Photography Post Vol. 2

[freecat]

(those are old but i felt like participating a bit here, i know they aren't that worth it)

[indesertum]

I read this thread religiously and I felt like I had to contribute.

I'm a photography noob so please tell me what I did wrong.

[kennmon]

almost everything.

dont take it too harshly though, just keep trying.

[indesertum]

but like specifically. what can I do to improve.

[kennmon]

actually since im eating breakfast now and have some time, ill give you a thorough critique

first and foremost -

a photo can be like a car

if its really good at one thing, other flaws can be excused

such as a car that can go really fast, but might not be the most comfortable, or a car that is exceedingly comfortable but slow and handles like a boat.

if a photo is able to do one thing extremely well, other flaws can be excused, but 99% of the time photos just suck.

your photos are grey, grey grey.

no contrast, no blocked out whites and blacks that should be there when you are shooting bw.

photographs can be easily judged by laymen simply based on the fact that they may/may not be pleasing to look at.

your first one, is it enjoyable to look at? no at all.

the second one, more of the same crap.

the tonal range is really bad on both, again, lack of contrast and in the first there are wierd blown out areas.

compositionally, the first is absolutely boring and messy, there is no central subject, nor does the whole scene work as a subject.

in the second, im wondering is a picture of a house? a picture of a bball game? either way there is no main focus, and no broad pleasing subject.

there are tons of other small nitpicks, but i am too lazy to write them all out.

dont use this as an excuse to upgrade from w/e cam you are using, its not the camera, its you.

[indesertum]

mmm. i wanted the second picture to be of the two people in the foreground looking on the game, but I guess then I shouldn't have cropped them out. I guess I have more reading to do.

[Leugwai]

I read this thread religiously and I felt like I had to contribute.

I'm a photography noob so please tell me what I did wrong.

The key is DEPTH. U can achieve greater depth thru anything, light/shadows, outoffocus, selective viewing, subject, lighting, color balance, saturation and tons other.

[kennmon]

what the hell do you mean by depth leungwai

[mis]

Im think i want to dabble in polaroids. I cant seem to find any new film polaroids on sale so Im assuming that I'm going to have to buy used.

I guess my criteria for the camera is

1) Not too expensive, about $200 tops

2) Film is not too difficult to find

3) About the size of an SLR, maybe bigger?

Any ideas?

[kennmon]

600 film isnt difficult to find, but seeing as though it is discontinued and prices are going up, it may deter you

thats what most people have in mind when they think of polaroids, so if you are going for that, be disappointed.

if you are looking into packfilm, the future isnt as grim

[corter]

i've been looking into getting a camera that shoots pack film mis, as they aren't going to be making 600 any more like kennmon said. I think i might pick up a polaroid 420 to start, as they're like $20-30 on ebay and seem to be a decent way to get into pack film and polaroid stuff that i'll be able to do after 2009. plus, pack film is like $8.99 as opposed to 600, which (when you can find it) is allready at like $19.99/pack even at cvs up here.

i got a polaroid back for my bronica the other day too, that should be a little bit of fun

[kennmon]

600se

195

180

npc 195

are the only pack cameras really worth getting

[fornicatard]

Too expensive for polaroids. You should get a 100, 250, 350 or 450. (these were the high-end models, are all essentially thesame, where the 450 has the most options, but all have a metal body instead of plastic and are generally better than the other packfilm models) they sell for +/- $30

Question for polaroid experts: how did this guy get these edges and intense waves? looks absolutely stunning. http://flickr.com/photos/pierrehebert/2400692740/in/photostream/

[kennmon]

Too expensive for polaroids. You should get a 100, 250, 350 or 450. (these were the high-end models, are all essentially thesame, where the 450 has the most options, but all have a metal body instead of plastic and are generally better than the other packfilm models) they sell for +/- $30

Question for polaroid experts: how did this guy get these edges and intense waves? looks absolutely stunning. http://flickr.com/photos/pierrehebert/2400692740/in/photostream/

nah, automatic exposure pack cams are weak

thats why i suggested good ones, do some research first.

and long exposure/full scanned 665, duh.

[fornicatard]

You're such a snob. For those who don't want to blow 500bucks on somthing that wont be useable in 2 years, the series I suggested are the best.

[Leugwai]

[kennmon]

wanting pc sync and manual exposure among other things for someone who uses manual cameras and has photographic knowledge is snobbish?

why wont it be usable in 2 years?

who says they all cost 500?

(yes, im baiting you with those questions since i know the answers and you are wrong.)

[fornicatard]

If I had the money, I would buy a better one. I'd buy a 5D instead of my 450D. I'd buy a golden toiletseat, if I had the money. But I was answering mis' question (1. Not too expensive, about $200 tops) and I think the series I suggested would be a better choice, certainly for someone who's just getting started shooting polaroid and probably isn't going to use it that much.

The years and numbers are exaggerations, and, yes, I find your bitchy-ass way of posting snobby. (do some research first.duh)

[corter]

why would you buy a 450d over a used 20 or 30d?

[kennmon]

If I had the money, I would buy a better one. I'd buy a 5D instead of my 450D. I'd buy a golden toiletseat, if I had the money. But I was answering mis' question (1. Not too expensive, about $200 tops) and I think the series I suggested would be a better choice, certainly for someone who's just getting started shooting polaroid and probably isn't going to use it that much.

The years and numbers are exaggerations, and, yes, I find your bitchy-ass way of posting snobby. (do some research first.duh)

golden toiletseats afaik offer no real benefits over plastic or w/e ones.

stupid analogy

[malaujai]

richter... 2nd and 3rd pic are great! fuckin love em.

here are some from today:

[McFly2015]

Some really nice pictures in this thread. The pics are clean

[corter]

more from portland, me. more coming later too, i'm scanning now

[sircheesecake]

Iggphotographing anymore. I really just need to walk around with my camera. Anyways, from awhile ago.

[tac0tron]

Will start posting here once I get a new camera.

Magnificent photos everyone!

[yupsterism]

The New York Ice Rink at Rockefeller Center

[corter]

[iralex]

I just got a panasonic dmc-fz50, any one know anything about it? anyway, I decided to take some pictures of my animals.

[C0C0]

corter that photo is so beautiful, reminds me of fabric

[corter]

thanks! i shot it with my point and shoot, and i knew i was too close to focus but figured the texture and pattern would be nice...kinda a new direction for me but i'd like to keep going with it