Having a camera does not make you a photographer.

I admit, I'm addicted to Facebook. It's a lot of fun finding out what your friends are up to without the hassle of talking to them, or, God forbid, feigning interest in maintaining an actual conversation. It's kind of like reality TV: you satisfy your voyeuristic tendencies of what goes on in other people's lives without the need to actually get involved. Hooray for Facebook!

One thing I've noticed is the upcoming trend of people attempting their hand at amateur photography, then putting them up on Facebook for all to see, and comment on. With the advent of cheaper digital cameras and built-in cameras in today's mobile phones, nearly everyone can snap pictures with ease, anytime, anywhere.

I generally do not have a problem with people putting up photos and adding their own comments to the photo. Heck, I completely understand the appeal of camwhoring. The vanity aspect of having people commenting on the photos you put up is also totally understandable. Something caught your eye, a thought occurred to you concerning that image, you snap a photo and add your addendum. Completely normal.

What I cannot abide, though, are the poser amateur photographers. This subset of people run around everywhere with their digital handhelds, or, if they splurged, DSLRs and go on some kind of photo-snapping spree. They hang the cameras around their necks (making them great mugging targets) or otherwise tote their DSLRs with oversized flash modules in these boxy cloth bags, snapping anything and everything that captures their fancy.

What separates the posers and the actual, earnest amateurs aren't their techniques, surprisingly. The posers read enough and know enough about depth, focus, lighting and other photography jargon that I can't bear to look up. What separates the posers from the real McCoys/amateurs are their subjects.

People who are actually interested in photography try to capture stories in their pictures. The idea that 'a picture is worth a thousand words' is something that they adhere to. Good pictures evoke thoughts and get people thinking about what the photographer is trying to say. There is real meaning behind such photos, and the best ones are those that describe the world and the human condition in both subtle and aggressive tones.

Posers, on the other hand, snap pictures of things they think would look good. There's nothing wrong with the photos they take, visually. They use camera effects like foreground focus, lens flare and whatnot. The problem here is that the only thoughts they evoke run along the lines of,"oh, I like the angle of that shot" and "that is a nice colour!" and "good closeup", and the automatic "that is a nice shot. Good job!". Notice how all they can do is describe the photo. Nothing else. It doesn't make them think, it doesn't make them feel. It's just a photo.

When I look at such photos, I get thoughts like "boring" and "so?" and "huh?" and "it's a flower. Great. Good for you. You're definitely winning a Pulitzer for this" and "it's a picture of a pair of Crocs. Purple Crocs. Oh my GOD. WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU, YOU PRETENTIOUS ASSWIPE."

They are airheads. They are fishing for compliments. They are wasting their time, and yours.