Loserphotographers.com: Will the LOSERS address our critique of their thieving, copyright-violating ways?

A CHALLENGE to thieving, copyright-violating LOSERS.

 LOSERS & THUGS like Ryan Dyar, Kevin Mcneal, Adrian Klein, Floris van Breugel, Miles Morgan (especially), and others have several things in common (see here), but one thing above all:

 They are all cheats, thieves, and unrepentant scum who literally spend every waking hour working to steal other people’s work.

 They commit wholesale theft of other photographers’ work. They pat each other on the back with every successful theft. There is no remorse here, 

no guilt. This is a lawless community, a group of immoral losers and thugs who might have been highwaymen in a different time. 

 So what, exactly, is the basis for their rationalization of this theft? We’re interested in hearing it. After all, if they don’t even bother rationalizing the theft they engage in, they’re no better than the violent thugs in street gangs. Well, worse. Gangs respect each others’ property . 

 So let’s hear it. A THUG’s best explanation for the reason he thinks he can copy (steal) other people’s work and get away with it. How do you twist it around and rationalize it in your sick head? Inquiring minds want to know. 

 Ryan Dyar? Miles Morgan? Floris van Breugel? Which THUG will step up to the plate and answer us? We bet not a single one of you spineless cowards will be able to justify your actions!

Loserphotographers.com Ryan Dyar commentary: When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

Loserphotographers.com Ryan Dyar commentary

On our feature “Two Examples of stupidity from LOSER/LIAR Ryan “My dad will take the bill” Dyar” (available here), we got a comment from a user called “Jessica Frink”. She raises no valid points of any kind, but we never miss an opportunity to mess with a pot-head. 

 Oh, and if you don’t know who Ryan Dyar is, he’s a LOSER who lives with his parents (or lives in an apartment paid for by his parents) and leeches off them to fund his photography obsession. We think Ryan wants to be a professional photographer mostly because he doesn’t have to pass drug tests that way, but you’re free to make your own assumptions about his appearance. 

 Anyway, enter “Jessica Frink”. We could go on about how ugly this girl is, or how dumb, or whatever, but we won’t stoop to the level of the THUGS & MORONS.  When we pointed out that Ryan Dyar was so stupid that he linked to someone else’s website instead of his own (he did this twice, by the way), Jessica jumped in: [note: we have reproduced it as is, with all spelling & grammar errors]

Um, seriously? Dyarphotography.com was Ryan’s old website. It doesn’t take a genius to figure that out. And you didn’t notice that he hasn’t wrote in his blog since March of 2009? Of course it’s not going to be updated with his new website.

 OK, first of all, Jessica, you’re not a genius, and you’re not attractive. There, we cleared the air with that one. Second, Ryan isn’t going to have sex with you. We think his inclinations are of another nature, altogether. (We’ll be returning to this in a different post).

 Apparently, it does take a genius. Dyarphotography.com is a photography gear review site of some sort. It’s registered to a British chap, and has been since 2008. Here’s the registration info link, courtesy of Godaddy:

Dyarphotography.com Whois

 Now, on to the rest. Ryan Dyar hasn’t “wrote” in his blog since March 2009 because he has nothing to say of any value to the public. That’s pretty simple. Ryan noticed that no one cared about the vain, vapid opinions of an over-privileged pothead, and he ignored the blog, hoping it would be ignored in turn. (he did write a gratuitous rant about Marc Adamus LIES 1.0, by the way, as one of his first posts). In fact, there isn’t even a link from his expensive Jack Brauer website to his blog. 

Morale of this story: When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. And don’t be a stupid pothead like Ryan Dyar.

Loserphotographers.com Blog: A response to a couple questions in a comment we received, PT1

A response to some comments, Part 1

On our feature “An analysis of LOSER/LIAR Ryan Dyar’s fake interview in Aperture Academy, Part one” (available here), we got a comment from a user called “Corey”. It’s quite long, so we won’t reproduce it in full here. You can see it at the link above. However, he raises some points (many of which are designed to denigrate our work, actually) that we’d like to address. Basically, the whole thing is a potshot at us, while being designed to seem fair and even-handed, even curious.

Part 1 of a multi-part series.

“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”

  First of all, asking about my/our education or standing in the photo industry is a red herring. It has no bearing on what is being discussed here. This sort of argument is preposterous. Do journalists need to have degrees in every field they cover? Of course not. 

 Furthermore, what education we do or don’t have isn’t relevant, especially in light of the fact that the LOSERS we talk about don’t have any training in the arts either (!). THUGS who have graduated college should be seeking a career in the field they studied, not running around with cameras, tearing down the photography industry. 

 In regards to “those who have any money whatsoever”, we refer to LOSERS who are typically middle to upper middle class. These MORONS do not appreciate the value of intellectual property. That is why they spend thousands of dollars stealing other people’s images to throw them on microstock sites for pennies, or selling large prints for $50 or $100.

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

This is a ridiculous argument. Digital cameras are far more expensive than film cameras. Let’s look at a Pentax 645 setup. This is actually a medium format film body that’s been used to create entire books.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Body: $300-400 (645N autofocus body, manual focus is cheaper).

Pentax 45-85mm lens (excellent, versatile all around lens): $1000-1500, depending on version.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Or maybe a large format system:

Many body choices, starting as low as $400 and going up from there. $750 will buy a great body that will probably last for the rest of your life.

Lenses are more expensive for large format. The great thing, however, as a real professional format (35mm is not a professional format for any serious landscape photographer), is that these lenses have been made for years, are all excellent performers, and can be picked up used cheaply. You can start out with lenses that are a couple hundred each. For the $1600 cost of a single Canon or Nikon pro zoom, you could easily get 3 large format lenses. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now let’s look at a digital system, especially the Canon 5D Mark II loved by so many THUGS & LOSERS:

Body: $2500

Let’s say a 24-105mm lens: $1000 (by the way, this isn’t even a very good lens, certainly not up to the performance of the Pentax medium format mid-range 45-85mm).

And you’re already up to $3500 with just one body, one lens, and nothing else.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We won’t consider printer, scanning, or film. Any real pro should first, be able to depend on any picture he’s taken. He shouldn’t have to take 20 images to get one with the correct exposure or composition. Losers who shoot only digital and check their LCD’s could never imagine this. This is how every competent pro used to work. With a professional working behind the viewfinder, only excellent images are taken, and only the best are scanned, reducing costs. And for the cost of ONE digital body and ONE lens, you could easily have an entire medium or large format system.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

35mm is not a professional format, except for sports and journalism. It’s the reason 35mm was basically invented, for people who didn’t want to carry heavy large format cameras. Comparing darkroom work to Photoshop is not a valid comparison. The adjustments possible in the darkroom are limited and well-defined. An image certainly couldn’t be cobbled together from 7 different film frames, in the darkroom.

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

Not wealthy families, but well-to-do upper middle class families, actually. And copying someone else’s image, especially when one goes out of his way to create an exact copy (as many THUGS do) has nothing to do with photography. It’s theft and copyright violation, pure and simple. Expensive websites such as the bogus Wide Range Galleries websites were purchased merely because Marc Adamus has one. And workshops are not a valid method of teaching photography. The great photographers did not become great by taking workshops. 

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

No one has claimed that the wealthy cannot be artists. In fact, it is easier for the wealthy to develop artistic talent, since they don’t have to worry about funding.

But this isn’t really relevant. Marc Adamus doesn’t come from a wealthy family. Neither does Ryan Dyar, Miles Morgan, Kevin Mcneal, or any of the other douchebags exposed on Marc Adamus LIES 2.0 or Loser Photographers. Thuggery and stupidity in photography is strictly the territory of the middle to upper middle class.

For example, a wealthy individual will still demand a reasonable price for his images or prints. He will not throw them on Istock photo.com for 25 cents or sell a 30x40 print for $100. He understands that his work has value. He does not copy the work of other professionals, but often invents and entirely new genre. LOSER, THUG middle-class idiots do not. They are the ones who steal (copy) the work of real professionals and throw them on Istockphoto.com for pennies, and print out copies for pennies on the dollar. The rich always recognize the value of work, money, and property. LOSER amateurs do NOT.

“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 17^th century painter Rembrandt?”

It’s very simple. Stealing a copy of a unique, recognizable image is theft and copyright violation. That’s the law. Trying to dance around with bogus explanations doesn’t cut it.

It’s even more of a violation when the entire intention is to create an exact copy of some composition, as many THUGS do with Marc Adamus images. That is a copyright violation by any standard. If these LOSERS who quote Galen Rowell would have actually read his books, they would have found out that Galen was constantly involved in legal battles with losers who stole his compositions. It’s one thing to apply techniques and ways of seeing to new perspectives. It’s a whole other thing to create an entire army of losers who run around with the goal of exactly duplicating professionals’ images. These losers are not photographers; they are just walking Xerox machines. 

Part 2 coming soon.

Imagine, for a moment, that you’re an inventor...

Thoughts about copyright and artistic integrity.

You’ve created an invention that the public loves. They buy your work and you are moderately successful. Your success grows every year. You can hold your head high in public. You’ve bettered the world and are respected and admired for it.

 Now imagine that envious competitors begin to eye you. Except that they really aren’t competitors. They already have jobs and careers. What they’re really after is the fame and recognition you’ve rightfully gained as a result of your successful inventions. They move in on your work. Out of naivety or misplaced feelings of generosity, you have failed to adequately protect your intellectual property/designs. These competitors copy your work, in fact going out of their way to create exact duplicates. Subsidized by their comfortable day jobs, they sell copies of your work at or nearly at a loss. The only goal here is often recognition & celebrity. Money isn’t always important, especially at first. You are unable to effectively compete with your new foes. While their work is invariably of lower quality than your originals, the huge price difference convinces the public to purchase the fakes. You keep producing new inventions to stay a step ahead of the frauds, and they keep copying you and undermining your business. They even go as far as to say they are inspired by you, and they copy your bio and the honest words you used to describe your passion for your work. Sound implausible?

Happens every in the photography industry. 

  Losers who have comfortable jobs think they can now be “artists”, with the difficulty of working with film largely removed from the photography world, except in the realm of the true photographers. They swarm Best Buy and buy fancy Digital SLRs. They buy workshops from frauds like Marc Adamus, Ryan Dyar, Aaron Reed, Kevin Mcneal, Floris van Breugel, Steve Sieren, Adrian Klein, and others. This doesn’t give them artistic vision, of course. Artistic vision can’t be created with a fake workshop. 

 These bozos/frauds fill their “portfolio” with copies of the images of Art Wolfe, David Muench, Ansel Adams. They say they are “inspired” by the photographers they have stolen from. They constantly say their first “inspiration” to start stealing came from reading books such as Galen Rowell’s Mountain Light or Art Wolfe’s Edge of the Earth, Corner of the Sky. Most have never even read these books. 

 They create boastful, arrogant websites filled with self-praising & statements rhetoric about themselves. They set up fake, utterly meaningless groups such as Timecatcher, Mountain Trail Photo, and Photo Cascadia, because they are ineligible for real professional organizations such as Canon or Nikon Professional Services. They, incredibly, describe themselves as “the best of the best” or “some of the finest photographers in [whatever region they live in, usually west coast or Pacific NW]”. These statements are utterly preposterous and fraudulent. 

 They start offering workshops. This is a given, always. A fraud who tries going “full-time pro” can never make an honest living from selling prints and licensing images. These workshops are sold to additional bozos, increasing the ranks of frauds and imposters in the photography world. Meanwhile, real photographers close honest businesses and practices, unable to compete with Istockphoto losers and scum selling 20x30 prints of stolen compositions for 100 bucks. 

-Do not buy images or prints from amateurs or frauds like Marc Adamus.

-Do not egg these losers on by commenting on their online portfolios.

-When you see copyright violation, call it out. Don’t be silent. These thieves operate without compunction because they are never chastised, and in fact, are often celebrated for their theft. If you saw someone stealing a car, you’d call the police. Give artistic professionals the same consideration.

-Consider your own financial implications. A stolen composition is worthless the moment you pay for it and receive it. A genuine print from a real photographer holds its value. A fraud’s copy of a composition ends up in the discount bin at Goodwill. 

-Do not purchase workshops of any kind. If you are considering a photography workshop or photo tour, you do not have what it takes to be a professional and can only bring harm to the industry. If you are really just in it for fun, consider an enthusiast camera such as the Canon G12. It will give you all the creative abilities you need, and more. If you need something to shoot your kids, consider an affordable DSLR. 

-If you see scenes such as the following, call it out. Call them LOSERS. They are! Ask them why they are stealing. Ask them to explain how they feel copyright law allows what they’re doing. They will not have an answer. They are cowards and intellectual midgets who will continue this terrorism until the public calls for it to end. Be brave. Speak out: