>GFX100II + GF55[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:PhotographerMarcus UbungenImage-Specific Properties:
>>4389569This is your photography after being exposed to the equivalence cult1/1 f11 iso 50 is a lost art
>>4389580That's a lot of words for "you should have stopped down", though I do agree.
I think it works. His closeness to the lens distorting him lightly, the shallow depth capturing the important part of the face, it creates a sense of depth to the image.
>>4389569the asymmetrical eyes remind me of something
lmao i follow this nigga on ig
>>4389569Not a portrait, just a boring picture.This is a portrait. An image which purpose is to conjure up the character of a person in a pictorial form.
>>4389619Annie once again with the crappy racist memes
>>4389619Wtf is that garbage
>>4389613>asymmetrical eyesI'm sorry anon, did you think your face was symmetrical?>>4389569Looks like a school photo for a teacher
>>4389569Feel like i could take it.
>>4389619kek
>>4389619pottery
>>4389569yea cool i really need his cheek with orange peel texture old man skin in super hyper sharp focus but not his eyes. good one.
>>4389709lol>>4389619replace this baboon with a skinny blonde young woman and you are golden
>>4389619>annieI hate that retarded nigger nepobaby like you wouldn't believe it
>>4389619this is actually good unironically
>>4389709Kek
>>4389619>Feet are cut offIs this her style or something?
>>4389877Btfo'ing footfags is a style lmao
>>4389877she is blacktoes intolerant
>>4389882Ok yeah I can get behind that LOL
>>4389712kek
>>4389883CARLOS
>>4389569It's fine for a 159k sample.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareCapture One 23 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Width4896Image Height3264
>>4389619sopa de macaco
>>4389569Looks cool, I like the shot, I just dont like a corny 90s family photo backdrop behind him, or the frame around it. Also might be a touch cold on the temp but hey maybe the photographer likes it that way.
>>4389569Bland. DMV takes better portraits. Fact.
>>4389569generic
>>4390576All fuji users run the white balance too cold because fuji’s piss poor color science turns to literal piss otherwiseOnly (newer and more expensive) sony and canon can actually handle color temp adjustments. Fuji and nikon get weird shifts and tints especially in skin tones.
>>4392539But everybody say Sony takes green pictures, and now you say Fuji takes yellow pictures. I read the opposite shit every single day here. It's so tiresome.
>>4392542Sony -took- green pictures between the a7ii and a7iii, their auto white balance program didnt really workNeither did nikons once upon a timeNo one understood why they changed it because the original a7 and the sony DSLRs had lovely colors. Today I really can not tell panasonic, sony, and nikon apart. Fuji’s color issues are more pervasive. They’ve always been fucked in one direction or the other. Too cool, too magenta, wrong browns, skies too teal, etc. all the film simming caused them to forget what reality looks like.
>>4392539Can we see an example of the portraits you take? Portraits with good color
>>4392544>Fuji’s color issues are more pervasive. They’ve always been fucked in one direction or the other. Too cool, too magenta, wrong browns, skies too teal, etc. all the film simming caused them to forget what reality looks like.I cringe everytime someone post a Fuji shot on social media. The replies are nothing but "omg do you have the recipe, please do the needful reciple saar", instead of just playing with their WB.
>>4392553Why do I have to send you photos of my family to say fuji is trash?Their autofocus doesnt work at all either and xtrans is the only sensor variation that actually ruins photos (smeared reds, beige teeth)
>>4392542>I readthat was your first mistake. never read the garbage people type here . just look at the pictures
>>4392557Nothing to do with Fuji, I just to see examples of good portraits and assumed you had personal experience, but I guess not>>4392559Would be nice if people posted pictures though
>>4389877yes[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution144 dpiVertical Resolution144 dpiCommentScreenshotImage Width1232Image Height822
>>4389877leaving feet out of frame
>>4389877is her signature move[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution144 dpiVertical Resolution144 dpiCommentScreenshotImage Width954Image Height960
>>4389877even for chairs[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution144 dpiVertical Resolution144 dpiCommentScreenshotImage Width952Image Height958
>>4389569Combo like this will probably be better for doing some nature shots and shit. For a guy maybe it's not a problem, but good luck retouching all those skin imperfections for some actress with bad skin.
>>4389569Fuck off Marcus, you use the GFX as a crutch instead of taking a good picture.>>4389619This is why Annie is the GOAT when it comes to editorials. She collaborates with the artists or has a vision when it comes to the celebrity portraits she takes.Marcus Ubungen have something more to say or a vision rather than focus on being a fucking influencer. Oh wow, I took a portrait of a celebrity.All you do is just have a person sitting or standing in a room. Even Yousuf Karsh studied painting and composition to make something interesting with his portraits.It's even sadder that you come here, a 4chan board, because you aren't getting enough clicks whoring yourself out on IG and the various FB groups you share your mediocre photos.Here's a lesson Marcus, try looking up some actual portrait photographers and learn from them.Here's one: Arnold NewmanAlso don't give me the usual excuse of we don't have a budget or we only have 5 minutes to shoot.You can't even do the minimum of what's required of an artist, to work within those parameters to be creative.
>>4392612Marcus is no better than alec soth, and a good bit better than trevor wisecupHe is high average by photography standards because of this
>>4392612How can you use the gfx as a crutch when for 99% of people you cant tell it from a ff sony with a crappy lightroom presetOnly the ISO value in the exif would set it apart>this is sony right>oh wait no he shot at iso 12800 and theres no noise (but there would be at 200% zoom)The GFX experience: yes thats all it is
>>4392625Not really, every editorial photographer I see working for a magazine or newspaper shoot the same way. Which is why photography is floundering at the moment, because as a culture we're obsessed with aesthetics.The best thing that happened to Trevor Wisecup is when Daniel Arnold called him the modern Winogrand, which fucked the current generation because now we have some heroin addict-influencer wannabe-con artist, who still hasn't sent out the majority of his so called zines.Marcus just shoots everything wide open and thinks that's photography.Alec and Marcus are just following this Yale Photo style trend which is indicative of the trust fund kids who dominate the space and soak up all the jobs because they come from money. They can afford to shoot for cheap, but the rest of us can't.The person who is at least doing something interesting with his editorials is Mark Peckmenzian.If you just want someone doing a straight photo of a person, there's Phil Sharp who at least knows how to shoot someone.
