Does this pick suck? I'm not sure because those black spots with no foam look kinda like rocks, but they're not rocks. What do you guys think? Be honest
>>4505497 I noticed he wanders through just before dawn every day. Saturday, I had the camera waiting. I think this was actually just a yawn. He caught a squirrel last week. This was my favorite recent shot of him.
Presenting my gun photo which needed better execution. I feel at least some accomplishment from these because it was fairly successful as a learning exercise and I think has helped push me in the direction I want to take my gun pics. Put most of them on /fgt/
>>4505222 It's just a texture shot, it's not particularly special because there is no clear subject of any kind or anything that your eye is particularly drawn to. It's a movie without a plot, a story without any characters.
>>4505590 Composition is fucked up on this one, I wanted it more centered and the background more blurred, I was trying to capture the elegant shape of the sight, fading of the bluing and the engravings/scratches.
I don't like that guns are always portrayed so negatively or just as props, I think they're works of art in their own right and can tell really interesting stories through wear and tear. I've been trying to think how to get this across in my photos and feel like I finally made some progress on it with this set.
Probably my favorite off my first roll of film ever using a Pentax Spotmatic, this specific picture was taken on a Auto Berolina 28mm f/2.8 Not my favorite lens, but I've gotten some good pictures through it roll was kinda supposed to be a throw away to make sure the camera was functioning properly so i was a bit surprised I ended up liking ANY of the photos on it
>>4505222 its in focus and sharp nothing wrong with the photo, composition is only a guide and photography is expression so dont base your enjoyment off opinions on whatever you want to capture
have no fucking clue how i pulled this off but this is pointing at a store. the bottles are behind glass, it's an indoor building, but somehow the inside and the outside behind it got perfectly blended together in this shot and im really proud of it
>>4505707 Yes, but it is an easy fix, just bring some "thing" with you to add to nice textures if you feel the compulsion to take a texture shot.
I mean even a shot of some texture isn't inherently bad, it's a perfectly useful image if you have something in mind for it, it's just they often feel empty without a subject.
I won't pretend I'm above taking the occassional texture shot, particularly early in the roll where I'm not sure if I'll have light leaks or if I just want to get the roll finished for dev, picrel.
If you're shooting digital even more reason to take them from that perspective. So long as it's something you actually think merits it, not something that will just waste space on a hard drive.
>>4505800 too dark in the shadows, would definitely benefit from a lift there >>4505863 >>4505740 these would both benefit from a wider angle of view >>4505157 puddlecore I ‘member some guy asking what I saw ‘in there’ when I was bent down on my hands and knees photographing a red light’s reflection in the water over the road after some rain… a rite of passage for photographers everywhere. >>4505168 >>4505171 >>4505172 linecore very nice strong suggestions of geometry
>>4505231 you need to invest in sharp glass, a high-resolution body and to learn all the image stabilisation techniques and post-processing sharpening techniques you can… because this is not good enough. also, if you use a flash, invest in a diffuser.
>>4505222 I get what you mean and the way I would approach that in post-processing is to create contrast selectively between the black rocks and the dark grey water. I use RawTherapee and it has two tone curves in the exposure tab which make this fairly easy. Using the second curve, I can set a point for the black rocks and the gray water then push and pull them to my heart’s desire.
I suppose dodge and burn tools in photoshop or gimp might achieve the same thing.
>>4506676 >That guy has a camera out, the fuck >Why the fuck is he pointing it at me/here >No seriously dude. Yeah, you. Yeah, no really what the fuck are you pointing a camera at me for? Except it's in Laotian so it's CHINGCHONGBINGBONGCHINGCHONGBINGBONG
These were taken using 4x5 positive photo paper. Left is wide open at f4.5, middle is f6, and right is f12. Focus was kept the same through the shots, and flash was adjusted to compensate for increased aperture.
With chromatic aberration lenses there's this thing called chemical focus. The blue and UV lights that are less visible to the human eye are shifted far enough away from the more visible wavelengths that the image you see on the ground glass is not the same image that is exposed onto film plane. You just have to get a feel for shifting focus through practice.
>>4506932 I'd say this one actually does look like water. The wall looks like some kind of dock, and the hole in it reminds me of some sort of man made fishing hole someone would ice fish out of
>>4507039 I shot two rolls, and the one I shot at box speed just turned out awful. The one I shot at 200 is still pretty bad, but that might be due to me fucking something up. I used a canon t50 for the 200 ISO roll so it wouldn’t be me messing up the exposure. Read some people getting bad results with d96 and fomapan so it might be that, I don’t know.
>>4507040 Hmm, I recently shot some fomapan 100 shot at box speed on an old box camera and developed with rodinal. Seemed fine to me despite the limitations of the camera I used. Though nothing spectacular came out of it.
>>4507041 Yeah, I think I might just be doing something wrong. I’ll shoot a roll of something else in the coming week and see if it turns out any better. I did develop some film my dad shot 30-something years ago and it turned out fine though.
>>4506921 Same shot @f4.5, but this time as a 4x5 ambrotype. You can see just how much finer wetplate colloidion is compared to direct positive paper. Really lovely rendering from this lens. Looking forward to doing some bigger plates using it soon.
>>4507042 Can you post a picture of your negatives? I had some foma come out super grainy like that and it was mainly from underexposure.
I'm happy upon reflection that the new captcha has been on occasion so annoying it's discouraged me from making low-effort comments. Have you noticed the same thing, anon?
I used flash for this effect and at the time I considered I'd done nothing incredible but now I see there's a certain eeriness that could be worth exploring.
>>4507499 I see a man in the middle. Creepy... >>4507500 Beautiful yet cold, provoking considerations of starvation and privation... >>4507485 Pretty well done! and the bug is totally weird too... Why so red? Did you use a flash or a terribly fancy macro setup?
>>4507299 fugg... ebig, bro D: rly sad. will the sun ever shine again? >>4507297 I like the way you coloured that, it's come off well. Think there's oil spots beside the mast on the top left? Did you colour it this way intentionally or did the film make it like this? >>4507159 ebig sharpness bro :O beautiful sunny day in da woodz, eh?
>>4507666 Some baby bugs are brightly colored so predators may think it’s dangerous, even if it’s not. I used a fancy macro setup with flash and diffuser.
>>4507828 >>so predators may think it’s dangerous, even if it’s not >LET ME SEE YOUR WAR FACE, SOLDIER! Hell anon, I just reread your image description: 60-ish stacked images??? I didn't know it was possible to stack so many. Is this the power of OM System? They must have all been taken in very quick succession.