Wednesday, January 19, 2011

An analysis of LOSER/LIAR Ryan Dyar’s fake interview in Aperture Academy, Part one.

An analysis of LOSER/LIAR Ryan Dyar’s fake interview in Aperture Academy, Part one.



LoserPhotographers.com Feature: An analysis of LOSER/LIAR Ryan Dyar’s fake interview in Aperture Academy, Part one.

  Ryan Dyar is a good target for a Loserphotographers.com analysis. A drug addict who lives with his well-to-do parents in Battle Ground, Ryan Dyar has spent both a lot of time and a lot of his parent’s money trying to turn himself into a “professional landscape photographer”. He had an “interview” on the bogus Aperture Academy website, which seems to be obsessed with “interviewing” as many losers & frauds as it possibly can. Part one of a multi-part series. Quotes and our analysis follows:

The first LIE is literally in the very first sentence:

“…is professional career landscape photographer, Ryan Dyar…”: Professional career WHAT? Let’s review. Two years ago, Ryan Dyar was running around with a Canon Rebel and masturbating to Marc Adamus’ portfolio (while getting high, no doubt). Now he runs around with a Canon 5D MKII (camera choice of frauds everywhere), masturbates to Marc Adamus’ portfolio, and spends his parents’ money in the pursuit of fame. He’s not a professional anything, with the exception of “professional loser”. Well, we do admit that maybe Ryan really does want to be a photographer, but only because he could never pass a drug (or IQ) test for any real jobs.

“…I, like many landscape shooters, got started in landscape photography by my love for the outdoors…”: LIE. Ryan Dyar just found Marc Adamus’ portfolio, jerked off to it until he convinced his parents to spend thousands on printers/new car/ cameras. Now he pretends to be a professional photographer on Daddy’s dime. He is in love with his inflated image of himself, and his lust for fame & recognition.

“…I grew as a snowboarder, which meant a lot of time spent in the mountains exploring, riding, hiking, and camping…”: Bullshit! “Growing as a snowboarder” means a lot of time spent riding the ski lift and hitting the bong (with his loser buddies) in between passes down the mountain.

“…Eventually, my love for the alpine territories grew beyond the winter/spring snowboarding season and I began spending a lot of time hiking/backpacking just for the joy of being in the mountains…”: Bullshit! Typical crock of shit spun & weaved by liars trying to justify running around like a chicken with its head cut off, stealing real photographers’ images.

“…I used to bring a little point and shoot camera with me for snapshots and memories until I got my first DSLR…”: The first sign of fraud & incompetence. What does “a little point and shoot camera” have to do with a photographer’s images? Chase Jarvis has published an entire book using nothing but the iPhone camera. Could Ryan Dyar do that? Or any of his bozo buddies? Of course not! A real photographer’s images don’t change because he switches systems. Real photographers can create incredible images with any camera, including “a little point and shoot camera”. Always be wary of anyone who belittles the capabilities of a camera and ascribes his success to “DSLR’s”. Real photographers are not limited by the camera they use, which does not affect the impact of a careful composition and the right elements in the picture. DSLR’s are the easiest cameras to use, enabling weak photographers to pretend to be great Artists.

“…It’s the classic snowball effect… I didn’t start out wanting to be a photographer…”: Whatever. He just wants to be famous or avoid having to take drug and IQ tests for a real job. One or the other, or maybe both.

“…but once you actually learn how to use your camera and your images begin to get better and better…”:  Great images have nothing to do with whatever camera is used. Good cameras can make creating an image easier, but no camera can make a bad photographer into a good one. Case in point, Ryan Dyar. 

“…Going from your basic “point and shoot” owner to now career photographer in just a couple years is a big leap…”: Again, belittling cameras, as if the particular camera you use has anything to do with composition. And Ryan Dyar is not a career photographer. He is a career loser and stoner. Can he please point out the following: Galleries he has been in, Print sales, legitimate publications (not outdoor photographer), and winning real contests (not Better Photo “photo of the week”).

“…I would have never learned this fast with film, in my opinion…”: Of course not. When you’re a stoned loser, learning anything worthwhile is pretty hard.

“…I do have a great amount of respect for film guys, however…”: Untrue. These digital frauds routinely consider themselves to be the “best of the best”, a preposterous delusion. 

Part Two coming soon; stay tuned!


These lies, fraudulent boasts, and misrepresentations are merely a fraction of the many to be found in anything Ryan Dyar writes. Beware of Ryan Dyar or any of his friends. He is a LOSER who lives with his parents and indulges in illegal drugs. This is NOT the sort of person you should be buying anything from!

9 comments:

  1. Delusions? I challenge you to show this site to any mental health professional. You are not well and you need help. Seriously.

    Do it for yourself. Do it for your family.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Seeing as there was no answer in the last post i put this on

    I was just wondering, and I'm assuming whoever writes this blog sees themselves as a professional photographer, or someone dealing in the creative industry, how exactly did you gain this title? What training or education did you get?
    Because in other articles on here you bash those who are recently out of college, those who have any money whatsoever and everyone using a digital camera.

    "..realized all the “shortcomings” of film, and therefore, for years, you ignored large and medium format film photography in favor of a real camera.."

    Large and medium format cameras cost a lot, not to mention all that film, especially if you're working 10x8 or larger. How are you / were you able to afford this?

    In relation to the digital rage, do you feel the same about 35mm? Or darkroom work?

    It seems that a lot of your rants deal with either wealthy families, inspiration and appropriation, expensive websites or photographer led workshops.

    Almost all of the first professional or artistically accredited photographers were from wealthy families. Fox-Talbot, Niépce, Daguerre, all of these people were exceedingly wealthy. Cartier Bresson? His wealthy heritage gave him a basically unending source of income.

    Your argument over stealing images must mean that everyone who has taken a landscape photograph must be stealing the work of people like Ansel Adams? Or anyone who has taken a low key portrait is in fact a fraud for using a similar technique to 17th century painter Rembrandt?
    It is incredibly difficult, if not impossible to create something truly unique in this day and age. Even photographers such as Art Wolfe, (who seems to be something of an idol to you), create artworks that follow set "rules" created by landscape painters. Does this then mean that he too is nothing more than a "terrorist"? He also runs workshops, the swine!

    Im also quite interested in the descriptions in this post:
    http://www.loserphotographers.com/examples_idiots.html
    Old clothes for an outdoor shoot, how very unprofessional. After all, suits are made for trudging through rivers, right? Not that any self respecting professional would own a suit, everyone would think that daddy bought it.

    I also don't really understand how taking photographs makes someone a homosexual? I can't say I've ever taken a photo and wanted to "rub one out" to another guy taking a photo. But that may be because we're from different eras?

    I look forward to your reply :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. You reference Chase Jarvis as a great photographer, yet you constantly say how digital cameras are for losers, and that photoshop is some sort of ultimate sin. Chase uses photoshop in pretty much every image of his you see, and most of the time its one of his team who does the post work anyway. As much as I like Chase Jarvis, your points are invalid.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It would take another series of articles to look into the "Aperture Academy" itself. It's so clear these guys don't care about the art of photography because they treat it like it is any other product in need of retail distribution, not as art. But that’s fine because none of the images in the “Aperture Academy” are art in any case. They too of course get all their money from teaching people Photoshop.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yep. Frauds and Liars like Marc Adamus and Ryan Dyar try to get "interviews" everywhere they can, which is only only some bogus site like Aperture Academy. Note that in the "interview", they were very obsessed with Ryan's post-processing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. In response to Corey, those photographers you referenced were not landscape photographers. And I doubt they spent all their time teaching "workshops". Rich people can absolutely be pro photographers. Frauds, however, teach workshops all day instead of selling images.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm getting very excited because we are getting very close to finding you. And when that happens I'm going to hurt you and your family very very bad.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Please get a life. Your obsession with other people is depressing. Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  9. Honestly, photography is a hobby/career for rich people. So it's a bit of a career stopper for someone like me and I accept that. I can't afford those bloody L lenses and I usually hang out in the bargain bin.

    About the rest of the stuff here. I dunno. It sounds a bit bitter but then again he/they do have a valid point with regards to all the pretentious dribble that these so-called landscape photographers spit out. Peter Lik has got to be one of the worst! But then again, if someone is going to fork out $1 000 000 for a print then I guess they would like a bit of poetry to go along with the scene, right?

    Stealing images is a difficult one. I sometimes photograph scenes that are a bit, clichéd. I didn't plan it but it just looked nice until I see every freak with a sensor has gotten hold of the same idea! Aaargh! Oh well...

    I have the greatest respect for wedding, industrial, architectural and even editorial photographers. Why? Because most of the pretense is set aside to put food on the table. Well, in most cases.

    But when people do photography for art's sake they need to justify their existence for the sheer pleasure of photo taking with all kinds of melodrama and soul searching. That can get a bit annoying.

    This blog might sound a bit harsh and vindictive but it could also also, between all the spit and foam building up around the mouth, actually clear up a lot of BS in the photography world - maybe even art in general!

    ReplyDelete