I've always wanted to get into Photography, but, I never really wanted to go out of my way to spend alot for a camera. I do have an old FujiFilm DSLR though. :v:
I like taking pictures of animals. Here's a REALLY old picture. :3
[img]http://filebox.me/files/3u893kw96_Phillipines051.jpg[/img]
It's compressed because I was thirteenish and I was saving space on my laptop when this was taken. :v:
Some other unedited casual stuff I took years ago. You guys probably think it's shitty but yea.
[img_thumb]http://th07.deviantart.net/fs50/PRE/i/2009/327/1/5/A_Spanish_Couple_by_SHoGuNN3R.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://th06.deviantart.net/fs50/PRE/i/2009/327/6/f/DAT_BEAMER_by_SHoGuNN3R.jpg[/img_thumb]
Wrong thread for posting your photos, here's the the right one.
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=951319[/url]
snip
It has turned into a fad, but my sister and her friend are pretty good at photography. They don't use shitty watermarks.
[IMG]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs511.snc3/26826_1276717763598_1399591130_30663711_7073443_n.jpg[/IMG]
The fuck do children get the chance to stick a camera up the nose of a freaking tiger?!
OP, I know exactly what you mean. There's one girl I'm friends with on Facebook who takes pictures of random shit, changes the contrast, and calls them art. She even started to put watermarks that say "her name"photography.
As Astronautalis once said "I've had it with every indie girl who gets a polaroid camera and thinks she's a fucking photographer."
Why shouldn't people watermark there photo actually? It's theirs, not yours.
Changing the contrast? Who gives a shit,once again, it's their photo.
[QUOTE=BmB;24581011]That's 2k not 2000p.
Oh wait you meant the 3008 was horizontal.
Still, p, why? I didn't know pictures could be interlaced.
[/QUOTE]
No.
2K is a name, it's 1080 vertical pixels.
[editline]06:15PM[/editline]
2048x1080, instead of 1080p which is 1920x1080.
I asked this one girl what the ISO button on her camera meant and she said 'Its to make the image like blurry you know?'. I then asked her what DSLR stood for and she responded, 'Dynamic something'.
[QUOTE=BmB;24582383]Why even watermark it if you aren't using it commercially? Just distracts.[/QUOTE]People scared that their totally original photographs will be used by a worldwide viral marketing campaign.
[QUOTE=daijitsu;24580994][img_thumb]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2797/4278623854_6343e82aef_o.jpg[/img_thumb]
(2848x4288, click the thumbnail... Try and figure out her name looking at this, I dare you)[/QUOTE]
Holly I think.
Might be Molly.
It doesn't take an expert to take decent pictures, it takes an expert to find a decent thing to take a picture of.
[quote]I was into photography WAY before this fad[/quote]
"lulz I was doing it before it was cool"
Your just as bad, who gives a fuck if people are enjoying taking pictures. Why does it bother you, seriously?
[editline]09:10PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=SoaringScout;24590416]It has turned into a fad, but my sister and her friend are pretty good at photography. They don't use shitty watermarks.
[IMG]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs511.snc3/26826_1276717763598_1399591130_30663711_7073443_n.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Wow she totally brought those blades of grass to life
[QUOTE=Spacewolf;24551387]I can't fucking stand how shitty some people are at taking pictures. They take a picture of themselves in a mirror and put on some shitty filter and call it art.[/QUOTE]
Usually they miss out the filter and have it black n white. And Photography A Level consists of people buying the most expensive camera available, going into town/ a street at night and leaving the shutter open for ages. then submitting the picture as their coursework and getting an A* for it. It's just like "Modern Art".
[QUOTE=LarparNar;24592487]Holly I think.
Might be Molly.[/QUOTE]
'Tis Holly. Thanks for actually LOOKING, the first guess in the thread when I originally posted that was "Ginger". :suicide:
I have been doing Military aviation photography for about 2 years now.
Here's an example:
[img]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w306/VortexTunnel/Hawksemilowlevel0047.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=daijitsu;24598044]'Tis Holly. Thanks for actually LOOKING, the first guess in the thread when I originally posted that was "Ginger". :suicide:[/QUOTE]
Hah, oh wow...
I think photography has become more accepted or something, rather than being a fad.
And DSLR's are not too expensive anymore. That helps too.
[QUOTE=KillerSlash;24598383]I have been doing Military aviation photography for about 2 years now.
Here's an example:
[img_thumb]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w306/VortexTunnel/Hawksemilowlevel0047.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]
Here's the right thread for your photos.
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=951319[/url]
[QUOTE=Sivics;24599045]Here's the right thread for your photos.
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=951319[/url][/QUOTE]
(Thumbnails, please.)
And I'm not really looking to share my "work", I just posted that as a kinda "I'm just sayin'.".
[QUOTE=KillerSlash;24599763](Thumbnails, please.)
And I'm not really looking to share my "work", I just posted that as a kinda "I'm just sayin'.".[/QUOTE]
No, you came into a discussion thread to show off your mediocre photos.
[QUOTE=Roll_Program;24600299]No, you came into a discussion thread to show off your mediocre photos.[/QUOTE]
I think he was more trying to show an example of when a watermark would actually be useful.
A photo like that is more likely to be stolen for a brochure or website than a photo of a couple of your friends making funny faces.
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;24550583]Thank hipsters... they ruin everything[/QUOTE]
/thread
I am actually getting into photography the past few days and I am improving pretty well imo...
I do however feel like a hipster taking pictures of random things... uugh.
[QUOTE=Star Son;24615670]I am actually getting into photography the past few days and I am improving pretty well imo...
I do however feel like a hipster taking pictures of random things... uugh.[/QUOTE]
Do you photograph fixies or alternate haircuts or something?
You shouldn't feel bad taking photos of stuff, it's all good practice and experience.
[QUOTE=BmB;24581011]Digitally adjusting the exposure usually means fucking with the gamma curve, which unless it's seriously fucked up isn't really worth it. If you know of a better way I'm ears. I'd rather just snap a couple of different exposures and see which one looks best.
I r linear person.
Cropping usually isn't necessary unless it's like an action shot or a portrait or something. I'm not a composition nazi and I'm okay with it being a little imperfect or whatever.
And as for colour correction, sure if you need to normalize the colour over multiple shots of the same subject. But usually there's nothing you can do to improve the accuracy, by the time you're sitting in front of the colour tool in photoshop the vivid memory of the exact colours is long gone. At least for me. Which is why I try my darnedest to get it just exactly right on the spot.
Which is insanely hard with point and shoots and camera phones. :/
Sharpening however... ugh, never needed. It burns me deep within my soul to even hear it suggested. If you want it less blurry, scale it down (gamma accurately pl0x). Sharpening can only rape the natural detail of the image, it can never add actual detail. The reason digitals blur a little is usually because of the way the CCD works, by having the different colour sensors in a mosaic, and then the three channels have to be interpolated to fill every pixel. Which causes some blurriness. There's very few if any digital cameras that don't do this. And from what I've seen they aren't just expensive, they're plain ridiculous. There's only so much detail, you can never regain any more. You might be able to make up more, but it can never be regained.
Sorry about that rant.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I guess that's why my Photography teacher which has been ranked as the #1 best photographer in Norway says it's one of THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS you have to do with your pictures (along with sharpening).
Camera RAW converter: Keeps all the information needed in your every pixel to adjust the exposure correctly to not fuck up jack shit.
Levels: Does a dandy fine job at adjusting the levels to remove under- and/or overexposed images.
Yeah, that's why I put it in the SHOULD section. Many pictures and photos are fine without cropping, but it's also quite a lot of situations where it's needed. Like if the horizon is skewed or you got a pole or grass in the way.
I think it's pretty easy to adjust it more realistically when your camera will no matter what bring you a bit more washed out colours than real life. Bump up the saturation by 5-15 and it will in [I]most[/I] cases look better and more lively. You would usually edit this with the RAW converter as it has 2 slider options for colours.
Hahahhahahahah. You make me laugh here. So you admit your image is blurred, yet you tell sharpening to fuck off? Oh man. Sharpening IS necessary. You WILL see IMPROVEMENTS in details and sharpness. I'm not talking oversharpening like most people do. Most people sharpen it by 100-300% which is ridicilous, they get bold clear white lines everywhere. No, I'm talking about 25-60% sharpening, it really fucking helps in every un-edited image, no exception.
I'm getting a Flip Ultra HD camcorder (can also take pictures) for my birthday (september 30th)
I might take some photos :frogc00l:
Mostly girls who want to feel "artistic" or "hip" do it. It's not even photos that are worth putting up for a art show, contest, or magazine. Most of them are pure shit like "Ooooohhh, look how I can focus on this, turn the hue up on that, set the ISO speed on low and make these ridiculous lighting effects."
I don't want to see high-res pics of your friends, I wanna see some damn art.
[editline]04:30PM[/editline]
I seriously wouldn't mind getting into concert photography. Seems like a good field to get into.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
