As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Some Day My Prints Will Come [PHOTO THREAD] (spoiler things and die)

1212224262731

Posts

  • Options
    SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
  • Options
    anableanable North TexasRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Sheri wrote: »
    Also I'm just going to say this here. If I keep getting zero comments on my photos, I'm just going to go back to hardly posting any, like I did a few months ago. I know this isn't really a punishment to anyone (heck you'd all probably be better off), but it is really goddamn frustrating to post a photo and get ZILCH back. If it sucks, then just tell me so. If it's great, tell me that too. I try to post crits for you guys, it'd be nice if someone would do the same for me (and probably other people who are thinking the same thing. Or maybe it's just me).

    I feel a bit better now.

    I must be some kind of psychic. I pretty much saw this coming. I obviously can't speak for anyone but myself, but generally speaking, if a picture doesn't strike me, I don't comment on it. If there's a glaring problem, I'll point it out, if I really like something, I'll point that out as well. If a picture just strikes me as "meh" then generally don't say anything. I think perhaps the lack of criticism could be best taken as a sign that no one is moved enough to post anything about it; for better or worse. That's usually my take when I don't get a response on my pictures.

    anable on
  • Options
    UnknownSaintUnknownSaint Kasyn Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    The thing is, if a picture is 'meh', there are reasons for it. It helps everybody to figure out why and articulate it in a post. It's ridiculous to expect everyone to respond to every shot, but it should be regarded as pretty ridiculous if anyone gets totally ignored.

    UnknownSaint on
  • Options
    SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    anable wrote: »
    Sheri wrote: »
    Also I'm just going to say this here. If I keep getting zero comments on my photos, I'm just going to go back to hardly posting any, like I did a few months ago. I know this isn't really a punishment to anyone (heck you'd all probably be better off), but it is really goddamn frustrating to post a photo and get ZILCH back. If it sucks, then just tell me so. If it's great, tell me that too. I try to post crits for you guys, it'd be nice if someone would do the same for me (and probably other people who are thinking the same thing. Or maybe it's just me).

    I feel a bit better now.

    I must be some kind of psychic. I pretty much saw this coming. I obviously can't speak for anyone but myself, but generally speaking, if a picture doesn't strike me, I don't comment on it. If there's a glaring problem, I'll point it out, if I really like something, I'll point that out as well. If a picture just strikes me as "meh" then generally don't say anything. I think perhaps the lack of criticism could be best taken as a sign that no one is moved enough to post anything about it; for better or worse. That's usually my take when I don't get a response on my pictures.

    This is lazy photothreading.

    'Meh' is a response.

    There is a REASON why a photo is 'meh' to you.

    salti pointed out very eloquently why it is meh, and it probably didn't take him more than three minutes to think about and type.

    If I have to go through and comment on every single photo since the last time I posted one in order to get responses, so help me I will do it and you will not be happy!
    Haha, spoilers

    This is to show that I am not genuinely angry. Sometimes the italics just don't cut it.

    EDIT: DAMNIT SAINT I WAS TYPING

    Sheri on
  • Options
    CPCP Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Sheri, Ok, you want crits, you got em...
    Like usual, you have really great colors in your photo, I attribute this to living near disneyland, where life is more colorful, and generally enjoyable. I think thats what I notice the most about your work, is the color, which is usually nice and vibrant. Also, is the coke bottle that creepy guy is holding up covering a letter "c"? Because the "old ice cold" is hilarious. The tree kind of bothers me tho, and I feel like...there's not much to focus you on the coke guy, soda jerk, whatever he is. That being said, I like how the red strips in the stand connect with the red highlights on his uniform. It's a neat picture, I just wish the tree was there, and the lines on the stand could focus in on him more.

    Sometimes photos get ignored, it's a lot of work to comment on every photo, and if nothing strikes you, thats the way it is. I don't get a lot of comments on my photos, but persistance can have its rewards. And even if I don't have anything to say about a picture, I still enjoy soaking it in. I think you post really nice stuff, and it's consistant, so keep it up, and don't slack off. If you enjoy looking at other peoples photos, remember, we enjoy your stuff too, but there's not always an obvious crit.

    Hope I'm not incoherent, I just got back from the whale palace, and i've got a couple pints under my belt, if you know what I'm saying.

    Anyway, everyone should keep posting at the normal rate, this is a fun group, and it's nice seeing everyones photographs.

    PEACE!
    EDIT: Damnit, I thought I was the first response...anyway, Sushi, also, your photos have no real focal point, there's no purpose. It's like...hey, this rock is neat, but you didn't look at what was around the rock. You have to find something that everything is linked to, balance and connection. Look for similar and contrasting tones, and lines of optical connection. What is naturally accentuated. The moss picture is cool because it's all there is and you can focus on the DOF, color, and texture. For more complex shots, you have to try and relate the different elements in the shot.

    CP on
    Picasa web album
  • Options
    saltinesssaltiness Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    The thing is, if a picture is 'meh', there are reasons for it. It helps everybody to figure out why and articulate it in a post. It's ridiculous to expect everyone to respond to every shot, but it should be regarded as pretty ridiculous if anyone gets totally ignored.
    True. There is a wide range in skill level among people who post in the photo thread. So to some people it's pretty obvious when a photo is 'meh' and why it is that way, but to the person who shot it that probably isn't immediately apparent. So it's better to explain why it is 'meh' even if it's just a sentence or two than for us all to just assume they understand and that they won't do it again.

    saltiness on
    XBL: heavenkils
  • Options
    SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Really, a comment like, 'This is not as good as other stuff we've seen from you' is a pretty helpful comment (especially if you expand on it), because 1) it lets the photog know that their stuff is good and 2) it helps them distinguish when a photo is not up to par and use it in future shooting.

    In this case, I knew the photo was meh and I knew why, but I wanted some other people's opinions of it/why it was meh.

    Also I've posted a few that I thought were great and I got no responses, so I figured maybe you were all just intimidated by my incredible skill and talent and posting a 'meh' shot would show you that I am, indeed, a real human just like you. Only better.

    >.>

    Sheri on
  • Options
    CPCP Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    :<>

    CP on
    Picasa web album
  • Options
    MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    <>:

    MKR on
  • Options
    SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    What the fuck are you fuckers doing

    Sheri on
  • Options
    MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Bothering you with a meme!

    MKR on
  • Options
    anableanable North TexasRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Sheri wrote: »
    Really, a comment like, 'This is not as good as other stuff we've seen from you' is a pretty helpful comment (especially if you expand on it), because 1) it lets the photog know that their stuff is good and 2) it helps them distinguish when a photo is not up to par and use it in future shooting.

    In this case, I knew the photo was meh and I knew why, but I wanted some other people's opinions of it/why it was meh.

    Yeah, I suppose that's true. Damn you internet! You're supposed to let me be more lazy, not less. I guess I'll be conscious of this in the future.

    On that note, where are the comments on my amazing panoramics?!?!?
    Praise is what I want people, not crits. Let's keep these things straight.

    anable on
  • Options
    saltinesssaltiness Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    anable wrote: »
    Sheri wrote: »
    Really, a comment like, 'This is not as good as other stuff we've seen from you' is a pretty helpful comment (especially if you expand on it), because 1) it lets the photog know that their stuff is good and 2) it helps them distinguish when a photo is not up to par and use it in future shooting.

    In this case, I knew the photo was meh and I knew why, but I wanted some other people's opinions of it/why it was meh.

    Yeah, I suppose that's true. Damn you internet! You're supposed to let me be more lazy, not less. I guess I'll be conscious of this in the future.

    On that note, where are the comments on my amazing panoramics?!?!?
    Praise is what I want people, not crits. Let's keep these things straight.

    What's a panoramic? You mean panoramas?

    saltiness on
    XBL: heavenkils
  • Options
    Dark MoonDark Moon Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Sheri, I've begun snooping through your photo blog, and subsequently your portfolio. And I really love the smoke shot in your portfolio. Very much. May I ask how you lit it, so I may steal your secrets and try something similar this weekend?

    anable- I love the textures in the first pano. The second is very nice too - I like that you kept the noise in, it adds a lot to the shot. The third doesn't catch me. The sky is nice, but there's a fair bit of flare around all the windows in the bottom and they keep stealing my attention. An entirely black foreground, save the lovely reflection off the river, and I would be sold.

    Dark Moon on
    3072973561_de17a80845_o.jpg
  • Options
    anableanable North TexasRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    saltiness wrote: »
    What's a panoramic? You mean panoramas?

    That's not praise. emot-argh.gif

    anable on
  • Options
    SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Dark Moon wrote: »
    Sheri, I've begun snooping through your photo blog, and subsequently your portfolio. And I really love the smoke shot in your portfolio. Very much. May I ask how you lit it, so I may steal your secrets and try something similar this weekend?

    Heck, I'll show you the set-up shot.

    IMG_2719a.jpg

    And then I fired my flash at it.

    EDIT: Also, feel free to leave comments on the photoblog, they make me happy. And they make sure I keep posting more. <3

    Sheri on
  • Options
    UnknownSaintUnknownSaint Kasyn Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    I remember when everyone did those. I was too shitty at pictures at the time to participate, but some people got some damn cool results.

    UnknownSaint on
  • Options
    saltinesssaltiness Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    anable wrote: »
    saltiness wrote: »
    What's a panoramic? You mean panoramas?

    That's not praise. emot-argh.gif

    Oh you didn't know? This is also the grammar critique thread.

    saltiness on
    XBL: heavenkils
  • Options
    fogeymanfogeyman Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    anable wrote: »
    I've thrown aspect ratios to the wind!

    water+coast

    street lights

    blue sky
    I think the first one is alright. It looks kinda nice at first, but then I'm left thinking "meh". I really like the reflection in the water though--I feel like you could do more with that.

    The second is great.

    I don't really like the third. It's a little awkward how there's a red line (reflection from a river/stream?) running along the bottom of the frame, and the clouds don't really have any definition. They seem flat (in terms of the perceived height of the clouds, not the depth). This is especially noticeable when the clouds are the furthest.


    In other news, I've started to work at a local photography studio. They do small weddings and portrait/group shots (usually on-location, like for soccer teams or dance studios or something). I'm only in high school so I'm excited.

    fogeyman on
  • Options
    Dark MoonDark Moon Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Thanks! Did the incandescent lamp actually do anything, what with all your metering being done for your flash?

    Your photoblog has been added to my bookmarks, so I will trundle through every now and then and try and make myself useful. Be sure to post a lot of photos - they keep me commenting.

    Dark Moon on
    3072973561_de17a80845_o.jpg
  • Options
    SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Dark Moon wrote: »
    Thanks! Did the incandescent lamp actually do anything, what with all your metering being done for your flash?

    Your photoblog has been added to my bookmarks, so I will trundle through every now and then and try and make myself useful. Be sure to post a lot of photos - they keep me commenting.

    Who knows. I think it helped light it from beneath and not just head-on, but I didn't really try shooting without it, I don't think (actually, I might have. . . who knows). And I used the binder to keep some of the light from hitting the backdrop.

    Sheri on
  • Options
    MustangMustang Arbiter of Unpopular Opinions Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Hey all can I get some critique on this, it's a picture I took a few years ago and I've personally always liked it. However where ever I post it, it get's no response, which IMO is tantamount to saying 'This is shit'.
    I would like some constructive opinions as to why it is shit, the only thing I can see that may bother people is the heavy contrast and perhaps the colours are a bit washed out.

    thewayhomebymustang76vp4.jpg

    Mustang on
  • Options
    UnknownSaintUnknownSaint Kasyn Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    I like it, but the position of the seagull is awkward. I think it would be better without it, or more in the sky.

    Do it again.

    UnknownSaint on
  • Options
    SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Yeah, I've got to agree about the washed-out color thing. It seems kind of flat to me.

    Sheri on
  • Options
    saltinesssaltiness Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    The seagull is in the middle of the frame which is bad in most cases and definitely in this case. It's also tangent to the horizon which is also bad. It could be a nice shot but the composition kills it.

    saltiness on
    XBL: heavenkils
  • Options
    MustangMustang Arbiter of Unpopular Opinions Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Much thanks for giving it a once over folks and for your opinions.
    I definately see the issues with the horizon you talk of saltiness.

    Mustang on
  • Options
    VeritasVeritas Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    It feels like your blacks are clipped a little too far.

    On another note I haven't taken any photos this week and I have not a single idea or photo in my head. I feel completely drained of creativity this week, even my school stuff feels lackluster and forced.

    Veritas on
  • Options
    Jake!Jake! Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    I posted these just before the arguments started... I'm wondering, does anyone have any crits?
    Jake! wrote: »

    I've been trying to improve my low light shooting, these are some shots these first three are from a friend's gig, the last two are from an open mic night I organise with a group of friends. Not entirely happy with the first of those two, eyes closed and all that.

    IMG_1377.jpg

    IMG_1500.jpg

    IMG_1534.jpg



    IMG_2712.jpg

    IMG_2745.jpg

    Jake! on
  • Options
    UnknownSaintUnknownSaint Kasyn Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    I've had those weeks before. Shit, I've had months like that. I had to force myself so damn hard out of hiatus until it just stuck and kicked in harder than ever. Hopefully works out for you, though I wouldn't worry too much if you have constant immersion courtesy of a class beating you over the head with the subject.

    UnknownSaint on
  • Options
    UnknownSaintUnknownSaint Kasyn Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Jake! -

    The second is pretty far and away the best. The wide lens really did it justice. First is solid compositionally but doesn't really interest me all that much, it's not dynamic at all and I feel like it should be. Third is awkward. The last is fairly interesting because it's kind of a single face amongst a crowd that stands out, but her expression or looks aren't unique or interesting enough to make it a great shot.

    Hope it helps. Concert lighting is a tough deal.

    Edit - I'll totp these for ya. Without spoilers.
    Jake! wrote: »
    IMG_1377.jpg

    IMG_1500.jpg

    IMG_1534.jpg



    IMG_2712.jpg

    IMG_2745.jpg

    UnknownSaint on
  • Options
    Jake!Jake! Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Cheers Saint, I know there's nothing stand out in there, just trying to take more in low light. I avoid doing it generally, because I hate the frustration of loosing good compositions to blur.
    Mustang wrote: »
    Hey all can I get some critique on this, it's a picture I took a few years ago and I've personally always liked it. However where ever I post it, it get's no response, which IMO is tantamount to saying 'This is shit'.
    I would like some constructive opinions as to why it is shit, the only thing I can see that may bother people is the heavy contrast and perhaps the colours are a bit washed out.

    I'd be interested to see the frame you cropped that from, if you still have it.

    Jake! on
  • Options
    tinyfisttinyfist Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Sheri wrote: »
    Dark Moon wrote: »
    Thanks! Did the incandescent lamp actually do anything, what with all your metering being done for your flash?

    Your photoblog has been added to my bookmarks, so I will trundle through every now and then and try and make myself useful. Be sure to post a lot of photos - they keep me commenting.

    Who knows. I think it helped light it from beneath and not just head-on, but I didn't really try shooting without it, I don't think (actually, I might have. . . who knows). And I used the binder to keep some of the light from hitting the backdrop.


    Forgive the noobocity, but I really liked the smoke shots too (especially the red one, the shape is so interesting yet clean-ish). But could you tell me how you got it to be different colours?

    tinyfist on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    erisian popeerisian pope Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Mustang wrote: »
    Hey all can I get some critique on this, it's a picture I took a few years ago and I've personally always liked it. However where ever I post it, it get's no response, which IMO is tantamount to saying 'This is shit'.
    I would like some constructive opinions as to why it is shit, the only thing I can see that may bother people is the heavy contrast and perhaps the colours are a bit washed out.

    seagull, fence, etc

    Here are some thoughts (all critical):

    It's too busy for my tastes. The bird is superimposed over the horizon line which feels very cluttered. If the bird were higher (or you had crouched lower when shooting) so that the bird were firmly in the sky that would help the image a lot.

    When I see a picture with a person/animal in it I tend to look at that person/animal and then look in the direction they are looking. In your pic, since the bird is centered, that means I tend to not look at the entire left half of the image.

    You almost have convergence going on (fence, plus the main grassy hillside) except the hills in the background don't also converge. In a candid snap you can't necessarily control that, but if all the landmasses/objects converged together on the right that would have added some dynamicness to the image.

    The background hills are nearly the same degree of color saturation as the foreground, making them blend a lot. I would be tempted to create an adjustment layer and mask everything except them and either darken or lighten, or desaturate them so they are more distinct. I think lighten/desaturate would be the best options.

    The sky is empty but the color is not rich. It's in nearly equal proportion to the foreground but the foreground is very busy (but still not color rich). I think the pic would be better with less foreground and more sky (shot from a lower angle, which would have also fixed the bird/horizon overlap issue) or possibly less sky. Also, possibly a polarizer or another adjustment layer to give the sky more richness in color would make the sky contrast against the forgeround better.


    These are all the things I think keep the image from really engaging me.

    One thing I REALLY like is the brightness of the bird against the flatness of the colors in the image. That makes the bird "pop" a lot and that's cool.

    erisian pope on
  • Options
    erisian popeerisian pope Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Sheri, I wanna comment on your pic, too! (I really am trying to give back more to this thread since I am now so high and mighty and perfect :roll:)

    I agree with it being too busy. But I want to point out that part that catches my eye the most is the really bright highlight along the edge of the foreground sign-dude. That part is all about abstract shape, but the rest of the pic feels more documentary-style. For documentary, I agree that a different angle showing more interaction between the real people would really enhance it, but if you wanted to go arty, then maybe a shallower DOF so that the foreground sign-dude was crisp but the stand was blurred some would increase our focus on the neat highlight shape. Or maybe selective coloring to set the pic to B&W / grayscale except for the sign-dude. Ideally, (I am going on and on cuz that shape and the light on it are RAD!!!) there would be other background shapes in the blurred rest-of-the-picture that repeat the shape or something similar to it. Then the pic would be more arty rather than documentary. Which may not be what you wanted.

    One other issue I see: The stand has two major lines - the roof and the counter. One is diagonal down (roof) and one is semi-horizonal (top of counter) but there's a third line (foot-rest-rails and bottom of counter) that is diagonally up. You did a good job of averaging these so that the counter seems horizontal. But the roof is a stronger line to me and so the stand and the earth itself feel slanted down-and-to-the-right and I feel like I am sliding a little when I view the pic. I would suggest in this particular case having the roof horizontal and the other lines all leading upwards. That would feel more stable I think.


    Please take all of this with a grain of salt. Also please to be understanding that I offer these in-depth thoughts because I think you're pretty awesome at the photo thing and am hoping that my thoughts as just another person are helpful. It's not like you're some amateur, and it's not like I am any frigging better (I really amn't) ... god I hate how I feel uppity when I give crits sometimes. But yeah - I think you're top notch and am just hoping my thoughts might be useful. They also might not. <3

    erisian pope on
  • Options
    Dark MoonDark Moon Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Jake - The first feels too static for a performance shot. Composition is okay, it just doesn't grab me. Second and third shots are lovely, with the second being the best. The angle on 3 seems a bit extreme, and I think I'd prefer it if the side of the gear was near vertical so the stage isn't so heavily slanted, but it's still a good shot. The 4th would be good if both folks were in focus - probably impossible, given the lighting, but the lady looking at the fellow leads my eye to the fellow, who is unfortunately out of focus. There isn't much to the last shot - no one is particularly interesting, though the woman is well isolated, she's also centre of the frame and a bit dull.

    Dark Moon on
    3072973561_de17a80845_o.jpg
  • Options
    SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    tinyfist wrote: »
    Sheri wrote: »
    Dark Moon wrote: »
    Thanks! Did the incandescent lamp actually do anything, what with all your metering being done for your flash?

    Your photoblog has been added to my bookmarks, so I will trundle through every now and then and try and make myself useful. Be sure to post a lot of photos - they keep me commenting.

    Who knows. I think it helped light it from beneath and not just head-on, but I didn't really try shooting without it, I don't think (actually, I might have. . . who knows). And I used the binder to keep some of the light from hitting the backdrop.


    Forgive the noobocity, but I really liked the smoke shots too (especially the red one, the shape is so interesting yet clean-ish). But could you tell me how you got it to be different colours?

    Magic

    (Photoshop)

    t pope - Your ideas suck and I hate you.

    (<3)

    Sheri on
  • Options
    altmannaltmann Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    There's a fish in my eye:

    2297708565_1b4c66132a_b.jpg
    Some shop in California


    2297701675_47c71809d9_b.jpg
    Old caddy. (sorry for blurriness, it's hard to shoot this fkn 100iso film on bulb setting handheld.

    Anable: I loved the panoramics. Fantastic.

    altmann on
    Imperator of the Gigahorse Jockeys.

    "Oh what a day, what a LOVELY DAY!"

    signature.png
  • Options
    CPCP Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Altman, thats a neat shot, I think the distortion, the bright overblown colors, and that dark gapping maw ad to a overall discomfort and surreal-ness that work well. If you had dropped the point of view a bit, it would have further distorted the geometry of the building, I think that might have worked well for the shot.

    ALSO,
    I've been playing around with my old Minolta 35mm, and I'd like to try and shoot some B&W stuff. The thing is, I know nothing about film, what kind to use, what different options there are, anyone have any good "intro to film" resources? Suggestions, things I should consider? Thanks!

    CP on
    Picasa web album
  • Options
    AneurhythmiaAneurhythmia Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    I used to shoot on Ilford Delta and Kodak Tri-X and T-Max. No idea if those are still in production, though.

    Or, if your development is limited to drugstore labs or whatever, you might look at C-41 options for quick turn around.

    Aneurhythmia on
  • Options
    altmannaltmann Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    CP, just get 100iso for outdoor crap and around 400-800 for indoor. It's not as easy to figure out the film stuff as it is digital, because you essentially need to wait a few days before your prints come back and you can see whether you exposed correctly etc. But you can experiment and you'll get results that are perfectly fine. That's what I did at least. Just note that my first 2 rolls that came back were utter crap, with like 2 great shots and since then it's gotten a lot higher in terms of quality stuff coming back.

    altmann on
    Imperator of the Gigahorse Jockeys.

    "Oh what a day, what a LOVELY DAY!"

    signature.png
This discussion has been closed.