leaf editionFormer thread: >>4523061
Best photo I took this week was of a rock. I liked the colors at least.
>>4525860
>>4525861
>>4525851What colors? It would work better in b&w
>>4525845some abstract plant shit
>>4525903mooo
>>4525872I liked the slightly rusty red/brown look to the session. I'll try a b&w conversion and see how it goes.
>>4525878I love this, how do achieve this softness?
There's a lot of photos I'd like to share here, but I'm always afraid of doxxing myself, and some of my best shots include people I know, and I don't want to be putting them on 4chan.I know the fears are not particularly well-founded, given there's like 10 people that come here and it's very unlikely any one of you will ever meet me or any one of my friends. Nor is it likely for a photo from here likely to go viral and be eventually seen by anyone from my circle in the context that it's from 4chan.But it's still something that feels like a rule that must be kept. Idk.Not a nophoto btw, I've posted some here before, when they were anonymous enough.Cheers bros, I like your photos.
Is this a good photo?
>>4526048use a fuji lens on a fuji xtrans sensor
>>4526079>xtranssorry I am straight
>>4526073Is that your mom?
>>4525982Interesting scene and nice colors. I wish there was a bit more foreground included.>>4525860Cursed background lady.
>>4526108>Cursed background lady.This is why I love photo threads
>>4525903Shouldn't you cover the license plates?
>>4526079any opinions on using a lens filter or adding it later in the edit?
>>4526048>>4526079>>4526112Lmao, he just dragged the clarity slider back a little. Maybe the dehaze slider too.
Took this one today at a national park. I hope my image processing isn't too bad.
>>4526140I took this at a national park a few days ago
>>4525903Hello, friend
>>4525851I took photos of rocks too
>>4526001Nature is amazing
>>4526158Your rock photo is a lot better than my rock photo kek. Beautiful place.
>>4526160Everyone should go to Yellowstone at least once, I thought it would be overrated but it genuinely blew me away
>>4526156So pretty! What lens is it?
>>4526164Ricoh GR III lmao
>>4526165Neat
>>4526073I like it, it's far more interesting than all the other dogshit in this thread except >>4525851which is quite nicely composed and focused
I need to bring a hard hat and a speedlight next time. The camera flash and a bucket hat (ouch!) are inadequate.
>>4525851>>4526073>>4526158>>4526165the most kino of the thread (so far)>>4526169looks like the introduction of chinless zombie in day of the dead but in VERY blurry quality
>>4526169>>4526183Ty brahs
>>4526299Neat. Was this along the Oregon coast?
>>4526267Learn to crop, nigga
>>4526324I have this in several crops, actually. Do you have any advice that you're capable of sharing?
>>4526326Better, but you can really get in there with this amount of detail, and get a lot more drama out of it
>>4525862
>>4526332This has been my first time editing photos and ending up happy with it, I do feel a little insecure that they are mostly saturated and warm which I assume it's quite a noob thing to do but I don't care much at the moment, I'm enjoying it and liking the result.
>>4526308It was!
>>4526361Nice, it's rather distinct topography. That photo reminds me of the jetty that's viewable from the Umpqua lighthouse.
>>4526381> rather distinct topographySure is! This one's about an hour north of Umpqua - Its the Heceta head lighthouse.
>>4525845another pic of the leaves in my backyard. it rained today so I got some nice water shots
>>4526436Nice. Not sure if you were just gunning through the window, but it gives the illusion of intention at first glance.
>>4526579> Threesome with ghost twins.Sorry, I should be ashamed of myself.
>>4526866Pictorial
>>4526866Comfy, but does look like a screenshot from sole 90s show on tape that was panning.
I've never tried long a exposure shot before. I wish I had stopped down slightly more and got better sunstars.
>>4526993I find it interesting how low light shots can produce emerald green and bunch of other saturated colors.I only have a crappy handheld shot, but there's a similar thing going on with colors.
>>4526996It does bring out a special quality in the lighting, doesn't it? It will make bright lights glow, and make dim lights fill the scene in a way you can't normally see. I've had a change in my work schedule, so I now have more time to experiment with these shots. Here's an alternate crop.
>>4526993>better sunstarsI really don't understand the general obsession with sunstars. Not knocking on you if that's the vision you had for this photo, but the rigid geometric pattern to me always feel unnatural, more of an unwanted quirk of the medium to be avoided than a desired effect. Feels similar to how people fuss about "bokeh balls".
>>4527000I saw it more as a missed opportunity since I already went home and then came back after the fog cleared.Picrel is a rough render of the sunstar version. Your milage may vary, but I think they would've looked pretty cool in the fog.
manual focus'd a bee mid flight at f/2 (aps-c).
>>4525956Nice. Is that film?
Posted this in the previous thread. Thoughts?
>>4527141Can I suggest a crop?
bought a 24 year old used digicam because i got bored of my flagship phone taking perfectly ai processed photos all the timetrying to get the hang of shooting with it, took this in the garden right after it arrived
>>4527141Looks like shit senpai.>>4526638This is really cool.>>4526435Dios mío. I even recognize the cripple on the right.>>4526267Really crisp. What lens?Don't bother with the crop faggot.
>>4527150>looks like shitCan you elaborate? Is the composition bad or is just because it's blurry?
>>4527161Not him, but I share a similar opinion. It's not about it looking like shit, it just is not interesting in any way. Looks like a photo taken by someone that was on a walk and at a random point in time they took out their phone and snapped a snapshit. Yeah, there's a bit of framing with the tree trunks and the branch and the shoreline. But it's not interesting in any way.>Is the composition badYes, basically that. No subject, no visual interest, no story, no questions asked.>or is just because it's blurry?If you're still jumping to this as a possible reason for a photo not being appreciated, you gotta reevaluate why you're even taking photos in the first place. Look at Leiter, look at Moriyama. Compare to >>4526866. Very similar subject matter. It's blurry, it's soft, details lost in the dark. I'm not saying it's a stellar picture either, but it's doing something nice visually. There's more intention in the lines. There's a mood created.
>>4527141>thoughtsplease never post your phone "photos" here again. you can get a DSLR + good lens for under $200, there is no excuse.
>>4527172why would I spend a bunch of money on equipment when I'm just starting out and >>4527167 pointed out my composition isn't good? Shouldn't I get better at that first rather than focus on gear? The same shot with better gear would have had better fidelity and colors but the composition would have been as bad. It seems like you're just seething that someone would DARE try to take a photo with their phone. Keep trying to gatekeep, I'm not listening. One day I'll surpass you.
>>4527174Because better equipment than a shitty fucking 28mm phone lens is more inspiring, results in something worth looking at when you finally get it right, and most importantly, no matter how artistic you think you are, a phone photo is a phone photo. At their best they're just that but AI enhanced. Go buy an $80 DSLR with an f1.something lens.>gatekeep reeeeeGatekeeping is good. It's better known as quality control.
>>4527174If you enjoy taking pictures on your phone that's fine. If you want to improve the end result one way to do that is to improve the quality of your photo taking device. Of course improvements to other aspects like composition matter (arguably more), but it's kinda like saying you shouldn't fix your car's flat tire because right now you're focused on learning to parallel park. Ultimately good technique and establishing a minimum level of quality will lead to the best results, even if eventually you end up moving towards a style they doesn't really need a high end camera. Plus, taking photos in raw let's you do more editing which according to some is of equal importance to the actual clicking of the button on the camera
>>4527150>What lens?Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Macro G2 for the EF mount. It's been pretty good to me.
