The Creative Photography Thread - If It Ain't Bokeh, Don't Fix It

[waylander]

i like the red, i just had it redone thats why its so vibrant, i havnt had it cut since before xmas though so its a bit of a mess, normally the sides are shaved and the top is a lot shorter

[codenamecueball]

[quote]Artist: Nicholas Hart
Camera: Canon EOS 550D
Lens: EF24mm f/2.8
Exposure: Manual exposure, 1/200 sec, f/2.8, ISO 100
Flash: On, Fired
Date: February 17, 2011 7:01:48PM (timezone not specified)
(7 hours, 38 minutes, 58 seconds ago, assuming an image timezone of US Pacific)
File: 2,984 × 3,099 JPEG (9.2 megapixels)
3,195,195 bytes (3.0 megabytes) Image compression: 88%[/quote]

What's up nicholas?

[Roll_Program]

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/XvkOU.jpg[/IMG]

[Winston]

[QUOTE=B-hazard;28108794]Where is that statue? I think I recognize it.[/QUOTE]

Lewes, East Sussex, Southern England.

[B-hazard]

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;28111629][img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/XvkOU.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]

Love it, that shot is near-perfect.

[dai]

I [i]love[/i] black and white with healthy grain

[img]http://photoshoptutorials.ws/images/stories/250/natural-film-grain.jpg[/img]

Thinking of doing an experiment or two with digital editing.

[B-hazard]

[QUOTE=daijitsu;28112727]I [i]love[/i] black and white with healthy grain

[img_thumb]http://photoshoptutorials.ws/images/stories/250/natural-film-grain.jpg[/img_thumb]

Thinking of doing an experiment or two with digital editing.[/QUOTE]

Same here, but I dislike black and white photos that contain modern things such as computers/phones etc, just looks un-natural for some reason.

[Scotchair]

I agree if it's trying to look vintage with modern objects, but I like a nice B&W contemporary piece... architecture looks awesome. I always think of Paris when I think B&W.

[/B/rother]

Have anyone here tried this?
[url]http://www.alienskin.com/exposure/index.aspx[/url]

[dai]

[QUOTE=B-hazard;28113091]Same here, but I dislike black and white photos that contain modern things such as computers/phones etc, just looks un-natural for some reason.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that's a bit of a juxtoposition, but I bet someone could do it artistically. I just plain hate 'garbage photography' where people take pictures of boring subjects like a desk or a toilet, then add filters or vintage effects to make it ~*artistic*~

[editline]17th February 2011[/editline]

[QUOTE=/B/rother;28113206]Have anyone here tried this?
[url]http://www.alienskin.com/exposure/index.aspx[/url][/QUOTE]

I have it, actually. It's interesting to dig through all the effects but there's never really a happy midpoint without having to go into custom settings.

I use it more to make my 3D renderings look a little more like a photo than anything, haha.

[mrcsb]

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;28106398]Why? It just means high contrast, basically.[/QUOTE]
not in photography it doesn't

this is high contrast
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/08/The_Steerage_1907_Stieglitz_Corrected.jpg[/img]

this is low key
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Low-key_cat.jpg[/img]

and this is just underexposed (relatively low contrast anyway)
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1740292/Somemoreshit/66north.jpg[/img]

not to be a pedant but it's a specific style of lighting; notice the predominance of black and lighting mostly around edges

also, it is awesome when done right

[Roll_Program]

[QUOTE=B-hazard;28112462]Love it, that shot is near-perfect.[/QUOTE]

Thanks :)

[editline]17th February 2011[/editline]

[QUOTE=mrcsb;28113464]not in photography it doesn't

this is high contrast
[img_thumb]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/08/The_Steerage_1907_Stieglitz_Corrected.jpg[/img_thumb]

this is low key
[img_thumb]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Low-key_cat.jpg[/img_thumb]

and this is just underexposed (relatively low contrast anyway)
[img_thumb]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1740292/Somemoreshit/66north.jpg[/img_thumb]

not to be a pedant but it's a specific style of lighting; notice the predominance of black and lighting mostly around edges

also, it is awesome when done right[/QUOTE]

The 2nd one is high contrast and the third one is perfectly exposed for what it's trying to convey.

[dai]

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;28114114]The 2nd one is high contrast and the third one is perfectly exposed for what it's trying to convey.[/QUOTE]

what is it trying to convey and why wouldn't it convey something else if it was properly or even overexposed

[url=http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=low%20key&w=all]Low Key[/url] and [url=http://www.flickr.com/search/?ss=2&w=all&q=high+contrast&m=text]high contrast[/url] seem to have a pretty predominant style according to everyone else.

[Nonikai]

I was actually just trying to show the cruel side of Iceland with that photo.

[Roll_Program]

[QUOTE=daijitsu;28114267]what is it trying to convey and why wouldn't it convey something else if it was properly or even overexposed

[url=http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=low%20key&w=all]Low Key[/url] and [url=http://www.flickr.com/search/?ss=2&w=all&q=high+contrast&m=text]high contrast[/url] seem to have a pretty predominant style according to everyone else.[/QUOTE]

If it was bright, it would be too happy.

[B-hazard]

[QUOTE=Nonikai;28114473]I was actually just trying to show the cruel side of Iceland with that photo.[/QUOTE]

I wish I lived in Iceland, what exposure did you use for that shot?

[Nonikai]

God knows if I can remember mate, I have horrible memory.

I dont think I set any specific exposure value, I just remember setting the metering on my camera to like [(.)] and set the gradiation to low key

[IMG]http://cl.ly/38392z0z2G1s183K1O3U/Screen_shot_2011-02-17_at_10.33.20_PM.PNG[/IMG]

more information there

[dai]

fun, fun. I still don't think that your shot counts as 'low key', but I didn't realize it was yours earlier, just an example pulled up at random. I got that you had an idea in mind now, Roll's right.

also camera lens avatar trend

[B-hazard]

[QUOTE=Nonikai;28114959]God knows if I can remember mate, I have horrible memory.

I dont think I set any specific exposure value, I just remember setting the metering on my camera to like [(.)] and set the gradiation to low key

[img_thumb]http://cl.ly/38392z0z2G1s183K1O3U/Screen_shot_2011-02-17_at_10.33.20_PM.PNG[/img_thumb]

more information there[/QUOTE]

Heh, you should start shooting in RAW. You do post-editing right?

[/B/rother]

That's one nice avatar.

[B-hazard]

At first I thought his avatar was a transformer face, then I realized it is a camera lens.

[dai]

Optimus Prime Lens

85mm of badass

[Nonikai]

I do shoot in raw now, it was just that I didnt bring an extra card and I really wanted to squeeze that photo in there.

[B-hazard]

[QUOTE=daijitsu;28115227]Optimus Prime Lens

85mm of badass[/QUOTE]

I have a sticker on my 58mm f2.0 that says Optimus.

[editline]17th February 2011[/editline]

[QUOTE=Nonikai;28115247]I do shoot in raw now, it was just that I didnt bring an extra card and I really wanted to squeeze that photo in there.[/QUOTE]

I need to learn to be more conservative with my photos, every time I go out I take 300+ photos then cut it down to 10-20 good ones. Of course it can be more difficult to not do that using a MF lens.

[Nonikai]

[IMG]http://www.aphotoeditor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/spraytshirt.jpg[/IMG]

[/B/rother]

[QUOTE=B-hazard;28115261]I have a sticker on my 58mm f2.0 that says Optimus.[/QUOTE]

That's pretty rad, actually.

Also, any thoughts on this?
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/58903109@N06/5395823889/][img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5218/5395823889_355813e4bc_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/58903109@N06/5395823889/]DSC00777[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/58903109@N06/]/fa/ggot[/url], on Flickr

[B-hazard]

It's more like click - adjust focus - click - adjust focus - click - adjust focus - click -adjust focus.
Manual focus is such a fucking bitch on my 1000d.

[editline]17th February 2011[/editline]

[QUOTE=/B/rother;28115350]That's pretty rad, actually.

Also, any thoughts on this?
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/58903109@N06/5395823889/][img_thumb]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5218/5395823889_355813e4bc_z.jpg[/img_thumb][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/58903109@N06/5395823889/]DSC00777[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/58903109@N06/]/fa/ggot[/url], on Flickr[/QUOTE]

I like it, the way you washed out the colours sets it apart from the generic flower pictures.

[Roll_Program]

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/XHKU3.jpg[/IMG]

[superfunkyjam]

[QUOTE=DoubleDD;28107484]Do you scan your film yourself? If so what scanner do you use?[/QUOTE]

no i go to my local development store (bay photo lab) and instead of getting prints i ask if they can make it just on a CD and in HD.

[labbet]

fuck i was signed into my alt. thats me ^
|
new pics from photography! EXPERIMENTATION RULEZ.
i am the jumper. i did this with a 5 second shutter and someone standing of camera with a flash. its not photoshoped.
[img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5015/5454351522_a55eaf266d_b.jpg[/img]

[img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5131/5453739225_7ec642d330_b.jpg[/img]

[img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5298/5453739855_86895fed82_b.jpg[/img]

here is also some pritty macro flower pictures.
[img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5296/5453537977_081325e99d_b.jpg[/img]

[img]http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5177/5453536447_250c173732_b.jpg[/img]

heres my [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/7451701@N07/with/5453536447/] flickr [/url] .