I can tell you're trying to do things with shape, light, color, etc. so that beats taking snapshits of your pet cat or whatever. That said the pictures aren't very interesting. It's just the corners of buildings. This sort of abstract, pure shapes, literalist style was already boring 60 years ago.

>>4517952
this OP pic is by far the most interesting. the rest aren't flawed in a technical sense but they just aren't particularly interesting to me. not using your gay rating system though sorry.

also post your pictures in something higher than 720x1080

I like these. 2,3,4 the most.

>>4517962
>>4517965
Harsh but fair, I understand it is not terribly original. Can't tell if "not interesting"/"boring" means it's not good enough or if you dislike the minimalist esthetic as a whole but I'll try to improve to give it a more personnal style.

also the OP image is actually the only pic I consider truly good. I find the textures and the way the building fades in the white sky beautiful, the others don't have anything like this going for them.

>>4517993
thanks

Your shit is kind of like
https://www.mattstuart.com/industrieweg
This
But not as good

>>4518036
Cool. it's definitely more consistent. other examples of stuff that is similar but better are appreciated.

>>4518036
I think where OP differs from that example is the loose perspective. In comparison the collection form the website has this intentional fixed vertical perspective, which makes it more eye catching and uniform in a glance.

I like how you play with colours, but even with those loose perspective, I think the composition can be improved. 9531 feels nice.

>>4518109
It's true. I would say, I am much more focused on 1 singular texture, color, or contrast, that I surround with empty space. Matt Stuart is more about organizing a lot of stuff in a small frame, resulting in some geometric clutter. I will stick to my approach and try to form a series as consistent as his.

9531 is actually my least favorite, but I like its colors. Thanks!

>>4517956
This is my favorite, clearly a building like the rest but abstract and unique enough that I gave it an extra glance or two. Runner up would be the OP photo for similar reasons, but slightly less so.

>>4518112
Also bro there’s no such thing as talent. It’s not like painting where there is skill. There’s no type of brush stroke you need, or inherent memory ability to take in a scene and recreate it. it’s about learning the techniques of visual composition and applying them to your focus. The only physical talent involved with photography is how your finger touches the shutter button or how long you can stand out on the street getting pictures.
Good photography is more a matter of study and practice.
Winograd took 1 million photos and died with another 250000 undeveloped. It’s about getting out there and getting the reps in
For landscapers it’s about returning to a scene multiple times for different weather, different lighting, different flowers in bloom.
It’s part of what makes photography such a great hobby. It’s not like running where there’s a genetic barrier to entry.

That being said op keep studying what you like and that will help you make what you want to see. Also dont take us retards to seriously when we tell you it’s shit because if it connects with you it will connect with someone else

>>4517952
usecase for talent?

>>4518132
Camera operation is only one part of photography, chud.

>>4518122
Thanks for the feedback

>>4518132
>>4518133
It's a /p/ meme from 3-5 years ago. An insane middle-aged asian guy would open threads titled "Am I a talented photographer?" and dump what you would get if you'd strap a gopro to your wrist and get it to take random photo on a night walk to 7-eleven.

I totally agree with the comment about practice. I also think it's important to spend time developing a photographic culture, that's how I get inspired.

Don't worry, I'm not getting discouraged by people saying it's boring. I think I needed that to keep my standards high, and if I'm honest with myself only the OP pic is a keeper. It's quite hard to get many great keepers for the same series as a hobbyist, and at some point you gotta use what you have because otherwise my photos would never leave my ssd. Thanks.

>>4518139
Physically?
Unironically yes

>>4517952
look purposefully made
and adhere to a style and aesthetic
whch is to say, it's decent. number 2

that being said, the jews have taught us that photos wth meaning or ones that also make us reflect, are what makes one great

so in a sense they don't impact me at all

>>4517952
This one is your best one, the rest aren't as interesting and are pretty derivative since you used the same angle for all of them.

>>4518185
Thanks. Yeah I get now the main weakness of those is that they have no message, they are entirely non-objective. That makes them boring quick if they don't have something special on top.

>>4518189
Thanks. Good point. It's hard to get different angles though since the buildings stretch up there and i'm down there. But I'll try to mix up the shapes at least.

>>4518281
>Thanks. Good point. It's hard to get different angles though since the buildings stretch up there and i'm down there. But I'll try to mix up the shapes at least.
Based that you're open to criticism, a lot of people really aren't. Not that your other photos were bad, they just became more of the same. That red building one was also kino and was really visually interesting despite being the same angle.

As for angles, really just try out some weird shit. Even getting right up close to the building and putting your camera against the wall looking up can do interesting things. Look for shapes in the buildings too, geometry is really neat when doors and windows all make strange lines and you add some odd angles to them.

>>4518289
My harshest critic is myself, doesn't even compare to what's here. I actually think this thread was pretty positive, I got serious feedback and got compared to a pro even if to say I'm worse. Means at least my stuff is worthy of critique.

The secret objective of this thread was to decide which photos to print alongside OP's pic for an art fair. I think I'll go with 3 and 4. I think I'll print OP's in A3 and the others in A4 to save money and highlight my best pic.

Will try to mix up my angles. I'm going tonight on a photo walk on the french riviera. That's where I got inspired to do minimalist building shots. Might post in a new thread in August.

File: DSC_4649.jpg (432 KB, 1080x1080)

432 KB JPG

I actually have more shot that might fit a series in this theme. The problem is it was taken long ago on a filthy digital ewaste while my newer pics are shot exclusively on a glorious half frame film camera. Therefore the details are mushy and pixelated so I overlaid some fake grain on it to make it look like the others, but still it's not quite there. Probably I will never use this. Twas good practice though.

>>4517952
I like your pics but do you know how to make something else ? I feel like building corners pics are ultra limited and not super hard to take

>>4518358
Thanks, I also do nudes and landscapes. I would say, it's not difficult, but like everything else it's hard to do well. OP pic would be challenging to reproduce.

>>4518331
Kino, nice work.

>>4518365
>nudes
Where do you find models? Seems like it's really hard in the modern era since everyone is satisfied with selfies on their phone (or just thinks it's weird to be asked to pose nude).

>>4518427
Friends and gfs. It's just a hobby for now, I wouldn't pay models for that.

>>4518448
>Friends
How in the world does that even come up?

>>4518459
>I mean, friends I had sex with. To be honest it only happened twice
Well that's pretty different then, it sounded like you had various friends you did this with. Nudes of FWBs and ex-gf's is pretty easy to get then.

>>4518460
Yeah, guess I overplayed it because I'm pleased with the results and I'd like to continue in the future. But then again, I don't have much of anything I'm pleased with yet, be it landscape buildings or nudes. I'm in the building portfolio phase.

>>4518461
Don't sweat it, I've been in the building portfolio stage for years now. I ended up working in building photography as a result, but in a stale documentary way which bored me, so I left after a year. There's also cars too, but I know a lot of car people so that's just natural.

In almost a decade of taking photos, there's probably only 100 photos I actually really like and maybe a dozen I consider incredible.

>>4518464
Sweat. Actually, I've been doing photo for a long time too but it never clicked until I started shooting exclusively film 1 year ago. Since then I've been more consistent and have actual projects I'm slowly building up. A dozen incredible photos and a 100 good ones is actually great for a decade. Hope you make a thread to show those.

Also, how did you get the job in photo? Did you have to show up your work on your website or something?

>>4518466
Sweet*

>>4518466
>A dozen incredible photos and a 100 good ones is actually great for a decade. Hope you make a thread to show those.
Maybe, I don't know. As much as I love them, I feel like they probably won't be loved by others for the same reasons that I love them. Art being subjective and all that.

>Also, how did you get the job in photo? Did you have to show up your work on your website or something?
It got advertised on a job site and I applied immediately, then I got the managers phone number from the company website (publicly listed so I wasn't being weird by doing this) and called him up to express my interest. After that I emailed some of my portfolio and that was good enough. They didn't consider my pictures perfect as they weren't in a documentary style and were too artistic, but the interest in building photography was helpful.

As for if I'd recommend it, that's up to you. I got bored of photography as a result and had to leave after only a year of working there. Sometimes it's a bad idea to make what you love become your day job. I probably should've gone into portraits since that's my least explored side, but I don't know enough people to build a portfolio and I'm actually quite a private person, so I don't have a site or really post anywhere but /p/.

>>4518468
> I feel like they probably won't be loved by others for the same reasons that I love them.
I think that's the point of surrounding the great photo with a series that prepare the viewer to see what's to see. Else, photography is quite a weak mean of artistic expression. Here I'd like to showcase the OP pic, but I didn't have anything quite like it.

> it's a bad idea to make what you love become your day job
Thanks for the recap. I think the issue with photo is what earns money is not what's great about photo. I think I'll just try to build a fine art portfolio alongside my normal job and try to sell prints. I'll realistically never "make it" but at least I'll do only what I want.

>>4518469
>I think that's the point of surrounding the great photo with a series that prepare the viewer to see what's to see. Else, photography is quite a weak mean of artistic expression. Here I'd like to showcase the OP pic, but I didn't have anything quite like it.
Good point. I might post a thread of my work someday then and see how it goes. I'd be very interested to see more of your work too.

>I think I'll just try to build a fine art portfolio alongside my normal job and try to sell prints. I'll realistically never "make it" but at least I'll do only what I want.
Man I never even thought about prints. Maybe I should consider doing that, though I don't know where to begin with that exactly. I know sites exist but I don't know who uses what or what is a good choice.

Making it is a rich mans game imo, don't worry about it. I know people go on about nepotism or being rich and all that but it is accurate. I've known a few other photographers over time and the ones that had stuff in displays typically didn't have jobs and were supported by their parents. I knew one guy that used film exclusively and all types of odd cameras and had his work on display, and it was all on his parents dime. Same with a girl that made and sold her pottery online, she's never had a job and spends most of her time traveling around Europe when she's not at home making pottery.

>>4518470
Likewise, cheers. I think being a namefag is retarded but I'll use a similar name for the thread when I post more.

I think photo printing and most art practice is meaningless without community. I would never actually print stuff if it wasn't because my friend who's doing photography as well wanted to go to the fair. I would never feel like I could expose my photos if I didn't have an opportunity to talk with volunteers at the local photo gallery.

I guess you're right about money. But for now I don't even have 1 finalized project so I'll just start there and see what happens at the local gallery.

>>4518476
>I think being a namefag is retarded but I'll use a similar name for the thread when I post more.
Anon you can just trip yourself without a name to make you unique in a thread then drop it afterwards instead of becoming some insufferable namefag.

>>4518480
Yeah the issue is more recognizing me in my next thread. But those days there is so few curated photo threads it won't be so hard anyway.

>>4517952
You, op, would benefit from using the shift function of a tilt shift lens to get straight lines for architectural building photos. Alternatively you can edit in photoshop your images to correct the lines but you will lose a lot of resolution.

>>4518132
There's many types of photography.

In order from least to most talent needed:

| Iphone, don't know anything about the principles of capturing light, press the shutter button at anything without any intent.

|| Mirrorless Knows the basics of the exposure triangle and incorporate these settings depending on the subject or scene your are photographing but still shoot at any random thing that you come across.

||| Pro cam Chooses a topic, theme, subject or concept and photographs what can be found outside in public. This is the collector photographer. The photographer that may shoot 100s of thousands of street (or other topic) photos, continuously collecting until the collection leads to quality emerging.

|||| Pro cam Hassy The same as three but incorporates some limited usage of props / pre-determined locations.

||||| Medium or Large format film or specialist digital medium format back camera. The studio / still life photographer / artist photographer. Everything single shot is pre-visualised before even a single shutter is pressed. The photographer doesn't rely on randomness, everything (or as much as possible) is predetermined and controlled. Lighting, location, pose, backdrop, contextual theme, edit etc.

|||||| The photography god. Knows all the rules and all the technics and throws everything out the window and re-invents the genre.

>>4524009
Yeah, you're right, it's just expensive. I correct the ones I feel need correction, but I also think it doesn't always need it. Like in the OP photo I think having some wonk to those lines works out.

>>4524011
I guess I'm III, but I think there is more to photo than this. This scale that you made, I think it's typical of how an isolated photographer sees his own craft. But after having met other artist and sold prints at an art fair I dont think I will get anywhere if I don't learn to assemble meaningful series using limited material, print, present and sell photos. In part because as a rule of thumb, the better the art, the smaller the audience. This photo that you think is exceptional, no one else than you and a couple artist who understand what you like in it will find it impressive (that would be the OP photo for me). You need to constrain a bit your raw photography "talent" to what can be actually put together, printed and appreciated in the real world, and that's at least 40% of what makes a great photographer. Because in the end art is about communication. For art to be good, someone has to see it and feel something.

i don;t understand this type of photography. not that is bad i just don;t find it interesting. there are exceptions but quite rare. same whit abstract or street photos.
the number of photos in this style that make me stop and check for details is quite low

>>4524076
what photos do you like?

The subject matter is not interesting or aesthetically pleasing to me

>>4524153
It's hard because the most given criticism in this thread is "it's not bad, but I am not interested / it is not interesting.". I don't really know what to do about it. I can try to improve my photos but I cannot change my interests, exploring those is kind of the whole thing with art isn't it.

>>4524135

Yea, your subject and photo type is kind of niche. Same with macro insects. Some ppl are disgusted , to some they give nightmares. I ilke it and always pixel peep to see some details that you can t really see with the naked eyed.
For example i like the derelict/abandoned factories houses subway stations and always zoom in and check for details.
While looking at your photos i realised that some not so obvious things could be considered. I might be a retard and this stuff might be the stupidest thing you read on thia site but hear me out
>>4517960
>>4517957
>>4517955
>>4517953
You could match the corner of the building to be on the photo diagonal so it pints exactly at the photo corner
Something g like this anon did voluntarily or involuntarely but missed by a couple of mm
>>4502563
Don t remember how this style is called where you shot the pictures in abnormal ways
>>4518331
>>4518332
These 2 i like
One looks like the letter E
>>4518330
This one cloud be nice but for me the shadow ruins it

Anyway tour pics gave an idea to shoot in sqaure or not so square mode and connecting the corners of a photo with bridges or horizon or whatever end either make ppl turn their heads 45* or turn it in post and leave the pic in the middle of a black square. Not even bothering to see if anybody else does it. I ll do it and see how retarded it turns out

>>4524168
Are you making art for yourself or for others? If it's for others, you may have to make some sacrifices in what you naturally want to do. If it's for yourself, why are you even asking what other people think?

There's a lot of research showing that people prefer natural forms that follow the golden ratio instead of geometric shapes. Even putting that aside though, just broadly speaking these are very simple images without a lot going on. There is no artistic message, you are just trying to take pictures of stuff that looks cool. Therefore it lives and dies by how cool it actually looks. You only have a few broad shapes and colors in each of these pictures. What exactly is supposed to be interesting about it?

>>4524204
Thanks for the feedback and suggestions. I will see if it works out for me.

>>4524209
Thanks for the message but I don't agree with your criticism.

>Are you making art for yourself or for others?
Both. I like making it, and I like to share it.

>If it's for yourself, why are you even asking what other people think?
Caring about what other people think of your work doesn't mean you didn't do it for yourself.

>There's a lot of research
doubt

>natural forms that follow the golden ratio
the golden ratio is not natural

>very simple images without a lot going on
you say that like it's a bad thing, but I don't think so. Maybe I'd understand better if you were more specific.

>There is no artistic message
says you
I mean, what is an artistic message to you? IMO it doesn't have to be something literal like "society bad". An esthetic is an artistic message.

>you are just trying to take pictures of stuff that looks cool
for real, what else am I supposed to be doing? Also you have no idea what i'm actually doing. You're not criticizing the pictures you're giving me intentions I might not have.

>it lives and dies by how cool it actually looks
What art doesn't? Are you talking about photojournalism?

>What exactly is supposed to be interesting about it?
What i'm trying to do is to use photograohy to create images that are distinctly photos but don't look like reality. I guess it is some kind of pictorialism, except i'm not trying to imitate paintings, I want to fully exploit photography as a medium. Granted, this is my ambition, not something I already achieved. This thread is just a couple of early works.

>>4524291
this post has revealed you are just too stupid to be helped.