The Creative Photography Thread v7 | The quickest way to make money at photography is to sell your c
8,671 replies, posted
I took a few photos yesterday morning when I was out walking.
[img]http://u.cubeupload.com/jenny7332/gPbCvk.png[/img]
[img]http://u.cubeupload.com/jenny7332/u8bUGJ.png[/img]
Any way to get rid of those lens flares?
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/59868994@N03/6892549816/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7132/6892549816_e062a92c42_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/59868994@N03/6892549816/]Doha Airport[/url] von [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/59868994@N03/]Terranigmus[/url] auf Flickr
[QUOTE=Him1411;35397403]That second one is beautiful!![/QUOTE]
I think they're both pretty great. The perspective on that first one is fantastic.
One of the most emotional pictures I ever took. Nothing faked, no props. Straight out off a little shack on Pulau Ubin, Singapore.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/59868994@N03/6892685696/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7246/6892685696_c1b9678293_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/59868994@N03/6892685696/]IMG_5999.jpg[/url] von [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/59868994@N03/]Terranigmus[/url] auf Flickr
[QUOTE=seek;35375437][url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mkealcoran/6858847482/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7079/6858847482_4816da57da.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/mkealcoran/6858847482/]Going To Work.[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/mkealcoran/]mkealcoran[/url], on Flickr[/QUOTE]
Awesome colours.
Reminds me of Mumford & Sons album art:
[img]http://lamusicblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/mumfordAndSons_sighNoMore.jpg[/img]
What lens btw?
Blaze, I feel that you should have a knife in that picture.
Got bored today, so I bought some sirup, and got naked in the shower:
[img]http://www.sundephoto.net/facepunch/HFS_9989.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=credesniper;35403701]Blaze, I feel that you should have a knife in that picture.[/QUOTE]
its not me
[QUOTE=BlazeFresh;35403858]its not me[/QUOTE]Ah. Well, that picture is great.
Went out with my camera for the first time today to what was supposed to be a big amateur photography gathering and ended in me and another random dude walking around taking pictures.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040335183/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7116/7040335183_f0166f5392_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040335183/]clock[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/latin_geek/]Latin Geek[/url], on Flickr
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040332565/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7081/7040332565_ce151074e7_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040332565/]flower thing super bokeh edition[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/latin_geek/]Latin Geek[/url], on Flickr
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/6894232700/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7207/6894232700_b45be58df9_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/6894232700/]shroom[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/latin_geek/]Latin Geek[/url], on Flickr
He happened to have some old photog equipement including a full metal analog tele, first lens I've used besides my kit, it was ssoooo fucking awesome to use.
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040330259/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7056/7040330259_0a4ee59523_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040330259/]manual everything is fun[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/latin_geek/]Latin Geek[/url], on Flickr
title says everything
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040334105/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7069/7040334105_54cdd055cb_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040334105/]probably the best picture containing a person i've ever shot[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/latin_geek/]Latin Geek[/url], on Flickr
This could probably use a crop but :v:
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040334295/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7083/7040334295_5252be5237_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/latin_geek/7040334295/]teeny house[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/latin_geek/]Latin Geek[/url], on Flickr
The only one I really like is the teeny house and even there ou could have worked with the background to even make the house look more "natural" by using the window I see there or using the wall to make it more seperated.
All in all they look like point n shoot which is fine and dandy for learning and tryig and getting a lucky shot here and there but not really something you should show off.
Tip: It's only called Bokeh when you see light sources, everything else is called "deth of field" (but I got a "lol you got that from gmod" comment for using the term DOF in here too so who knows..)
The clock could be fine too if you'd have paid attention to framing and composure, the star here is the architecture, the litle nooks and all, not your way of photographing it( but you can emphasize something of course) so maybe for future pictures my tip would be paying attention to whether you want to break the frame or not.
Cheers, keep on.
Thanks for taking the time to critique, man. Not really showing off, but it's not like there's a "dump your amateur crap here and get critique" thread I posted it here. Yeah, I recognize framing/composing is one of my weak points, and looking through pictures again I can see how I could have improved them. Any books/blogs/reads you guys could suggest on that subject or is it just practice?
And that's weird, someone told me it was Bokeh when the background was softened, even without the light sources showing.
[QUOTE=Killuah;35405177]The only one I really like is the teeny house and even there ou could have worked with the background to even make the house look more "natural" by using the window I see there or using the wall to make it more seperated.
All in all they look like point n shoot which is fine and dandy for learning and tryig and getting a lucky shot here and there but not really something you should show off.
Tip: It's only called Bokeh when you see light sources, everything else is called "deth of field" (but I got a "lol you got that from gmod" comment for using the term DOF in here too so who knows..)
The clock could be fine too if you'd have paid attention to framing and composure, the star here is the architecture, the litle nooks and all, not your way of photographing it( but you can emphasize something of course) so maybe for future pictures my tip would be paying attention to whether you want to break the frame or not.
Cheers, keep on.[/QUOTE]
Bokeh is the whole blur, not just light sources. Anything with a shallow depth of field has bokeh. It describes the quality of all the out of focus area, not only light sources.
[img]http://puu.sh/nEKw[/img]
Indeed, bokeh is the actual blur, resulting from a [lack of] depth of field - which is a measurement of the distance based 'zone' in which things will be in relative focus.
[img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7238/6894935356_c49649a652_c.jpg[/img]
[img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7226/7041032373_0625d3033d_c.jpg[/img]
still working with black and white, been getting back into skate photography. it's been really fun.
you're seriously nailing the b/w thing. processing is ace (images are sweet too), can't wait to see more stuff
been messing with our old friend the brenizer method again :)
[IMG]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7247/7041371383_8ec6825f00_c.jpg[/IMG]
Kinda pointless for this picture.
Never understood what the hell the Brenzier method was
Nice games collection btw (is that original PS2 Half Life?)
[QUOTE=latin_geek;35410258]Never understood what the hell the Brenzier method was
Nice games collection btw (is that original PS2 Half Life?)[/QUOTE]
Its basically a panoramic stitch but uses vertical too, can create amazing an depth of field
haha, cheers buddy and yes it is!
that was shot with an old 50mm at f/5.6 but because its old its on a k-mount so i use an adapter for it, due to this it zooms in with about 2.5x magnification so when taking one image it would shoot about the size of 1/3rd of one of the shelves in the cabinet.
[QUOTE=Slippery-Q;35408192][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7238/6894935356_c49649a652_c.jpg[/img]
[img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7226/7041032373_0625d3033d_c.jpg[/img]
still working with black and white, been getting back into skate photography. it's been really fun.[/QUOTE]
Looks good but they are not totally black and white. You can see a magenta color cast over them
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;35411063]Looks good but they are not totally black and white. You can see a magenta color cast over them[/QUOTE]
I think that's the idea
[QUOTE=latin_geek;35410258]Never understood what the hell the Brenzier method was
Nice games collection btw (is that original PS2 Half Life?)[/QUOTE]
Since the bokeh(thanks for clearing that up to me guys) gets stronger when you zoom in it is basically simulating a bigger shutter by taking zoomed pictures an stiching them.
[editline]3rd April 2012[/editline]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/59868994@N03/6892690658/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7086/6892690658_51c376ef47_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/59868994@N03/6892690658/]IMG_5810.jpg[/url] von [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/59868994@N03/]Terranigmus[/url] auf Flickr
Singapore Night Safari Zoo.
[QUOTE=Killuah;35411472]Since the bokeh(thanks for clearing that up to me guys) gets stronger when you zoom in it is basically simulating a bigger shutter by taking zoomed pictures an stiching them.
[editline]3rd April 2012[/editline]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/59868994@N03/6892690658/][img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7086/6892690658_51c376ef47_z.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/59868994@N03/6892690658/]IMG_5810.jpg[/url] von [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/59868994@N03/]Terranigmus[/url] auf Flickr
Singapore Night Safari Zoo.[/QUOTE]
*Bigger image sensor/film size.
[QUOTE=Dolton;35412737]*Bigger image sensor/film size.[/QUOTE]
Could you explain? Even Brenizer himself talks about simulated aperture numbers in his blog.
[QUOTE=Killuah;35413675]Could you explain? Even Brenizer himself talks about simulated aperture numbers in his blog.[/QUOTE]
well you are stitching pictures together, which is simulating the idea of your sensor being bigger and capturing more space. i can't really think of a different way to explain it. it's like your sensor is bigger pretty much
[url]http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
