...but I have no expectations of ever being in, say, the Explore, mostly because there's so many teenagers with photoshop who love making "statement" photo-collages.
Eh I wouldn't say that. I've actually skimmed all 500 photos on explore for the past 3 weeks or so. Everyday I just check the explore page from the day before with http://www.flickrleech.net/ There are definitely really cool photos on there mixed with IMO really mediocre ones that don't fall into the "excessive photoshop collages making a statement", but since our tastes differ maybe some of you guys really would enjoy the ones I consider mediocre.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
Except for the slightly distracting stuff in the top right I actually like this shot more than any other fashion thing I've seen you post on this forum. Go figure.
I just noticed one of the comments on there says "Oh goddess - I'd be so obedient. "
Oh people on the internet, why do you have to be so damn creepy?
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
So does the unusualness in this make up for the "omg it's a pet/cat photo blah blah blah" effect? I hope so.
Yes but I still feel it lacks something. I wish the cat's silhouette was leaning further into the window. Also the shot makes me wish there was something a little more interesting to latch on to outside the window. The cat is looking out there and we get some pretty colors and bokeh but nothing significant. You need to photoshop in an out of focus zombie right outside of the window.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
pope: I'm with CC. Good concept, so close to good execution. Cutting out some of the black space to the right of the interesting bits might help a smidgen.
bombs: #2 is delightful. The green tint goes better with the green scene than the magenta tint above, which clashes. In addition, that one highlight on the horizon is better masked in #2.
So as you all may have gathered I am, in fact, not dead, but rather living in a small town in the middle of nowhere with no internet all summer.
Because these little guys need to be fed:
Tiny adorable owls! Burrowing owls, to be specific. I'm a research assistant for a project involving releasing captive burrowing owls, and this has allowed me to get up close and personal with a whole bunch of pint-size owls.
I've taken some artsy shots
and some ridiculous ones
(he was so pissed off at us for keeping him in a cage for two days).
Crits on 1/2 would be great. I only kept 3 because of the hilarious expression.
So does the unusualness in this make up for the "omg it's a pet/cat photo blah blah blah" effect? I hope so.
Yes but I still feel it lacks something. I wish the cat's silhouette was leaning further into the window. Also the shot makes me wish there was something a little more interesting to latch on to outside the window. The cat is looking out there and we get some pretty colors and bokeh but nothing significant. You need to photoshop in an out of focus zombie right outside of the window.
quick and dirty for ya:
(I can take it down if pope wants. Just having some fun)
DM I love the light and saturation of the colors on 1 but the netting / pole in the background are so distracting. I would try and remove that if you have the time for it*. #2 is ruined by the netting IMO. As a matter of principle I would try to not get the netting in any shot or try and remove it in post afterwards. I understand thats pretty hard to do since they are in little cages but damn is that stuff distracting. Cage/netting is antithetical to wildlife.
*I took the large version of it into PS and tried to remove the netting and it seems like it would be pretty easy on the blue part of the sky but somewhat time consuming on the clouds and near the grass coming out of that rock.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
Messing around with some water and colored gels. I plan on doing some more tonight except on a larger scale outside and just freezing the water mid air. We'll see if I get around to that.
Click on the images for setup info.
Edit: Also dicked around with that lightning photo in PS to try and amp it up a little bit:
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
Someone just tried to convince me that certain lenses soften up noise on his digital camera.
I am all for mystical mumbo-jumbo but your beliefs dont change the LAWS OF PHYSICS.
Um, hello everybody, I was wanting to do some nice self portraits, as Im turning my
cv into a egotistical magazine, as im a arsehole kinda, and it would be a designer like me
would do, i do though need help getting to terms with camera settings, etc.
I have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18, that im borrowing off my father.
Im trying to get something like this http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4Buev2eybnY/S8W_AHwt5HI/AAAAAAAAG2M/kNRxyTW7IE4/s1600/robert-pattinson.jpg or along the lines of.
I use this as a example only cos i was told that i need to scrub up as im
starting to resemble him lol, which i found funny.
So can someone kinda tell, settings like aperture, shutterspeed, or like lighting etc.
So help this bum, scrub up and find a job lol
I've just invested in a 950nm infra-red filter, only to find that my camera is not ideal for shooting in such situations, being prone to artefacting and hot spots with slow shutter speeds and long exposure times. You can see this clearly in this photograph, with a very prominent hot spot.
It was very sunny when I took this photograph not even an hour ago, with no cloud in the sky, and what I thought would be more than enough light. I know this is a boring photograph, but I was just doing experiments with the filter and wanted something static with no chance of movement to ruin the long exposure time. Does anyone have any helpful hints on how to go about photography in infra-red?
Rohan on
...and I thought of how all those people died, and what a good death that is. That nobody can blame you for it, because everyone else died along with you, and it is the fault of none, save those who did the killing.
Jake: How would you crop it?
Also thats a cool shot but I would crop it at the end of the dock or a little after. There is nothing going on in the background on the left side of the photo. Plus the foreground shore acts like a leading line to the left side of the photo taking your eyes to nothing. The right side at least has some cool silhouettes from the trees.
What was the light source used for that? It doesn't look like fire but I could be wrong.
Um, hello everybody, I was wanting to do some nice self portraits, as Im turning my
cv into a egotistical magazine, as im a arsehole kinda, and it would be a designer like me
would do, i do though need help getting to terms with camera settings, etc.
I have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18, that im borrowing off my father.
Im trying to get something like this http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4Buev2eybnY/S8W_AHwt5HI/AAAAAAAAG2M/kNRxyTW7IE4/s1600/robert-pattinson.jpg or along the lines of.
I use this as a example only cos i was told that i need to scrub up as im
starting to resemble him lol, which i found funny.
So can someone kinda tell, settings like aperture, shutterspeed, or like lighting etc.
So help this bum, scrub up and find a job lol
You won't get anything like that shot with that camera; not to mention the whole thing sounds like an incredibly bad idea.
This. Unless you are looking for a job in acting. Also remember famous people can do just about anything and look cool while the average person will look like an idiot trying to imitate them.
It was very sunny when I took this photograph not even an hour ago, with no cloud in the sky, and what I thought would be more than enough light. I know this is a boring photograph, but I was just doing experiments with the filter and wanted something static with no chance of movement to ruin the long exposure time. Does anyone have any helpful hints on how to go about photography in infra-red?
I've only shot with IR film....8 years ago..... so take this with a grain of salt. I would try shooting something organic like trees with a tripod. Also try to do this during the morning or afternoon and shoot away from the sun. Also bracketing some.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
Hello! I've got some pictures from my first wedding gig. I was only an assistant but I had the chance to take some shots.
I like #3; it's a good shot that captures a nice expression -- not just the typical wedding stuff. Although I'd try to photoshop out the smoke detector, and maybe see if you can boost some of the fill light to try to give her hair a little definition.
The PSing on those wedding shots bother me in some cases. I would certainly pull it back some unless that is how the client wanted the photos processed.
The one looking out the window is just odd with the overexposed fuzzyness thats going on. The one with all the tables is far too yellow with some weird artifacts going on near the lights in the background. Also the picture with her dancing with the kid seems like it has a bit of some dingy photoshopping to it. Maybe its a little too desaturated + yellow.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
Um, hello everybody, I was wanting to do some nice self portraits, as Im turning my
cv into a egotistical magazine, as im a arsehole kinda, and it would be a designer like me
would do, i do though need help getting to terms with camera settings, etc.
I have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18, that im borrowing off my father.
Im trying to get something like this http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4Buev2eybnY/S8W_AHwt5HI/AAAAAAAAG2M/kNRxyTW7IE4/s1600/robert-pattinson.jpg or along the lines of.
I use this as a example only cos i was told that i need to scrub up as im
starting to resemble him lol, which i found funny.
So can someone kinda tell, settings like aperture, shutterspeed, or like lighting etc.
So help this bum, scrub up and find a job lol
You won't get anything like that shot with that camera; not to mention the whole thing sounds like an incredibly bad idea.
This. Unless you are looking for a job in acting. Also remember famous people can do just about anything and look cool while the average person will look like an idiot trying to imitate them.
Thanks jake for putting that into the virtual world.
And for Cow, well I not looking for an acting job, but I intend
to put some graphics over top etc, to make it look more like
a design magazine.
Anyway I know that I not going to pull it off exactly like the example,
cos the example was an example, I dont think someone that
was just borrowing the bestest or closest camera they could get
and having no real photography setup, would endevor to get a professional shot.
I was more concerned with the whole really focused face and the blurred back ground.
And maybe you guys may of had other ideas of what I could do with the means I have,
instead of just passing me off.
I was more concerned with the whole really focused face and the blurred back ground.And maybe you guys may of had other ideas of what I could do with the means I have,
instead of just passing me off.
As jake said, you can't really do the "focused face and blurred background" with that camera. Other ideas: borrow a DSLR with a 50mm lens and shoot at f/1.4 or f/1.8 or get someone who has experience to take your picture. With what you have just try and get a tripod and take a picture of yourself in indirect natural lighting. For example in the shade outside or inside next to a window without sun coming directly in. Make sure your face or head/shoulders fill most of the frame.
Most of us have been doing this stuff for years and still haven't mastered it so its hard for us to give you a quick "this is how you take awesome portraits" post.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
To add; you're making a CV. That's why this is a bad idea. You're trying to represent yourself to a potential employee. Your current idea is going to make you out to be an egotistical arsehole - is that how you want to portray yourself?
cow: there's too much dead space on the left; it makes the comp unbalanced an hence uncomfortable (although maybe that was your intention?) The texture is fantastic.
Thanks jake for putting that into the virtual world.
And for Cow, well I not looking for an acting job, but I intend
to put some graphics over top etc, to make it look more like
a design magazine.
Maybe I'm missing something here but why are you doing this for your CV instead of for your portfolio? If you're a designer, your employer wants to see two things: a resume listing your education/qualifications/etc and a portfolio showcasing your skill. It sounds like you're trying to combine these two. While it's a novel approach, what you need to remember is that the reason you have a portfolio is to show people that you can produce someone else's vision (the retailer, manufacturer or who ever else would be hiring your services). Making your CV your portfolio misses this key ingredient because no one is ever going to hire you to design their resume.
No processing beyond a contrast adjustment to make the scan look more like the instant film.
And the setup:
One thing I've missed in the Hasselblad is that awesome bellows focusing I had with the RB67. I have been contemplating going with the Mamiya C330, but I cannot give up the 'Blad and I think the girlfriend would be angry that I put money into a new camera instead of helping her buy shelves (which I think is a silly thing to buy in a place we don't plan on living in for more than this summer).
Jake, I like the idea but I find the stuff on the background a little distracting; I feel diagonal shapes of light would reinforce the horizontal flow the pose of the models creates.
Bah, been gone for a bit. Had a really busy month at work / a bit of a creative dry spell.
Hectorse - some bad processing choices, and not so good color balance. The fill shadow / retrieve highlights is creating some banding for you and the orange skin tones are not pleasant.
Jake - a bit busy, but it's supposed to be busy, so that's as constructive as I get.
Jake I'm not sure I like the wide angle on that one. If you were trying to make them look like weird circus people then I guess it works. The back two models almost look like little people(or whatever the PC term is these days) because of the distortion. The model in the foreground IMO should have a little more light on the right side of her face. I know its hard to light multiple people evenly without doing a composite. The model on the far left just has a very odd expression on her face. Instead of looking concerned that someone is about to be beaten with a pineapple she just looks very calm and docile.
nO: I think the ones where the mom has her shirt pulled up look odd. The ones where she has the open button up top look a lot more natural.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
So I'm going to ramble for a minute about flickr so ignore this post if you don't care about flickr or the interestingness algorithm. So I've been killing a little time and I decided to check out my top 20 photos sorted by interestingness. Oddly enough those shots of the lime and orange being dropped into the water and the beer shot are in my top 20 intermingled with some photos of scantily clad women. Also I have a few other photos that are on there that I consider prettydamnmediocre compared to some of my other photography and they aren't even women in swimwear / lingerie. That is another thing that is kind of annoying. I can take a few mediocre pictures of women in swimwear or lingerie and they get TONS of views but my fashion work that I think looks way the hell better...not that much.
I guess I just a little surprised at my top 20 "interesting" photos.[/rambling]
and now a funny picture to go along with my useless post:
Thats pretty and stuff but I really don't like the border on just the middle picture especially since it is so big. If you are going to do a diptych or triptych in my opinion you should either have them all with a border or all without a border.
I like the right picture the best and I think it could stand by itself unlike the other two.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
Thats pretty and stuff but I really don't like the border on just the middle picture especially since it is so big. If you are going to do a diptych or triptych in my opinion you should either have them all with a border or all without a border.
I like the right picture the best and I think it could stand by itself unlike the other two.
Thats pretty and stuff but I really don't like the border on just the middle picture especially since it is so big. If you are going to do a diptych or triptych in my opinion you should either have them all with a border or all without a border.
I like the right picture the best and I think it could stand by itself unlike the other two.
I was going to agree with this as well (except liking the middle photo more than the right one) until I saw how you posted this on flickr. With a white border around the entire triptych, the smaller center photo doesn't bother me.
Thats pretty and stuff but I really don't like the border on just the middle picture especially since it is so big. If you are going to do a diptych or triptych in my opinion you should either have them all with a border or all without a border.
I like the right picture the best and I think it could stand by itself unlike the other two.
I was going to agree with this as well (except liking the middle photo more than the right one) until I saw how you posted this on flickr. With a white border around the entire triptych, the smaller center photo doesn't bother me.
Yeah, that was the idea. I fucking *hate* PA's background color for the forum.
But I agree wichuguys! I'll need to repost the last pic, toooo.
Did I mention I fucking *love* the city? I'm mentioning it right now.
Posts
Lordy, and lots of them! Narrow aperture, very low ISO/ASA rated film (does it come lower than 25?) and lots of ND filters. Man, that's kinda unreal.
My Website | My "photo-a-day" 2010
LOTS of them. stacked on top of each other. I've considered doing this type of photography before but jebus are the 9+ stop ND filters expensive.
http://www.alexwisephotography.net/blog/2010/02/16/guide-to-daytime-long-exposures/
Eh I wouldn't say that. I've actually skimmed all 500 photos on explore for the past 3 weeks or so. Everyday I just check the explore page from the day before with http://www.flickrleech.net/ There are definitely really cool photos on there mixed with IMO really mediocre ones that don't fall into the "excessive photoshop collages making a statement", but since our tastes differ maybe some of you guys really would enjoy the ones I consider mediocre.
for a larger copy, click image to go to its flickr page then click "all sizes"
My Website | My "photo-a-day" 2010
I just noticed one of the comments on there says "Oh goddess - I'd be so obedient. "
Oh people on the internet, why do you have to be so damn creepy?
Yes but I still feel it lacks something. I wish the cat's silhouette was leaning further into the window. Also the shot makes me wish there was something a little more interesting to latch on to outside the window. The cat is looking out there and we get some pretty colors and bokeh but nothing significant. You need to photoshop in an out of focus zombie right outside of the window.
My Website | My "photo-a-day" 2010
bombs: #2 is delightful. The green tint goes better with the green scene than the magenta tint above, which clashes. In addition, that one highlight on the horizon is better masked in #2.
So as you all may have gathered I am, in fact, not dead, but rather living in a small town in the middle of nowhere with no internet all summer.
Because these little guys need to be fed:
Tiny adorable owls! Burrowing owls, to be specific. I'm a research assistant for a project involving releasing captive burrowing owls, and this has allowed me to get up close and personal with a whole bunch of pint-size owls.
I've taken some artsy shots
and some ridiculous ones
(he was so pissed off at us for keeping him in a cage for two days).
Crits on 1/2 would be great. I only kept 3 because of the hilarious expression.
quick and dirty for ya:
(I can take it down if pope wants. Just having some fun)
DM I love the light and saturation of the colors on 1 but the netting / pole in the background are so distracting. I would try and remove that if you have the time for it*. #2 is ruined by the netting IMO. As a matter of principle I would try to not get the netting in any shot or try and remove it in post afterwards. I understand thats pretty hard to do since they are in little cages but damn is that stuff distracting. Cage/netting is antithetical to wildlife.
*I took the large version of it into PS and tried to remove the netting and it seems like it would be pretty easy on the blue part of the sky but somewhat time consuming on the clouds and near the grass coming out of that rock.
Click on the images for setup info.
Edit: Also dicked around with that lightning photo in PS to try and amp it up a little bit:
I am all for mystical mumbo-jumbo but your beliefs dont change the LAWS OF PHYSICS.
cv into a egotistical magazine, as im a arsehole kinda, and it would be a designer like me
would do, i do though need help getting to terms with camera settings, etc.
I have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18, that im borrowing off my father.
Im trying to get something like this http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4Buev2eybnY/S8W_AHwt5HI/AAAAAAAAG2M/kNRxyTW7IE4/s1600/robert-pattinson.jpg or along the lines of.
I use this as a example only cos i was told that i need to scrub up as im
starting to resemble him lol, which i found funny.
So can someone kinda tell, settings like aperture, shutterspeed, or like lighting etc.
So help this bum, scrub up and find a job lol
DeviantArt Old Homepage
Cow: I like the concept but I feel like the crop is a little uncomfortable on all three.
I've just invested in a 950nm infra-red filter, only to find that my camera is not ideal for shooting in such situations, being prone to artefacting and hot spots with slow shutter speeds and long exposure times. You can see this clearly in this photograph, with a very prominent hot spot.
It was very sunny when I took this photograph not even an hour ago, with no cloud in the sky, and what I thought would be more than enough light. I know this is a boring photograph, but I was just doing experiments with the filter and wanted something static with no chance of movement to ruin the long exposure time. Does anyone have any helpful hints on how to go about photography in infra-red?
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
Also thats a cool shot but I would crop it at the end of the dock or a little after. There is nothing going on in the background on the left side of the photo. Plus the foreground shore acts like a leading line to the left side of the photo taking your eyes to nothing. The right side at least has some cool silhouettes from the trees.
What was the light source used for that? It doesn't look like fire but I could be wrong.
Edit: This. Unless you are looking for a job in acting. Also remember famous people can do just about anything and look cool while the average person will look like an idiot trying to imitate them.
I've only shot with IR film....8 years ago..... so take this with a grain of salt. I would try shooting something organic like trees with a tripod. Also try to do this during the morning or afternoon and shoot away from the sun. Also bracketing some.
I need so much more experience!
I like #3; it's a good shot that captures a nice expression -- not just the typical wedding stuff. Although I'd try to photoshop out the smoke detector, and maybe see if you can boost some of the fill light to try to give her hair a little definition.
The one looking out the window is just odd with the overexposed fuzzyness thats going on. The one with all the tables is far too yellow with some weird artifacts going on near the lights in the background. Also the picture with her dancing with the kid seems like it has a bit of some dingy photoshopping to it. Maybe its a little too desaturated + yellow.
Thanks jake for putting that into the virtual world.
And for Cow, well I not looking for an acting job, but I intend
to put some graphics over top etc, to make it look more like
a design magazine.
Anyway I know that I not going to pull it off exactly like the example,
cos the example was an example, I dont think someone that
was just borrowing the bestest or closest camera they could get
and having no real photography setup, would endevor to get a professional shot.
I was more concerned with the whole really focused face and the blurred back ground.
And maybe you guys may of had other ideas of what I could do with the means I have,
instead of just passing me off.
DeviantArt Old Homepage
As jake said, you can't really do the "focused face and blurred background" with that camera. Other ideas: borrow a DSLR with a 50mm lens and shoot at f/1.4 or f/1.8 or get someone who has experience to take your picture. With what you have just try and get a tripod and take a picture of yourself in indirect natural lighting. For example in the shade outside or inside next to a window without sun coming directly in. Make sure your face or head/shoulders fill most of the frame.
Most of us have been doing this stuff for years and still haven't mastered it so its hard for us to give you a quick "this is how you take awesome portraits" post.
cow: there's too much dead space on the left; it makes the comp unbalanced an hence uncomfortable (although maybe that was your intention?) The texture is fantastic.
And the setup:
Maybe I'm missing something here but why are you doing this for your CV instead of for your portfolio? If you're a designer, your employer wants to see two things: a resume listing your education/qualifications/etc and a portfolio showcasing your skill. It sounds like you're trying to combine these two. While it's a novel approach, what you need to remember is that the reason you have a portfolio is to show people that you can produce someone else's vision (the retailer, manufacturer or who ever else would be hiring your services). Making your CV your portfolio misses this key ingredient because no one is ever going to hire you to design their resume.
One thing I've missed in the Hasselblad is that awesome bellows focusing I had with the RB67. I have been contemplating going with the Mamiya C330, but I cannot give up the 'Blad and I think the girlfriend would be angry that I put money into a new camera instead of helping her buy shelves (which I think is a silly thing to buy in a place we don't plan on living in for more than this summer).
Ryan M Long Photography
Buy my Prints!
It is pretty cool being able to focus that close with a 50mm.
hectorse: I think you've bumped the contrast too much on those, but they're not bad.
virum: nice!
Hectorse - some bad processing choices, and not so good color balance. The fill shadow / retrieve highlights is creating some banding for you and the orange skin tones are not pleasant.
Jake - a bit busy, but it's supposed to be busy, so that's as constructive as I get.
Did some maternity work:
Some random family & friends pics:
nO: I think the ones where the mom has her shirt pulled up look odd. The ones where she has the open button up top look a lot more natural.
Not surprisingly, this is my top-viewed photo.
Sheri Baldwin Photography | Facebook | Twitter | Etsy Shop | BUY ME STUFF (updated for 2014!)
nerdCred++ ?
Anyway, i'll take your nature landscape and rebut with the windy city in fog:
(Sorry for breaking the h scroll ya non-wide monitor owning poor saps)
I like the right picture the best and I think it could stand by itself unlike the other two.
Man, these are all the thoughts I had, too.
My Website | My "photo-a-day" 2010
I was going to agree with this as well (except liking the middle photo more than the right one) until I saw how you posted this on flickr. With a white border around the entire triptych, the smaller center photo doesn't bother me.
Yeah, that was the idea. I fucking *hate* PA's background color for the forum.
But I agree wichuguys! I'll need to repost the last pic, toooo.
Did I mention I fucking *love* the city? I'm mentioning it right now.
EDIT: TOTP ABUSE!!!!