What Photography-Related Things Would You Send Into Room 101

A BBC radio and TV series here in the UK is "Room 101." People argue to send things they dislike into the infamous room from Orwell’s book Nineteen Eighty-Four, where they will never be seen again. What would you send there from the world of photography?

Photography should be fun, but some things get in the way. Even the most cheerful and easygoing of us have things we don’t like. Having the opportunity to rant, let off some steam, and then send them off to Room 101 can be cathartic.

So, here’s our chance to be grumpy and shout about the trivial stuff in the world of photography that annoys us. Obviously, there is major stuff like war, racism, and misogyny that any reasonable-minded person would like to see the end of, but that’s not what this is about. This is a chance to put on a mildly cranky face and point out the relatively minor things in photography that annoy us.

Plagiarizers

These come in many forms. First, there are the freeloaders who want you to let them use your photos on social media. I get them all the time on Instagram, don’t you? People and bots seek out my posts asking to post my images on their social media as if I am doing them a favor. Why do they do this? Because they can make money from my pictures. What do I get in return? Nothing.

Secondly, and worse still, are those who take my images and articles to publish on their websites without permission. I’m quite good at getting those taken down because I just send them an invoice along with my terms and conditions, which give my charges for use of my work without permission.

The theft of copyrighted work is a big industry earning criminals millions of dollars every year. Social media companies help preserve this crime because, although they might take individual posts down when someone complains, they rarely block these aggregate accounts because they get tens of thousands of views and thus earn them money from advertising. Let’s encourage people to unfollow these aggregate accounts, then inform those whose photos are stolen of the theft, and send those thieves off to Room 101.

Poorly Quality Products on Online Marketplaces

When I made the change to digital photography, it was soon after the widespread use of the internet. I lived in a small village in the wilds of Scotland, and even my dial-up first-generation mobile phone connection gave me access to shops that were unavailable to me.

It wasn’t long after that when a lot of cheap photography products appeared on the market. This was when I discovered that a bargain isn’t necessarily so; you get what you pay for in the world of photography. Overly cheap filters, intervalometers, memory cards, lenses, and tripods flooded tax-dodging online marketplaces that had no concern about making sure the customer got a good deal.

I’ve still got the set of colored plastic filters I bought in my naivete. To be honest, I would be reluctant to condemn them to Room 101 because for low-fidelity photos, they are great. But a lot of people are conned into buying them, so into Room 101 they are kicked.

Fake Reviews

A long time ago, I used to buy two reputable photography magazines from the same publishing company. One month they both featured and reviewed the same entry-level camera. One gave the camera a five-star review and the other a pretty damning two-star review. Guess which article was right next to a full-page ad for that camera? The other magazine had advertisements for the camera’s main competitor.

Soon after that, customer reviews started to be noticed more. But then these became manipulated with disreputable traders using fake identities to write good reviews for themselves and bad ones for their competitors. Fortunately, there are browser plugins like Fakespot that help identify fake reviews.

Like many of the writers here, I write reviews of gear. I only write reviews of things that I think will be good. I get solicited all the time by manufacturers of rubbish products that don’t deserve to be reviewed. But if it is something worthwhile, I’ll agree to review it.

Sometimes I review the kit I bought and at other times what I have been sent to try. Much of that gets sent back to the manufacturer afterward, and at other times we get to keep it because of the cost of returning it. However, that doesn’t sway us in our opinions of the gear. If it’s good, we’ll say so, but at Fstoppers, we always mention what could be improved. Testing gear properly and then writing it up can take a couple of days.

With all the hard work and time that goes into writing an honest review, it grates that fake reviews get seen online.

Fake reviews I send into Room 101.

Big Businesses That Treat Customers With Contempt

Besides the cheap tat that should be consigned to Room 101, there’s the disappointment we get when a big brand brings out a new product and it doesn’t work properly. Unfortunately, the failure is only discovered after the product has been on the market for a while.

Perhaps the camera overheats or falls apart like the Canon R5, or maybe it was the lack of investment like the short-lived but otherwise great little Nikon 1 cameras. I’m going to include here software manufacturers that have a cynical attitude toward their clients too, introducing subscription-only plans when they promised to continue perpetual licensing. (Nobody has forgotten, Adobe.)

There are also poor-quality and overly restricted entry-level cameras that will either put the budding photographer off or force them to quickly upgrade because they outgrow the camera. Moreover, the advertising lie that suggests anyone who buys one of the manufacturer’s beginner’s cameras will become as good as the next National Geographic photographer is also contemptuous.

So, manufacturers who treat their customers with contempt are consigned to the hell that is Room 101.

Single-Use Plastic

This is something I usually include in reviews, and I have found ever more manufacturers are taking heed of it. A couple of years ago, vast amounts of plastic packaging were used to accompany every product. Now, there has been a significant reduction, with many boxes just having a thin cellophane wrapper and no plastic inside. Better still are those who don’t put plastic around the outside of a box but protect the product in either a reusable or biodegradable bag within the box. Similarly, boxes are becoming plain, and the glossy unrecyclable plastic foil covering with metallic lettering is becoming a thing of the past.

Nevertheless, there are still manufacturers who insist on having several layers of plastic inside their packaging. Of course, they are missing out on customers who will reject their products because of it. In effect, they are condemning themselves to Room 101. Meanwhile, those businesses that respect the planet are held in high esteem.

Stupid Names for Camera Functions

Camera manufacturers cannot agree on universal names for functions. Every other branch of science—and photography is as much a science as it is an art form—has standardized nomenclature.

Photography has branched out in a myriad of directions. Why would Nikon, Sony, and Canon call sequential shooting "continuous" when that word is widely associated with an autofocus mode? Then, who in their right mind at Canon decided that continuous autofocus should be called "AI Servo" or single autofocus "One-Shot"?

All manufacturers should stop pretending that their Matrix, Evaluative, multi, multiple, or Electro-Selective Pattern is anything but an advanced average metering mode.

Canon also went off-piste with the icons they use for their metering mode, too. They also have Av and Tv modes that the rest of the world calls A and S. Fujifilm, what’s with all those unlabeled buttons on the X-T4 or Single-Autofocus, Single Shot, and Shutter Priority all being labeled "S" on the X-T3?

Is there any other art or industry where there is such a confusing muddle of names designed to befuddle the user?

Stupid nomenclature is going into Room 101.

What Annoys You?

This is all a bit tongue-in-cheek. Adobe makes great software. Yes, AI Servo is a stupid name, but I guess Canon users get used to it. All these things I find just as funny as frustrating.

Perhaps those things don't bother you at all. Maybe you are annoyed at the AI generation that I used to create a couple of the pictures above, or all the Instagram reels of cats and cucumbers wind you up. Maybe it's a particular subject that you just can't capture.

What little irritations would you rant about and send off to Room 101? Keep it light-hearted and friendly; it's only photography and not war.

For some lighthearted rants while you are editing your photos, series one and series two of Room 101 can be heard on the BBC Sounds website.