• Hammertime's photography corner
    35 replies, posted
Hi guys, recently got my EOS 500D (my first DSLR ever, had a P&S for 5 years) so I immediately started taking pictures. Here's a small selection I really like. I'll update this thread regularly. 1 [img_thumb]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/1.jpg[/img_thumb] 2 [img_thumb]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/3.jpg[/img_thumb] 3 [img_thumb]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/20091121-IMG_0605.jpg[/img_thumb] 4 [img_thumb]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/20091124-IMG_0832 2.jpg[/img_thumb] 5 [img_thumb]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/20091125-20091125-IMG_0943.jpg[/img_thumb] [B]Set 2[/B] 1 I had a panorama set of photo's but PS won't align them :frown: [img]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/IMG_2741-1.jpg[/img] 2 I like this one very much :buddy: [img]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/IMG_2814-1.jpg[/img] Then at some metal café where a friend held a B-day party 3 [img]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/IMG_2853-1.jpg[/img] 4 Some punk chick I didn't knew but who was pretty friendly [img]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/IMG_2858-1.jpg[/img] 5 Also this one, very pretty apartment building [img]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/IMG_2795-1.jpg[/img] With a different angle (different lines are now perpendicular to the frame), tell me which one you prefer :) [img]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/IMG_2795-1-2.jpg[/img]
First and second to last are my favorites, nice composition. Others are pretty boring, cat is too grainy.
Second last = Very good.
[QUOTE=Dclone2;18642726]First and second to last are my favorites, nice composition. Others are pretty boring, cat is too grainy.[/QUOTE] I like the graininess, I took it at ISO 12800. But well, that's your opinion. Also if you zoom it out a little it's less disturbing...
[QUOTE=Hammertime;18643957]I love the graininess, I took it at ISO 12800, I don't see how it can be ugly. But well that's your opinion. If you zoom it out a little it's less disturbing...[/QUOTE] High ISO usually rapes quality.
[QUOTE=Doc Miles;18649053]High ISO usually rapes quality.[/QUOTE] Higher speed films have grain like that, but that doesn't mean it only produces bad photos.
[QUOTE=Doc Miles;18649053]High ISO usually rapes quality.[/QUOTE] Not everyone wants crisp & crystal clear photo's...
grain is gross ok
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;18650425]grain is gross ok[/QUOTE] I agree. Film grain has a different look that digital can NEVER produce and hard to produce in Photoshop...
The high contrast greyscale is really limiting too. I've always though greyscale was either used artistically or because you can't properly photograph in colour :/
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;18650565]The high contrast greyscale is really limiting too. I've always though greyscale was either used artistically or because you can't properly photograph in colour :/[/QUOTE] High contrast greyscale is usually gross.
[QUOTE=Hammertime;18649638]Not everyone wants crisp & crystal clear photo's...[/QUOTE] i agree, film grain can really add to the feel of a picture, its just gotta be done right
Second to last is awesome. And I like the angry kitty.
[QUOTE=Moocow8;18652449]i agree, film grain can really add to the feel of a picture, its just gotta be done right[/QUOTE] That's not film grain
Photographs with grain can be executed correctly; and by that I mean the photo grain shouldn't be there unless you REALLY need that high of an iso to pull off the shot. [media]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2633/3992200760_647ecbd75f_b.jpg[/media] One of my shots outdoors at night by a bonfire.
[QUOTE=Perfumly;18653392]Photographs with grain can be executed correctly; and by that I mean the photo grain shouldn't be there unless you REALLY need that high of an iso to pull off the shot. [media]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2633/3992200760_647ecbd75f_b.jpg[/media] One of my shots outdoors at night by a bonfire.[/QUOTE] What shutter speed did you use to get such good lighting and no blur?
[QUOTE=Doc Miles;18653874]What shutter speed did you use to get such good lighting and no blur?[/QUOTE] Lemme pull up the EXIF [QUOTE]Camera: Canon EOS 40D Exposure: 0.01 sec (1/100) Aperture: f/4.5 Focal Length: 50 mm ISO Speed: 1600 Exposure Bias: 0 EV Flash: Off, Did not fire File Size: 6.5 MB File Type: JPEG MIME Type: image/jpeg Image Width: 3888 Image Height: 2592[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;18652972]That's not film grain[/QUOTE] okay mr technicality, you know what i ment
[QUOTE=Moocow8;18654274]okay mr technicality, you know what i ment[/QUOTE] I'm saying that film grain looks different from digital grain.
I would like to see the 3rd picture in color. Whats the point of taking a picture of a sunrise/sunset if you can't see all the pretty colors? :v:
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;18650425]grain is gross ok[/QUOTE] Oh hi my name is Henri Cartier Bresson, one of the greatest photographers to ever walk on this planet, there's a little grain in this photo I hope you don't mind. [IMG]http://webvondsten.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/cartier-bresson-henri-iza-gare-st-lazare-paris-1932.jpg[/IMG] [editline]01:06PM[/editline] [QUOTE=DOG-GY;18650565]The high contrast greyscale is really limiting too. I've always though greyscale was either used artistically or because you can't properly photograph in colour :/[/QUOTE] Well of course I use it artistically! And saying b&w photographers have less skill is like saying that Jimi Hendrix is a worse musician than Django Reinhardt... (I'm not saying that I have lots of skill, just that colour photography wouldn't make me more skillful) I often just don't like colours in my pictures, they distract from the subject, they decrease the contrast and that's what I like about my pictures. What's wrong with contrast anyway? I took the first shot in different exposures and combined them to create a HDR effect and the picture was just really boring, important lines fade and there's too much going on in the scene. But I do think the kitty pic could use some more sharpness... [editline]01:11PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Sgt Pepper;18655760]I would like to see the 3rd picture in color. Whats the point of taking a picture of a sunrise/sunset if you can't see all the pretty colors? :v:[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/20091121-IMG_0605.jpg[/img] Hmm yeah I dunno, maybe it's nicer... [editline]01:55PM[/editline] I do agree that most of them are kinda boring except the 2nd last and the last picture... I just also need more guts to photograph people, the 2nd last one I took when I was on my way to the café and I just downed 3 glasses of champaign really quickly (reception at the conservatory :P). I was like 'I need that shot, goddamn', but that's also why the traffic cone at the bottom isn't completely on it... :(
Threads like these have inspired me to get a new camera and start taking photos again. Love the photos btw hammertime.
Don't get all defensive about it. The picture you posted from one of the 'best photographers in the world' would be so much better without all that noise.
Even the 2nd last one? And like this? [img]http://www.roflsaurus.com/users/Hammertime/20091124-IMG_0832 2.jpg[/img] [editline]06:15PM[/editline] [QUOTE=The golden;18662522]They're really...boring and dry. Nothing really catches the eye in those pictures, and the grain is horrible.I B&W also may have ruined some good pictures too.[/QUOTE] I agree that there should be more going on in my photo's, the 2nd last is close, but not close enough. And you're right about the B&W...
Fourth has great composition, and is very well exposed. Last one is also nice, and has a great low-key-esque look to it, but make sure you focus on the eyes of the person you're taking pictures of. They're the key focal points in portrait photography.
I love the silhouette one, i think it looks nice.
-snip- sorry I moved the post to another thread
[QUOTE=jetlitheone;18650801]High contrast greyscale is usually gross.[/QUOTE] Not really, it just depends on how well you do it and the subject you're doing it with. Black and white photography is actually harder to do than color from what most pros told me in the past. The reason why is because even though there's only two colors to worry about, it's all about the contrast and tone of the photo that make it good in black and white photography. I asked one of my friends who goes to a class for photography what kind of stuff they used first and he told me black and white film photography. And the reason for that is because you have to understand contrast and subject matter in black and white photography before you move on to color. I've never taken classes for photography yet, but I already seem to have gotten a good idea of why they do that. I'd prefer a black and white photo over an Holga style photo any day though, since I'm not a big fan of the whole messed up picture thing Holga cameras tend to make. Some are done well with them, but it's sort of becoming a hipster thing now in my opinion. And no photographer would want to be seen as that. [editline]05:44PM[/editline] [QUOTE=DOG-GY;18650565]The high contrast greyscale is really limiting too. I've always though greyscale was either used artistically or because you can't properly photograph in colour :/[/QUOTE] As said, greyscale is actually one of the things you need to really learn if you want to understand some things better. And also some photos just work better in black and white, it can represent many things from political things or other various topics. It isn't just a change from one style to another, but it changes the meaning a whole lot when you actually use it right. Just because we have color now doesn't mean you have to completely ignore black and white and consider it not good enough to your interests in photography. There are those moments where you will realize color can't always imitate the effect a greyscale photo can do. Sure it's more limiting, but you just have to know the subject matter you have to represent with it. I like color photography and use it along with my black and white photos, but I still love black and white photography since you can work with what limits you are given with it.
Great post :) I might take some classes next year. I've also read a lot about photography (the one by the National Geographic photographer, I think it's called "Perfect Digital Photography" is great) I still have a lot to learn though
proper black and white photography - by that i mean film, not digital - i did find harder, but with much more impressive and worthwhile results than digital. i studied them both for 2 years and whilst there is so much more you can do with a digital photograph (in terms of post-processing), there is something about black and white that is just... lovely. plus i loved processing my own film and prints, but that's another matter :P
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.