Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
superior choices only
yoshotography
yosotography
yostography
yosography
yosgraphy
yosraphy
View Results
 
  • Post
  • Reply
post hole digger
Mar 21, 2011
eg, snype

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

Megabound posted:

I like this the most out of everything you've posted but the edit let's it down.



The curve in the original is wild with no true whites or blacks



funny, coz to me that’s the photo that is maybe the most boring and ordinary, except for the fact it’s probably a different landscape to what most on this forum are used to



regarding the “fixing” of the edit. idk.. just kinda looks like any other photo


I’ve literally had models message me and tell me they love the “film style” I do. thats gotta mean something lol

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004


nice

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004


hmmm I find these a bit disturbing

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004



fuckin love this photo. shame about the deep blacks though 😁

its not mine

Megabound
Oct 20, 2012

Ren Hang's work can't be divorced from the culture he lived in and what kind of expression is allowed and accepted in it. An exploring of sexuality in the PRC is something very different to that same exploration elsewhere.

post hole digger
Mar 21, 2011
it reminds me a lot of terry richardson photography unfortunately

akadajet
Sep 14, 2003

echinopsis posted:

this is interesting

thanks for the fuckin support man

I can really tell that we have fundamentally different ideas of what good photography is
that's one of my favorite photos that I have taken

before I raised the blacks, there was detail on the person. the photo was not better when it had detail, and raising the blacks not only fixed that issue, but also then met my ideals and the style I promote and hope to continue promoting

you crushed the blacks

Awkward Davies
Sep 3, 2009
Grimey Drawer

echinopsis posted:

hmmm I find these a bit disturbing

Yeah!

They're arresting, and unique, and don't look like anyone else but him.

HAIL eSATA-n
Apr 7, 2007

echi i think you have good composition but we have different styles and like different things and that’s fine

composition is all that matters anyway, everything else is just detail

HAIL eSATA-n
Apr 7, 2007

I’m phoneposting and don’t know what the can of worms emoji is so throw that in there with the power of your mind

Achmed Jones
Oct 16, 2004



i don't take pictures in raw mode cause it's enough of a pain to delete the egregious photos and import the rest. i can't imagine also wanting to do Real Processing on a regular basis

am i making a terrible mistake? i don't really know what kind of adjustments raw would let me do that i can't do on jpgs. i know they exist but no further details

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

HAIL eSATA-n posted:

echi i think you have good composition but we have different styles and like different things and that’s fine

composition is all that matters anyway, everything else is just detail

thanks for the kind words, been feeling like a faildividual re photo lately lol

HAIL eSATA-n
Apr 7, 2007

Achmed Jones posted:

i don't take pictures in raw mode cause it's enough of a pain to delete the egregious photos and import the rest. i can't imagine also wanting to do Real Processing on a regular basis

am i making a terrible mistake? i don't really know what kind of adjustments raw would let me do that i can't do on jpgs. i know they exist but no further details

raw gives you more room and lets you change white balance easily. you can also edit nondestructively which is handy for playing around. jpgs are fine too vOv

Sagebrush
Feb 26, 2012

Megabound posted:

I like this the most out of everything you've posted but the edit let's it down.



The curve in the original is wild with no true whites or blacks



the contrast-corrected version here looks like a WPA kodachrome and that's a good thing

echinopsis posted:

regarding the “fixing” of the edit. idk.. just kinda looks like any other photo

I’ve literally had models message me and tell me they love the “film style” I do. thats gotta mean something lol

the "film style" washed out look i think is pretty trite, but trite sells. a lot of people like mega-hdr photos and Live Laugh Love decals too

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

Sagebrush posted:

the "film style" washed out look i think is pretty trite, but trite sells.

chumps like me actually like it

Megabound
Oct 20, 2012

HAIL eSATA-n
Apr 7, 2007


> move forward

akadajet
Sep 14, 2003

Sagebrush posted:

the contrast-corrected version here looks like a WPA kodachrome and that's a good thing

the "film style" washed out look i think is pretty trite, but trite sells. a lot of people like mega-hdr photos and Live Laugh Love decals too

when you went to the drug store and they printed your film, the processor didn't make everything low contrast

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

you are welcome to enjoy these if you wish




bobmarleysghost
Mar 7, 2006



bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

akadajet posted:

when you went to the drug store and they printed your film, the processor didn't make everything low contrast

the low contrast stuff comes from people getting lab scans (frontier/noritsu) of badly exposed consumer grade film, drop off a roll of kodak gold you shot wildly underexposed because you don't know how to meter and get jpegs back and they'll look grainy as all hell with not a single pixel of actual black in it

Blotto_Otter
Aug 16, 2013


beeftweeter, you seem to know a lot about micro four-thirds hardware... I'm looking to upgrade my camera body, any suggestions as to a cheap (used?) option that gets me a better sensor than what I have now?

I'm currently using an ancient Panasonic Lumix GX1 that I got used in 2015 for $160, and it's served me well over the years, but the sensor shows its age if you get into the higher ISO levels, and there's zero in-body image stabilization, which sometimes makes it challenging to use my favorite lens, which is...

Beeftweeter posted:

panasonic also makes a pancake 20mm portrait that my wife has, it's not quite as fast as the 25mm (i don't remember offhand but i think it's f/1.9) but it's a good lens too
... the 20mm pancake lens mentioned here (which is f/1.7, actually, unless there's a different/newer slower version).

I had been hoping that I could just go and score another old-but-newer body for <$200 like I've done before, but it looks like used camera prices are a lot higher now than they were last time I shopped? The GX7, which is the next model after mine but still almost a decade old at this point, seems to still be going for close to $300 on ebay.

I guess I'm willing to pay more than I did last time around, but are there any sweet spots in the micro 4/3 camera body market? I definitely don't need a lot of bells and whistles, just a higher quality sensor than I have now (which includes... just about everything made in the last decade, probably)

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004


same

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005


holy shit this os has cinepak?!?!?


Blotto_Otter posted:

beeftweeter, you seem to know a lot about micro four-thirds hardware... I'm looking to upgrade my camera body, any suggestions as to a cheap (used?) option that gets me a better sensor than what I have now?

I'm currently using an ancient Panasonic Lumix GX1 that I got used in 2015 for $160, and it's served me well over the years, but the sensor shows its age if you get into the higher ISO levels, and there's zero in-body image stabilization, which sometimes makes it challenging to use my favorite lens, which is...

... the 20mm pancake lens mentioned here (which is f/1.7, actually, unless there's a different/newer slower version).

I had been hoping that I could just go and score another old-but-newer body for <$200 like I've done before, but it looks like used camera prices are a lot higher now than they were last time I shopped? The GX7, which is the next model after mine but still almost a decade old at this point, seems to still be going for close to $300 on ebay.

I guess I'm willing to pay more than I did last time around, but are there any sweet spots in the micro 4/3 camera body market? I definitely don't need a lot of bells and whistles, just a higher quality sensor than I have now (which includes... just about everything made in the last decade, probably)

there's a massive difference in sensor quality between those generations

my wife also has a GX1, i'm guessing she picked up the lens around the same time you did. it's not terrible per se but it's a huge step down from my g85, which would be around the same generation as a gx7 (afaik the g7/g75 are, technically, though)

i've also read very good things about the g95, but that's pretty new. i think general wisdom re: price/performance still holds true though, i picked up a g100 about a year ago, it was dirt cheap and it's kinda mediocre all around

HAIL eSATA-n
Apr 7, 2007

this thread has more activity than all of dorkroom lol

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

at work at xmas time I said to a co worker “this music is too horny” and she looked at me like what?? and I said “there are too many horns, I can’t stand the sound of horns”

Megabound
Oct 20, 2012


Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005


holy shit this os has cinepak?!?!?


lol hes got ya there echi

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

if youre gonna gently caress it up you might as well start from the source
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xnMZ5tAZYFndYy4zrRTgMDg8LdHAvPSS/view?usp=share_link

Beeftweeter posted:

lol hes got ya there echi

how?


I made the artistic choice to present the photo the way I did on purpose. it was a bleak day, one of the wettest in 2022, it was drizzling like mad up there, the visibility was poor, and the way I presented it represents those feelings, as far as I am concerned. and (of course) includes raising the blacks, something I do to almost every photo because I think it looks better :smugmrgw:



mother fuckers in this thread act as if they have objectively superior opinions on something inherently subjective

being able to see more detail, or being able to see something more clearly, is an artistic choice, not the default, and it's not always the best choice either.


I appreciate the opinions of others and I still have a lot to learn, but I am also developing my own style, that is different to others. If I just followed the opinions of others, my photos would look like theirs. it's one of the reasons I am not too fussed on 35-50mm lenses for portraits, every man and their dog uses one

Megabound
Oct 20, 2012



There's a lot to like about this photograph, the dead grass, the shrouding fog, the manmade structures disappearing into the natural surroundings. It's already cold an uninviting. I find your edit just makes it muddy, needlessly reducing detail and texture that draws the viewer to look more closely. I like the detail on the wall of the structure, how it falls into darkness, the glimpse of base. I kept it a little bit warm, but not as warm as you had it as that eases that brightness a bit, makes it less stark.

Anyway, that's how I'd edit it. It's a good photo.

echinopsis
Apr 13, 2004

I appreciate the analysis, and justification for how you’ve edited it. and thankyou.

you definitely do a deeper dive, and look closer at what’s going on than I do. I suspect my profound lack of patience leads me to often viewing a photo as a single entity and deriving some kind of vibe or aesthetic from it: or maybe I’m just full of poo poo and have no insight into why I think the way I do

purely for interests sake here’s basically the same shot but on a nice day. it’s much less interesting

big scary monsters
Sep 2, 2011

-~Skullwave~-
i also like the fog photo, i think it's one of the best you've posted. i don't mind the crushed blacks as much either, it works with the fog. i would still like a bit more contrast, it is quite muddy, but it's a photo where you don't need the blackest blacks and whitest whites. if i were editing it i'd probably go somewhere between yours and the other edits. that sunny day photo is a good example of where it doesn't work for me - bright sunshine has strong highlights and dark shadows, it looks weird with such grey shadows

some dusk fog that i shot a while back





Wild EEPROM
Jul 29, 2011


oh, my, god. Becky, look at her bitrate.

echinopsis posted:

I appreciate the analysis, and justification for how you’ve edited it. and thankyou.

you definitely do a deeper dive, and look closer at what’s going on than I do. I suspect my profound lack of patience leads me to often viewing a photo as a single entity and deriving some kind of vibe or aesthetic from it: or maybe I’m just full of poo poo and have no insight into why I think the way I do

purely for interests sake here’s basically the same shot but on a nice day. it’s much less interesting



Megabound
Oct 20, 2012


:hmmyes:

Sagebrush
Feb 26, 2012

HAIL eSATA-n
Apr 7, 2007

hmm, nice

kind of want to see it in b&w too

KidDynamite
Feb 11, 2005

echi here is my inspo




here's one of mine from ages ago.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

KidDynamite
Feb 11, 2005

i should really pick up one of these new fangled full framed mirrorless bodies that can shot 30fps and start walking up to ring aprons again.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply