Official Photography Thread: Vol. ICan'tFindTheLastOne

[im not you]

I'd drop that "photography" from your tag too. It doesn't look well that way you have it placed.

 

[luca tony]

Just some random shots from Richmond.

 

[jimmybeanz]

^^^lmao off at that picture of carlton with a cross

 

[Fong$tarr]

Cashmere....probably the best photo set you've done. Although a lot have some issues as far as clarity and focus and white balance, they seem to be goingin the right direction. And as far as your logo placement, you should really drop the "photography" part (I think everyone should cause it seemsredundant) and place it in the right spot on each photo. There is no rule that the logo has to be placed in one spot the whole time, but a rule of thumb is tonever have it over your subject matter.

This one is probably my favorite out of the bunch.

 

[im not you]

Originally Posted by Mr Fongstarr

think everyone should cause it seems redundant

Co-sign.

 

[mangudai954]

Originally Posted by DJ bana

I feel like this picture could have been sooo much better..I don't know, I feel like you were too close or something or maybe if the white car was a littlefurther back.

 

[realxfresh]

Love your 240 stuff santi

 

[ruleofthirds]

more work from last saturday:

 

[mrshadow]

Originally Posted by Mangudai954

Originally Posted by DJ bana

I feel like this picture could have been sooo much better..I don't know, I feel like you were too close or something or maybe if the white car was a little further back.

like she should of got a full shot of the house or something?

either way pic is

i really want to get into photography...what kind of cam do yall recommend anewbie and whats the BEST way to learn how to really work a camera

 

[ruleofthirds]

Originally Posted by Mangudai954

Originally Posted by DJ bana

I feel like this picture could have been sooo much better..I don't know, I feel like you were too close or something or maybe if the white car was a little further back.

1. WB can be corrected
2. Focal point is in question, given that white car isn't very sharp
3. The vignetting simulates too much light fall off and gives the impression that you used direct flash with not enough power
4. Composition could have been improved, either by shooting lower or by placing the vehicles lower in the frame
5. Loss of info in the Tree shadows. Would like to see a bit more detail in the shadow area to display better dynamic range


i could go on....

 

[dj bana]

i was manually focusing in low light (which i have a very very difficult time with), there is no flash. it is not focused well (im aware).

the WB is NOT off, this is exactly how street lights should look, sorry.

the subject of the image is not the trees, hence the shadows and darkness in that area.

that is actually a cropped version of the original image- there is a reason it is cropped, there was a car behind the other car that bothered me a lot. ispent 15 mins messing with the crop bc i just couldnt decide which i preferred, so i used the crop bc well, i just couldnt decide. however, the central pointof focus is better in the OG. now that i have some feedback, i shouldve stuck to my initial image and worked with that.

here is the original image:

 

[dj bana]

here are 2 more versions of this image that i had edited:

1. has more emphasis on the background lighting

2. b/w

 

[Fong$tarr]

^^^Even though that is how the imaged looked, you can fix the white balance so that it doesn't come out yellow and have more of a white look.....unless theyellow is the desired look that you are looking for.

 

[ruleofthirds]

Originally Posted by DJ bana

i was manually focusing in low light (which i have a very very difficult time with), there is no flash. it is not focused well (im aware).

the WB is NOT off, this is exactly how street lights should look, sorry.

the subject of the image is not the trees, hence the shadows and darkness in that area.

that is actually a cropped version of the original image- there is a reason it is cropped, there was a car behind the other car that bothered me a lot. i spent 15 mins messing with the crop bc i just couldnt decide which i preferred, so i used the crop bc well, i just couldnt decide. however, the central point of focus is better in the OG. now that i have some feedback, i shouldve stuck to my initial image and worked with that.

here is the original image:

WB is not off? The subject does not have to be in the trees in order to have detail in shadow. You should know something about blown out high lights or lossof info in dark areas. The more detail and clarity you have in a picture, the better your dynamic range will look. This looks as if it were shot with a Pointand Shoot sensor.

 

[SVNTI]

^ I like how the white car isn't cut off on the last 2. I can see why you cropped it though, the other car in the back doesn't fit in with the shot.The B/W version is dope.

 

[dj bana]

Originally Posted by Mr Fongstarr

^^^Even though that is how the imaged looked, you can fix the white balance so that it doesn't come out yellow and have more of a white look.....unless the yellow is the desired look that you are looking for.

ding ding ding =]

yes, i like my street shots to look like they were taken on the street, hence the yellow tones.

 

[dj bana]

i like what you did with the lighting, but i dont like your choice of white balance, just my personal preference. i was going for a specific mood, so i editedit the way i saw it.. with the vignetting and shadows on the trees. i wanted to glorify nothing but the cars and possibly a bit of the sky.

thanks for you input, though.

and santi, the white (its actually baby green) car is not cut out of the first image ... its just a tight crop.

 

[ruleofthirds]

Originally Posted by DJ bana

i like what you did with the lighting, but i dont like your choice of white balance, just my personal preference. i was going for a specific mood, so i edited it the way i saw it.. with the vignetting and shadows on the trees. i wanted to glorify nothing but the cars and possibly a bit of the sky.

thanks for you input, though.

and santi, the white (its actually baby green) car is not cut out of the first image ... its just a tight crop.

I didn't do anything with the lighting, all i did was adjust the WB. Again, the vignetting simulates light fall off (simulating light sourcecoming from your camera directly and not having enough power to light the entire frame. IMO the vignetting does not work with the light situation. But if itfloats your boat, by all means

 

[im not you]

I hope you fed that broad after the shoot...

 

[tommykairaa]

i haven't shot in a while.

 

[dj bana]

Originally Posted by RuleOfThirds

Originally Posted by DJ bana

i like what you did with the lighting, but i dont like your choice of white balance, just my personal preference. i was going for a specific mood, so i edited it the way i saw it.. with the vignetting and shadows on the trees. i wanted to glorify nothing but the cars and possibly a bit of the sky.

thanks for you input, though.

and santi, the white (its actually baby green) car is not cut out of the first image ... its just a tight crop.

I didn't do anything with the lighting, all i did was adjust the WB. Again, the vignetting simulates light fall off (simulating light source coming from your camera directly and not having enough power to light the entire frame. IMO the vignetting does not work with the light situation. But if it floats your boat, by all means

im well aware what vignetting is.
i shoot wide open, 90% of the time. you can either enhance the vignetting effect, or try and get rid of it. in some cases its not that easy, and others it alsoadds to the mood of a photo. vignetting is NOT, by any means, a bad thing.

from the looks of you flickr, we shoot completely different styles, so i can understand why your initial reaction was to correct the white balance. and thanksfor that, but i just prefer my images to look a certain way

oh and, critique away...
its the only way we become better photographers. in every case, a 2nd set of eyes is always useful

 

[ruleofthirds]

Originally Posted by DJ bana

Originally Posted by RuleOfThirds

Originally Posted by DJ bana

i like what you did with the lighting, but i dont like your choice of white balance, just my personal preference. i was going for a specific mood, so i edited it the way i saw it.. with the vignetting and shadows on the trees. i wanted to glorify nothing but the cars and possibly a bit of the sky.

thanks for you input, though.

and santi, the white (its actually baby green) car is not cut out of the first image ... its just a tight crop.

I didn't do anything with the lighting, all i did was adjust the WB. Again, the vignetting simulates light fall off (simulating light source coming from your camera directly and not having enough power to light the entire frame. IMO the vignetting does not work with the light situation. But if it floats your boat, by all means

im well aware what vignetting is.
i shoot wide open, 90% of the time. you can either enhance the vignetting effect, or try and get rid of it. in some cases its not that easy, and others it also adds to the mood of a photo. vignetting is NOT, by any means, a bad thing.

from the looks of you flickr, we shoot completely different styles, so i can understand why your initial reaction was to correct the white balance. and thanks for that, but i just prefer my images to look a certain way

i wasn't trying to school you on Vignetting, I was making direct reference to the impact it has on this particular photo. Since the light isalready concentrated on your subjects (the cars) I feel that there is really no need to bring emphasis to them with Vignetting. You have a good balance oflight/darks, but adding the vignetting to it simulated light fall off. In some cases its good, some not so good. If your background/sky were brighter, Ithink the vignetting would have been better, and would have been apparent that you used it for that purpose. But like I said, since it was already dark, itjust made it look like your flash wasn't powerful enough.

You're right we probably do shoot with different styles, what works for you may not work for me.

 

[Fong$tarr]

Black and white suites the best look. Even when the white balance is corrected, it just doesn't do anything. At least with the black, it puts more emphasison the car which makes it more interesting as far as composition goes. The other one just looks like a....well picture. You can't really tell what is beingshot at all. Cause there are so many different things to look at.

 

[ruleofthirds]

Originally Posted by KobeBeef

Originally Posted by RuleOfThirds

more work from last saturday:

next time you do a shoot, can you post pics of your setup? i'm curious on what it looks like-- cause i'm about to get into some 'strobist' stuff (bought my wireless triggers, light stands, umbrellas, etc)

so i'm curious on how other people setup their lighting.

thanks.

Once you go OCF, you will never look at lighting the same

Here is my setup for this shoot

*300W model/strobe to models right at 45 degrees, large softbox at 1/2 power
*300W model/strobe to models left at 20 degrees, large softbox at 1/8 power
*150W model/strobe directly behind model bare at 1/2 power

 

[vrp32tl]

Originally Posted by RuleOfThirds

Originally Posted by KobeBeef

Originally Posted by RuleOfThirds

more work from last saturday:

next time you do a shoot, can you post pics of your setup? i'm curious on what it looks like-- cause i'm about to get into some 'strobist' stuff (bought my wireless triggers, light stands, umbrellas, etc)

so i'm curious on how other people setup their lighting.

thanks.

Once you go OCF, you will never look at lighting the same

Here is my setup for this shoot

*300W model/strobe to models right at 45 degrees, large softbox at 1/2 power
*300W model/strobe to models left at 20 degrees, large softbox at 1/8 power
*150W model/strobe directly behind model bare at 1/2 power

Nice shooting D. Look like you putting in "work" brah!