’ Phantom Herd ii. 22 He‥debated whether it should be ‘shot’ with two cameras or three. 1919 Conquest Dec. 70/2 First, the camera man ‘shoots’ on the tank containing the fishes with one half of the lens open. 1930 E. Waugh Vile Bodies ix. 156 ‘All right,’ said one of the men with megaphones.‥ ‘We'll shoot the duel now.’ 1953 Manch. Guardian Weekly 27 Aug. 7/1 While the big-city exhibitors were pondering this expensive outlay a small studio in Hollywood shot a poor film with two interlocking lenses. 1962 Montagu & Leyda tr. Nizhny's Lessons with Eisenstein iii. 66 Could the set-up be so changed as to shoot past Dessalines' back? 1976 Observer (Colour Suppl.) 9 May 10/2 She has also shot the odd film here. 1978 J. Krantz Scruples iii. 77 If anyone was going to go down to the Virgin Islands and shoot three models in next year's monokinis‥it was Hank.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ditto on intrusive airport security and all of the ludicrous geopolitical conditions that necessitate it in the first place.

 

 

And lest we not forget, luggage surcharges for already-expensive flights that can't even offer a free bag of pretzels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Living here in politically correct California, I wonder if the sensitive types found "shoot" too violent and "caaapture" more humane. For those that did, I "machine gun" mine with a burst at 8 fps with my 35 mil. Any of the lovers of the language here miss Carlin's analysis of language too?</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Mine just hit me. I was looking forward to an afternoon of printing. Got everything set up, and when I started to mix my Dektol, it looked like some really strong tea. Guess it was older than I thought. so It shouldn't be a total loss, I mixed fresh paper fix too. Now just have to wait for it all to cool down.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...