tribal_princess said:
how are the lice?
we're you toooo naughty?
submit a photo to the urban75 critics
- Thread starter alef
- Start date
how are the lice?
we're you toooo naughty?
tribal_princess said:
LOL...I reckons it was the other princess from the East then?...oooo errrr hit a tender spot eh?Whooooda thought it?
Better zippit now then or this one'll will get binned...dum_di_dum...
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Cadmus said:
I don't agree that it should be black and white; it looks good in colour.
The only flaw I see with it is that it's a little bit misaligned. It would have more power if the last stair before the water was straight and level in the shot.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Corax said:
It is nice; but silhouettes are a bit like cheating: it's hard not to take a nice silhouette photo, because of the light contrasts.
Now that you can do a good composition in silhouette, try your hand at fully lit shots.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
beekeeper said:
Sort of a parallax effect going on here; I like the 'true' lines of the lampost vis a vis the altered lines of the buildings.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
wordie said:
Nice pic.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Pingu said:
I like the original better. The cropped one: too little grass, too much dog.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Cadmus said:i like this thread - useful and informative, hooray for the thread starter!
i can usually tell that the pic ain't good enough, but can rarely tell what's wrong exactly. this helps.
i'm posting a couple more but don't feel pressurised to comment on them...at least not immediately.
they are all from one of my walks, all very point-and-click...
Direction Left
River Squad
Surveillance
Eye
You're a good photographer. Either you've naturally got a good eye, or you've taken some training.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
beekeeper said:
Is this a series?
I think this one would have benefitted from a little more sky to the left of the lamppost.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
mauvais mangue said:
Looks like it was done in a studio.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOh JC2 you seem to know alot about photography...I've got this camera which has stopped working...I don't want to ruin the film and actually I'd like to get the camera working again. What do you think i should do?
For wordie:: you'd hate me...more!
For wordie:: you'd hate me...more!
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
squelch said:OOOOOOOOOOOOOOh JC2 you seem to know alot about photography...I've got this camera which has stopped working...I don't want to ruin the film and actually I'd like to get the camera working again. What do you think i should do?
For wordie:: you'd hate me...more!
You could put it up your bum, remove the film in that dark space, then take the camera in to a camera repair store.
Corax
Luke 5:16
Cheers JC for the comment JC.Johnny Canuck2 said:
I can see what you mean about silhouettes. Before this thread appeared, that was the best shot I'd taken. After advice off here I've taken and posted a few more, received advice from alef and others (much 'preciated), and gone out shooting again.
along with others, are here
No silhouettes this time...
Any better?
Johnny Canuck2 said:
Tank you for that...obviously I would have never have thought of that. Oh silly me.. ThanX for that JC2.... you are great at giveing really god advice. And thank you too for not referring to the size of my dick or my income. You are the best. We must get together sometime. It would be great.
alef
Needs to take more photos
Both. In b+w it's a very strong picture about texture, composition and sky. In colour those aspects become a bit less important and the green of the bridge itself is a central feature and works well. If absolutely forced to choose then the b+w has the edge, but I love colour photography.wordie said:
Occasionally in the past I would carry two cameras with each type of film and inevitably used the colour film more. Now having moved to digital there's just no point playing with b+w until the photoshop stage.
For years I had no idea about f-stops, lens, etc. When I used manuals I just made sure the shutter was set to 1/64 sec or faster, lined up the meter, and that worked fine. Eventually I spent the time and read up a bit but I don't actually think it's ever helped my photography, I still rarely bother with setting a specific depth of field.wordie said:
I tend to think of quoting technical facts in photography akin to DJs who go on about the specific Technics, headphones etc. In the end it's really the eye for the image or ear for the music that matters, anything else is minor details.
alef
Needs to take more photos
The colour fence stands out immediately as a great subject. Did you try a variety of angles and compositions with it? Deej (guy lying on grass with hand in front of face) is the other new one that grabbed my curiosity. I'm not personally into mixing colour and b+w together, although you have done a neat job of it (clean edges). I like the shot for the strangeness, telling some kind of story but left ambiguous.Corax said:
Disagree, it's not cheating. It's true that silhouettes lend themselves to photography, but that's no reason at all to avoid them. The challenge is do them really well. Similarly very photogenic themes are abandoned houses, cars, just about anything in this month's Decay competition, but that doesn't mean the photographers are cheating.Corax said:
At the other end of the spectrum I think portraits, and people in general, are the trickiest subject and always worth a try. Even if you find it a bit intimidating I believe it's worth having a go, very rewarding capturing people.
alef said:
1. woopsa daisy....homage to the f64group...what did they do then?
2.really?....i've always found the combination of film speed,aperture,shutter speed and even choice of lens tends to be quite important.
3.you are kidding aren't you? so if the details weren't provided and someone asked what lens was being used you'd be happy to that that was irrelevant.
Sorry mate but IMO you are not wrong but somewhat mistaken in holding onto those thoughts.... bit like a dj (to carry on your analogy) pulling leads in and out of speakers,amp and decks...still mixing isn't it?
In fact I'll put my head on the block...agin!...and say that the choices you make prior to taking the picture are the ones that make great pictures...the difference between an image which will change someones life or there perspective of the World is exactly that....however happenstance like the shot was achieved the technical construct is the overiding reason that those who have the chance to observe the image and understand it do so is due to the fact that the photographer used he combination* of medium sesitivity, shutter, aperture and lens not content alone.
*whether empirically correct or not.
alef said:
JC2 said a bit like cheating...i took that to mean that a lot of silhouette photography tends to come about because of incorrect expose...not because the snapper was interested in silhouettes...in fact the images(not the ones talked of here) tend to be recordes of shadows...I beieve IRRC the silouette was a precurssor/ran parallell to the beginnings of photography and the term has been in the last 50yrs or so become misappropriated...rather like me being modest here!
....do you see what i mean?
alef
Needs to take more photos
I was simply working to the rule of thumb that anything slower was likely to be blurred. These days I just stick to automatic cameras or P mode.squelch said:
Honestly does little for me. Obviously if I was a commercial photographer it'd matter more, but as a keen amateur out to simply take good shots, maybe try to get a few in galleries from time to time, no it just doesn't matter enough to me.squelch said:
I care about colours, composition, subject matter, lighting. Camera details just don't much bother me. Prefer cameras that easily fit in my pocket and feel solid in my hands, have a vaguely decent lens, that's all.
Two words: John Peel.squelch said:Sorry mate but IMO you are not wrong but somewhat mistaken in holding onto those thoughts.... bit like a dj (to carry on your analogy) pulling leads in and out of speakers,amp and decks...still mixing isn't it?
Interesting response...can i have permission from a moderator to respond before someone interjects and starts calling me an arrongant cunt? And bins the Thread via erase rather than to allow others to possibly learn something about the difference between professional and amateur photography? If any at all?
alef
Needs to take more photos
To keep this thread on topic I've started a new thread:squelch said:Interesting response...can i have permission from a moderator to respond before someone interjects and starts calling me an arrongant cunt? And bins the Thread via erase rather than to allow others to possibly learn something about the difference between professional and amateur photography? If any at all?
do f-stops, aperature and shutter really matter?
alef said:
Therefore those things don't apply to a critique...interesting stance?
interesting spelling + repetiton tooo mate!...think about it?
Gordon Gnu
New Member
wordie said:
Don't be then...eh?
,,,,jeeez even I don't understand that!!!!! wordie said:
I have, on occasion benefited from your advice squelcher, and hope to again!
have a few jars of scrumpy, and all will be crystal
Similar threads
