A Website Dedicated to Outing "Photographers"

A Website Dedicated to Outing "Photographers"

You may find YouAreNotAPhotographer.com (a site dedicated to outing supposed professional photography businesses) entertaining, educational and yes even offensive. But one thing is for sure, if you don't get why these pics should be making you shake your head with the occasional chuckle, then you need to be looking at these photos as examples of things NOT to do or consider a new line of work.

I have a list with dozens upon dozens of photography related websites that I view each week and this one landed at the bottom of that list. Partially because it was new and partially because it seemed a bit too snarky and potentially offensive despite it's humorous approach. But it does, if nothing else, give excellent examples of common mistakes the average, novice photographer can make. I can't wait to see how our readers react and apologize if any of you are unfortunate enough to be featured on their site. If you want the full effect, head over to: YouAreNotAPhotographer.com, where each photos comes with it's very own berating comment.

You Are Not A Photographer: "Have you noticed how 50 girls you went to school with have set up shop as a "professional" photographer? Having a DSLR does not make you a professional photographer. We're outing these no talents with daily pictures from the worst of the web. We only post pictures that were from a photography "business," and we use that term lightly. Maybe you are one of those photographers. Have a good laugh at yourself. You submit the photos, and we provide the snark."











via [YouAreNotAPhotographer.com]
From Kenn:
Do you like what we are doing? Then show us some love. Tweet and Like your favorite articles and be sure to leave your comments below. Heck leave a comment even if you don't like what we are doing. We can take it. ;)

If you want to receive the best of the month's news articles in a convenient newsletter with added features such as Easter eggs, upcoming contests, great deals and more... then don't forget to subscribe now.
And don't be shy. I could use some more friends these days so hit me up on Twitter and Facebook.

Log in or register to post comments


this is golden. i'm gonna cherish this site and submit loads of stuff.

I agree with Thomas, I now alot of "photographers" whose work would not look out of place on that site.

Hah!  Unfortunately we see it everyday!!!

Amazing :D I went to college with a certain somebody who used their parents' money to buy tons of expensive cameras, lenses, lights and accessories. Years later, I'm still shooting with an outdated, beat up camera that I earned myself and I take much better pictures.

Graham Marley's picture

The wasted good gear thing is tricky. I remember my first DSLR, taking a picture and thinking "But it looks just like any other camera!" Clearly, a good camera is better than a crappy camera, but in ways that you have to LEARN. Bad photographers are simply the people who don't see what needs to change in their work, and thus never learn what to do or why you do it. I think the "give a crappy camera to a pro and they will make something amazing" thing is true, but only in the right context and conditions. If I can't get to manual controls or even exposure compensation easily, then I'm going to run into problems in a lot of places, or it'll at least make my life a lot harder. I do most of my low light work with two good bodies with a nice fast prime on each. Not because it's FAHNCY, but it gets what I need. You can't do that with a rebel and a kit lens after a certain point. 

Along that idea, these guys from the youtube channel did a serie "pro photographer/ cheap camera" which demonstrate what you say (and maybe a little more).

Zack Williamson's picture

man, that baby picture is going to give me nightmares

Tracy Nanthavongsa's picture


Jaymes Poudrier's picture

I'm not really a photographer, but then again I never claim to be. However, if this is photography, then I'm Ansel Adams....


Fetching image ...
Michael Blitch's picture

And do you get permission from the copyright holder to republish the work? Bad or not, you may be no better of a photographer if you copy the work of others so you can make money through advertising.

Patrick Hall's picture

Interesting thought there.  Obviously any news article or blog post doing a story on the site has permission to use the images in an editorial way but the site itself probably doesn't fall under news or public media.  It seems very similar to http://awkwardfamilyphotos.com/ which is a gem in and of itself

Kenn Tam's picture

The term "fair use" was created for these exact situations where the intent is to proliferate points of interest, news, trends and the like.  We are re-posting something already post by another site, where the original posters makes no claims on exclusive copy right.  That being said if the original post takes flack and proves to not have the rights/justification for said post, there will be a trickle down effect that would result in us removing any photos in adjudication, conflict or question.  There where some photos on their site that had copyrights applied and I specifically avoided them for that reason.  ;) Incidentally I don't see how this would make one "no better a photographer" where being a photographer and being a blog poster are not mutual exclusive.

Paul Monaghan's picture

Just because a photo dosn't have an copyright notice on it don't mean it isn't copyrighted.

As soon as the shutter is pressed the photographer/person own's the copyright of that photo (unless otherwise stated) no mater how good or bad unless otherwise stated in a contract for a job or such thing.

I don't watermark any of my photo's but that doesn't mean my photo's are not mine.

Anyway I quite enjoyed looking at the site and it worrying what people try to pass onto others exspecialy for paid work,

Kenn Tam's picture

I wasn't implying that unmarked pics don't have copy rights, just that when people watermark their pics they are kind of making a point of saying, "don't touch my $#!^", so I don't.  :)

Paul Monaghan's picture

yer good point :), Maybe I should start watermarking mine..  One of my photos ended up on lots of blogs (linked back to my flickr) If It had a water marked with my name/logo or so I guess it would make people more aware of me.

If I put my watermark to my images its just because if somebody likes to use my image, at least you can see the watermark, if the person forgets to mention the credit. Its not saying don't touch my image. Its just for safety.

Nicholas Gonzalez's picture

Very reassuring images. Stephen King, in his book On Writing, encouraged writers to read, constantly, the good and, especially, the crap. How else can we know the difference? :)

Gary Meyer's picture

I want to bookmark this and read it frequently, but I know my health will suffer from all of the pent-up rage I will experience.  I'll stick to being angry at my Facebook friends.  They're bad, but not THAT bad...

This is class! Fell off my chair watching this, love it!

Barbara Bell's picture

Okay, the baby coming out of the egg shot??  What IS that?!

Wondering how long until I end up on that site!

Mark Alameel's picture

The problem with most of these images posted on F-Stoppers is the bad Photoshop work.  Not that the originals were great to begin with...

Payam Jirsa's picture

OMG, new shoot concept! I am proud to be one of the first studios to offer Trash the Suit shoots for men.

My goal is to end up on that site!!!!!

Garrett Graham's picture

Oh man! You should not have shared this site I think I may need to see a doctor now. HA! This was great!

HAHAHA! This is phenominal. Good find!

Motti Bembaron's picture

I can't watch it. I tried, I really tried. It was painful.

j.j.'s picture

it's like people of walmart, but with the focus on bad photographers

youarenotaphotographer.com is pompous and elitest. I don't blame bad photographers when they rip someone off, I blame the cliental. This whole "photography business is in the toilet" thing is a load of crap. If you know the script, worth your salt, are willing to market yourself a little then you'll get paid. If not, and the clients don't look at the portfolio of who they hired to shoot their wedding and end up with awful photos; It's their fault. I know some people expect higher calibre photos then what I shoot and I wouldn't take personal offense if someone bold face told me.

Who says you need to have been shooting for 10 years to be the real deal. If you are born with it, then flaunt what you have and make clients happy. I shot my first wedding with an XS and kit lens and they came out just fine for the asking price. experience helps, but also if you read enough, know your equipment, technique, and know what you need to shoot luck with favor the well prepared. Perhaps, the modern photographer should adjust their asking price to the current market where there is more sheer volume of photographers and a wider variety in the calibre of photographers within that larger volume. If you can't afford anything but a $200 wedding, then you can still get it. it's better than nothing for some people. If you think you are worth 1000, then price yourself competitively to that class.
If you're really so up tight about this stuff, then figure out some sort of standard for being a 'PRO'. I'm an engineering major in school and I'm not an engineer till I pass my FE exam and not a pro until I pass my "professional engineering" exam. Standardize it or stop complaining!Thanks :)
Coming from a real pro, just like anyone else...


Jonathan Schwind's picture

Agreed. There isn't one photographer that doesn't know this is a ongoing learning process and everyone starts somewhere. And I know a good portion of my student work (as well as some of my professional work) is every bit as ridiculous to me today. While this site is good for a chuckle, all photographers regardless of skill level benefit from constructive criticism.

More comments