Snapshot editionPrevious thread >>4482160
I would have liked to have gotten the squirrel a bit sharper, but I think this is my photo of the day.
>>4485034He stopped to pose, here.
>>4485034Too bad that would've been a great shot
>>4485039Right? I think it's good to post your near-misses. It's encouraging to beginners to know that everyone misses shots. >>4485040I normally dislike power lines in a shot, but this seems to work here. Civilization Vs. nature.
>>4485042Neat!
just got back from my first west coast visit. also entering my ken era i guess.
>>4485050That's a good shot. But, you're not going to reach Ken-levels without maxing the saturation.
>>4485052Fuck! Idk why its turned>>4485050Foreground looks good. Shadows look good, but the shadows in the back and background look too blue imo
>>4485041Yeah I also post near misses sometimes. I like to see what could have been too.>>4485042Great scene!>>4485050Wonderful shot as well, maybe a bit too much blue for the sky
>>4485053i have, for the first time in my life, used the clarity slider. thats ken enough for me for now.
>>4485057I usually set a negative clarity, much better results
>>4485049I love the scene and it's a good shot... but as much as I hate AI deletion in post, I really want all those people to go away.
>>4485061What is ai deletion? I have no idea what you’re talking about. I shot and edited all these pics from Japan on an old basic iPhone with stock apps
>>4485063he wants you to use AI and delete all the people in the shot
>>4485063It's taking a big section of a picture and letting AI delete it and replace it with it's idea of the same area without people or other objects. Like I said, I hate it. But like I said, I really like your picture. I just wish those people weren't there.
>>4485065Ohhh ok. I like the people, makes it honest. I think it’s lame to go to a very accessible, popular place and try to remove the people, either through editing (ai) or cropping, to make it look you’re alone. You can still see the subject very clearly, the people don’t take away from it imo. On the flip side, I don’t like exploiting strangers either, but the people are so far away it’s hard to see any details. I did upload one photo of strangers, but that was a unique situation where they were already being filmed.
>>4485068I get it. And I respect it. A photo should ultimately be what you want, and not what others think. I posted some pictures of a network sport news team at the local stadium as they were outside with a crowd of fans and some people here freaked the hell out. Don't care. I loved the shots. But, on to looking at the deer shots I just took. Might be back with some soon.
>>4485068Oh and the photo with the balls in the mirror room. I did capture that guys face too. I don’t normally like doing that but it was hard not to get someone’s face in that room bc it was crowded. I was a tourist in super populated location so I like capturing that, it fits the theme. Like I said idc if people are in the shots, if you balance it looks good.I’d like to upload more but I think I hit my limit. Idk this is my first time posting here, maybe an image I tried uploading was too large?
>>4485073You need a posting loicence m8
>>4485077Imo deer are so common that you have to do something interesting with the background or catch them doing something unique. Something creative needs to happen. I can look out my window and see these images all winter.
>>4485078We don't always have the opportunity. I normally post recent pictures here.
>>4485078What the fuck happened to deer in your area? My yuro ass cannot come closer than 50 m from them, even getting smelled makes them flee and they're pretty good at smelling humans
>>4485080No that anon, I'm the one actually posting pictures... but I have a 100-400mm Tamron lens. It's perfect until the rare one ventures close.
>>4485082For me it's not a matter of lens, I just don't see them very often. Then again I don't practice hiding so that might explain it
>>4485080>>4485080Idk, I live in town too. Can’t drive out of town at night without a good potential of hitting one. Couple winters ago had about 30 in front of my house. My buddy is hunting a buck rn on the edge of town. I think the wolf population got messed up and now there are too many deer. I think a lot of people here feed them too so they get used to humans. I see them everywhere, even downtown. Bears too.
>>4485083You probably know this already, but if you didn't, deer are most active around dusk and dawn. That's the time to find them as they follow their travel pattern for food. When food's hard to find, they'll be traveling more. But they have a pattern of where they go and once you find a place on their map, it's like watching a car race on a road course. You sit there and wait for them to regularly pass by.
>>4485079This one is cool and interesting. I like the backlighting. The deer seems to be very aware you are there taking the pic and the giant ears, nose, and eyes are locked in on you.
>>4485086Thanks. Fawns can be very brave and curious. but at the same time, panic and run from the sound of the shutter.
>>4485085Yeah I'm quite a ware of it indeed. What surprises me is how deer in your pics seem to be very aware of your presence yet completely unafraid
>>4485088I'm in an area on the edge between rural and suburban. Lots of pockets of woods, with one at the edge of my property. The deer are used to seeing people and when I want a picture like that, I'll make a clicking noise to get their attention and take the shots. But any movement toward them and they will quickly raise their tails and walk off.
>>4485099B&W works perfectly here.
I took this “photo” :')
>>4485101Thanks.
>>4485079Nice placement in the background and the lighting on the face is great. I've already reached the limit of my own backyard backdrop, but I still had fun while it lasted.>>4485050Fucking sweet. The background is a tad blue for this scheme though.
>>4485080I've groomed about five generations of deer. New moms bring their fawns to meet me. They like it when I pick bugs out of their ears.They are soooo close to being talldogs.
>>4485124Based
Hazy mountain shots are always a pain to process without turning them into shit
>>4485132i heavily dehaze even if it turns shit (very grainy)
>>4485136Yeah I do too most of the times, just look at how flat this shit >>4485132 was before ppBut for some reason attempts at dehazing always fuck with the colors big time and they're very hard to make kinda natural again. I guess too much stretching of the histogram is destined to fail.
Been trying to be a lot more destructive to my B&W rolls since i shoot worthless bullshit. I developed this in rodinal 1:100 at a rolling boil (275°F/135°C) and quenched in an ice water bath.Next project is to propgate fungus on the emulsion.
>>4485132>>4485137Rule 1- you can't add information that's not there in the first place. It was hazy. It will be a hazy picture. But, you can draw out more information. It's just a matter of how long you want to work an image. I slapped this together with layers and lots of individual tweaks to different areas. It's by no means my best work, but it shows you can draw out more if you're willing to put in the time. I spent... maybe 5 minutes. An hours work could probably make a nice shot.
>>4485124we have a forbidden bond.
>>4485050That's amazing. I need a tripod head>>4485130nyao why are u so cute
>>4485186
>>4485187
>>4485055>>4485056>>4485118thanks, yall got me all schizo about the colors again lol; every time i try to tame the blues i end up with a picture that feels too green to me - how about this one, too much?>>4485186thank you, i didnt use a tripod btw, its just two side by side shots stitched
>>4485141Yeah but it looks like shitAnd the scene irl didn't have such a hazy look, hence my attempt at stretching it quite a bit
>>4485200Yes way too much saturation in the highlights for me desu
>>4485210lil bit yeh them shits be orange as fucklike they burnin my eyes n shit but the shit dope tho with da road n shit nah mean
>>4485213are you okay anon
>>4485210damn. i always overshoot, then overcompensate, then hate myself for not overshooting even more. this any better? feels right, looks similiar to what my iphone saw, cloud-top-color-wise
>>4485243Sup heron anon how've you been, haven't seen your crispy bird pics in a minute.
>>4485000
>>4485255It's upside down can u rotate it please
>>4485255>dude... what if >no, dude, listen>what if...>no, oh my god dude>what if...>like>i turned it upside down?>duuuuuuuude...
lovely gum tree
>>4485140>135°CYou developed it in steam?
>>4485347or in a pressure cooker
>>4485034out of focus shit. why not delete that trash?
>>4485347Felt like it, i added sugar to the water too with the goal of causing as much damage as i could while still getting some images. The development proces was a dip/dunk in the dark for 30 seconds to reach full development.Almost burned myself and the neg looked like a bent and crinkled up pube but all i achieved was reticulation
Some damn nice shots itt
angle!
Finally developed this roll after like 3 months sitting on it
>>4485451i never heard of developing film by sitting on it, is that some sorta chicken method or what
>>4485490It’s a new method I developed
am i a cool "photographer of the street's" yet mom
Gloomy
>>4485547no ideaam i?
>>4485551hell yeah brother
>>4485550Is this a joke?
>>4485554What's funny about it?
>>4485554The color banding, the pubes on the sensor, the fact that its just a blurry mess..?
>>4485569>>4485562missed
>>4485140Just buy fomapan. It comes pre fungussed.
>>4485573Too late, i got some strips marinating in some microbe stank water + yeast + sugar. Ill post results eventually if i get cool results.
>>4485600You can buy geotrichum culture that may be nice to use if you soak your film in milk first. You could also let some bread or meat go moldy, scrape all the mold off, blend in water then soak your film in that. Let it sit in a sealed tupperware container on top of a wet sponge.
>>4485612Alternatively, you could just shoot digital and use the faggot slider in LR
Looky me, I'm a special snowflake that still shoots film in the digital age. Ain't I unique and edgy?
>>4485545This has the potential to become the next Kodachrome. Wait, you said sitting, I thought you meant something else nvm.>>4485531Noice>>4485308If you squint, you can see a kookaburra sitting on the gum tree looking merry and gay.>>4485050Nice light, nice pano
>>4485000here's a big toxix toad from Paraguay. I wish a had my fucking flash. I'm an idiot for not knowing an sb-26 would not work on my lumix. >>4485042neat>>4485221great clouds. how much editing?
Night shot under nearly pure green light at the renfaire the other night. Pulled some colors out using LRC.How'd I do, lads?
>4485601Nice, but the spot reflection (from a filter?) needs to be removed.>>4485606>>4485636>>4485659Comfy and souper shaarp. Almost rockwellian.>>4485621Film is great when the photographer is mature enough to view it as another tool in the toolbelt.
>>4485677Flash is one thing, the main problem here is the missed focus
>>4485612I like this idea, ill give it a try. Thanks anon>>4485618Im trying dawg
Today's lesson: if you don't ETTR, you'll make ISO 200 look more like 2000 when you recover in post
>>4485734>ETTRwelcome to 2012 loljust get a proper modern camera and you can just lift shadows without shit like ETTR and god knows what fuck poor people do to make their historic cameras work lol
>>4485734also learn to focus and return that fugly cat and get a photogenic one
>>4485677>great clouds. how much editing?hey man, thanks! just the usual color grading, nothing out of the ordinary, the sky just looked great that evening. heres the raw
>>4485742now i notice that i might have pushed the exposure up a bit too much. well it is what it is.
>>4485736The focus on the eyes is proper. I don't know where this persistently wrong idea came from, but I've never heard it from anyone who actually shoots for a living/passion.
>>4485754>eyes in focus - everything okbabies first prime lens, I see. just shoot wide open - no one cares for unimporant shit like ears or nose in a face. eyes and bokeh is enoughpost again when you learn to step down properly
>>4485731the flash would have made it like the front page of national geographic. was holding my phone flashlight, and with open aperture to get the shot.I couldn't focus the camera with one hand.
>>4485734>>4485735>>4485736>>4485754>>4485769its a fine picture, gear obsession ruins minds
>>4485769Oh, you again. How is anyone supposed to learn anything from you - or even care - if you seeth more than you advise? This was your problem in the other thread.It's almost like you don't actually know what you're talking about and you don't have a valid complaint.
>>4485743Yeah I think you need to preserve some of the softness in the clouds (avoid oversaturation too)I'd also suggest trying to refram to get the end of the road's curve in a corner and to erase that crack which is distracting. I think I also overexposed the foreground a bit but here's an attempt.
>>4485779Its an amateurish soapy blurry catBokeh works on people. A lot of lenses have a slightly curved field of focus that hugs the shape of the human face better so focusing on the eyes also gets the nose and ears in focus wide open. And on people, the pores in the skin being a but soft is ideal. On snouted animals like cats it’s just a blurry mess
>>4485779It's seething that he carried over from the M43 thread, even after being informed that he was responding to 5 year old photos in a troll thread. The ego is a funny thing, especially on this slow board.
>>4485784yeah man, gotcha, that looks pretty natural, but. tending to the overcompansating bit, i went the other way. regarding the crack - which one? and as to the reframing, i am now more than 8000km far from mojave and doubt i will be back in the near future so... it is what it is
>>4485809Might be my esl brain using the wrong word, I'm referring to cropping here like I did in the last pic, but idk if it's really better. The crack was on the road on the foreground and became a bit too noticeable with the increased luminosity and crop
>>4485814oh i see now! something something bias, i really didnt even notice the crack down there... i thought you wanted the right part of the road/shoulder to be included in the reframe
>>4485814
>>4485836Stitch points should be shifted so the flags don't look like they're dissolving, and the traffic lights aren't all lit at the same time.Also, why isn't the building symmetrical at the ends? Are they extensions?
Do you have Pareidolia? This photo triggers mine.
>>4485836>sunny day in england challenge (IMPOSSIBLE!)
>>4485842
1derland
mother's hands
>>4485838ever heard of a long exposure? i doubt any stitching happened on this one
>>4485903>fantaPanorama copy.jpg
>>4485821Yeah favourite version so far
>>4485903>ever heard of a long exposure? i doubt any stitching happened on this one16 vertical shots at 50mm on PTGui.>>4485838The flags are fluttering, each shot in the pano was like 10 seconds. The ends of the building are not symmetrical.
>>4485999Clean you sensors, reverse satan
>>4486004You're not my real dad! What the hell is a reverse satan?
A p&s snap of a frozen small green clump, 1:1 crop.
>>4485734I like it. Great use of DoF.>>4485735This is completely the ass backwards way of thinking. Why would you want to lift shadows? Modern sensors are way too sensitive imo and are ruining photography.>>4485736>>4485769>what is depth of field
>>4486068>>4486071i like the atmosphere in the first one but the grain is off, you use dehancer or something?
