>>4512463 askew exposure is fine maybe lowering the camera parallel to the subject would have been a more interesting composition since there’s a lot of head room showing clouds which could have been foot room showing more of that building the cranes are the most interesting part of the picture, anything you could have done to fill the frame more with them would have been an improvement
>>4512432 there’s no shadows pulling down the shadows on the tone curve would only be an improvement I think the composition is very neat and shows a lot of care (the precise and level kerb at the bottom/railing at the top, the banner positioned along the lower vertical third and the foliage pushing across horizontal two thirds). a lot of implied geometry. highlights are fine, not too bright. could be better with more contrast
>>4512386 cool view shadows are dodged too hard (look at the face of the man on the stairs at the left, for example: even the lightest parts of his face are very dark). although it seems to be late afternoon when nearly everything is naturally in the shade, a bit more lightness in the lower midtones to contrast with the shadows would add some clarity and definition to the scene
>>4512374 I don’t like it but I can’t say exactly why it’s a nice subject maybe it’s the bright background and the relatively shady subject. it might feel better with some more light on the subject
>>4512525 >I don’t like it but I can’t say exactly why The HDR and being crispy sharp while lacking detail is what I don't like about it. Almost certainly a phone pic.
>>4512522 >>4512629 Thanks for feedback, your crop is way better. I think you have a point regarding the color and contrast too but I am not sure about making the sky fully piss yellow like that, but I see the point.
>>4512751 Thank you for the feedback :) I have no ideas of how to shoot self portraits and I don’t like to expose myself, so I didn’t know how it was going to be the result. I got a couple more, but they are even duller.
>>4512360 did you crop this from the very center of a larger picture? photo would be good if it wasn't so muddy around her head Guy in the background is creepy af too, removing his face can't hurt
>>4513037 >everything is pink except the white objects green tint can be compensated for, they said just change the white balance in post, they said it will be fine they said
>>4513077 lmao, cheers senpai. it's just a hill near where I live and every time I look at it, it reminds me of the windows xp background. I'll try to get a midday shot while it's still wet enough for the grass to stay green.
edit wise i'm using a fuji provia film emulation profile which pushes the blue and green towards teal, also added orange into the shadows to remove the natural blue cast which is why the saturation is absolutely juiced.
>>4513088 yeah definitely am blasting the saturation, funny you should say that since I basically only shoot ektar on 120 and fujicolor 100 on 135 (pic related) which massively influenced how I color digital.
>>4513090 I haven't added saturation to a photo in probably five years. Gonna do it now for a change. Yeah, that sucked. Not doing that again for another five years at least.
>>4513160 how do i put this I can't tell if you chose a wide aperture, if your focus is off or if your lens is soft on the edges also, what did u even do? raise saturation? maybe, I'm just guessing. change contrast? it seems barely changed from a regular camera output. was the original exposure very dark or overly bright? anyway, cool barn.
>>4513166 Yes I did use a wider aperture, and perhaps a too fast shutter speed. I'm new to photography so I dont really know what you can get away with in terms of under/overexposing a photo. From my understanding you may have to do that at times to get a clearer/more focused photo and can just fix it with software?