If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Two images
On Jan 7, 2021, Melanie van Buren wrote
(in article ): On 07/01/2021 17:44, Bill W wrote: On Jan 7, 2021, Melanie van Buren wrote (in article ): The first image is by someone who knows what they are doing by taking an idea and using a half decent camera and light i.e. Helmut Newton. https://www.interviewmagazine.com/wp...HN-Walter-Stei ger -shoe-Monte-Carlo-1983-HR-scaled.jpg The second picture is by someone with half a lazy clue who was in a hurry (cropped and levelled shot using a camera swinging at the end of a tripod) and didn't take much bother at all i.e. me. As not very good as it is and certainly bad in comparison I found it to be a useful exercise. If you take something good you may not always learn. By comparing the good with the bad photo I can better understand the differences at an emotional level. The lessons just sink in deeper and motivate to do better next time. https://www.dropbox.com/s/s4ee1apg9t...18-25-42-3.jpg When you ask for comments, you are likely to get them. An artistic focus is desirable, but the technical side counts, too. It’s out of focus AND noisy, which you probably did not intend. And the floor/wall joint is very distracting, and appears to be more in focus than the subject. And imitation has its uses, but limits, too. Anyway, find your real camera, or replace it, and try some of your own ideas. You going to bore yourself right out of photography copying things. As i said I was in a hurry and being lazy. I know what the faults are. There's no need to overthink this or try to turn me into a gearhead or tell me what pictures I should or shouldn't take. No one is trying to do that. Maybe just maybe I know more about neuro-psychology than you Likely enough. and have other things going on in the background than I'm telling anyone. That’s becoming more apparent by the minute. I'm learning MY way because this is what works for me and I am finding myself motivated by what interests ME. I bet I also sold more pictures to paying clients this week than all of you put together. You see, this is the part that doesn’t fit with everything else. You claim to derive income from photography, yet you are here talking about the most basic aspects of photography, and you don’t even know where your real camera is, and even if you did, it has problems. What is your website? Nothing comes up on a Google search. It's a **** picture for sure and I can and hopefully will do better as I get into a photography habit ands like 3000% better than most of the competition I'm up against. Again, you are selling photos, but you’re not actually into photography right now. Or are you deliberately using “pictures” instead of “photos”? It's also one more photo than most of you posted this week. Here you go, here’s a few thousand: https://www.flickr.com/photos/48982192@N05/albums Let me know if you detect any art. I personally think it’s a bunch of snapshots. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Two images
On Jan 7, 2021, Bill W wrote
(in ternal-september.org): On Jan 7, 2021, Savageduck wrote (in iganews.com): On Jan 7, 2021, Melanie van Buren wrote (in article ): On 07/01/2021 18:41, Savageduck wrote: Some of us post images regularly, and some post when the whim urges us to post. I for one make a reasonable contribution of images to this, and some other groups, many times I get no response, sometimes I get a comment or two. Less lecturing and projecting. Where's your shoe picture? It's a simple challenge and probably one of the easiest challenges I can think of. OK! That’s fair enough. So since I did not have a pair mens size 13 stilettos available you are getting what I am wearing now. I reached over and picked up my Fujifilm X-E3 which happened to have the Fuji XF 16mm f/1.4 lens mounted, and shot my fashionably Sketchers shod foot. Just ambient light, no flash or pro lighting. https://www.dropbox.com/s/p8crjwms8fdy2eh/DSCF0945.jpg Absolutely breathtaking. But no drone *foot*age?... Heh heh heh... My latest drone “footage” was posted earlier on Tuesday the 5th, and it seems that it is yet to be noticed by anybody. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Two images
On 07/01/2021 19:37, Savageduck wrote:
I do not claim to be “so good”. I do claim to have over 60 years of experience in photography, but I am still learning, and I am prepared to share some of what I have learned. As far as emulating Newton's, or your image my wardrobe does not include fishnet stockings, and stilettos. Besides my calves are not up for that sort of modeling. I know more about the wardrobe issues and politics than having adeptness with photography and just happy pootling by for now learning in my own way and entertaining myself with my own internal dialogue. Excuses, excuses. £20 all in off Ebay and you don't need to show anything above the ankle. That said a decent quality shoe is noticeably better and can determine what kind of picture is taken as the shoe, background, and composition work together. I usually wear crappy stockings as I always seem to wreck expensive ones but I noticed this week the finish of some hold-ups was actually pretty good. Apart from an adequate lace band there's a just perceptible gloss to them. I'm not sure anyone would notice in a photo or what the best light would be. Of course that may influence what kind of picture is taken. A none **** camera might help too if I needed to be picky about the light level. Bog standard pumps can work but shoes which make a statement can be more interesting. It's too cold at the moment but there's a few interesting places I can take shoe pictures among others and the light will be a lot better. -- Melanie van Buren |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Two images
On 07/01/2021 20:38, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2021-01-07 12:11, Melanie van Buren wrote: The first image is by someone who knows what they are doing by taking an idea and using a half decent camera and light i.e. Helmut Newton. https://www.interviewmagazine.com/wp...-HR-scaled.jpg The second picture is by someone with half a lazy clue who was in a hurry (cropped and levelled shot using a camera swinging at the end of a tripod) and didn't take much bother at all i.e. me. As not very good as it is and certainly bad in comparison I found it to be a useful exercise. If you take something good you may not always learn. By comparing the good with the bad photo I can better understand the differences at an emotional level. The lessons just sink in deeper and motivate to do better next time. https://www.dropbox.com/s/s4ee1apg9t...18-25-42-3.jpg Composition is okay.* I find it too soft to be compelling. Try a curved paper board to eliminate the line (floor/wall). Something like: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nik4385qut...urvPaperEx.jpg (In the HM case probably outdoor in raw sunlight with a lot of room to the front of the model) You can shoot near a large window to get generous soft light (w/o direct sunlight) that will still render a nice contrasty shadow. Shoot a lot.* Try things.* But do try to make technically good shots as well as nice compositions.* Try for more contrast too. The emotional thing he the HM shot has a certain defiance to it. Yes, it was a lazy shot. I have background materials on my todo list. Available light is more than a bit crap at the moment and I have no lights plus ****ty cameras. I'm not making a huge effort technically or with light at the moment as the biggest challenge is actually getting off my ass and doing something which includes setting the time aside for it and wardrobe and location issues. It's been ages since I practiced depth of field with my Canon G9. It's not brilliant and I'm not sure how usable it is. I may be able to do something worthwile but have no ideas at the moment. I count not dropping the camera as a win. What with the practical issues I'm finding light a bit of a bummer at the moment. As well as the technical more practice as you say to develop a sense for this. HN certainly liked his bright sunlight. I thought it was a carpet originally but a closer look suggests concrete. -- Melanie van Buren |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Two images
On 07/01/2021 20:40, Bill W wrote:
On Jan 7, 2021, Melanie van Buren wrote (in article ): I'm learning MY way because this is what works for me and I am finding myself motivated by what interests ME. I bet I also sold more pictures to paying clients this week than all of you put together. You see, this is the part that doesn’t fit with everything else. You claim to derive income from photography, yet you are here talking about the most basic aspects of photography, and you don’t even know where your real camera is, and even if you did, it has problems. What is your website? Nothing comes up on a Google search. Maybe if you read my two topics and the comments therein very carefully the penny would drop. I'm also not on here to promote a website or any other business. Again, as commented. I'm just having a bit of fun at the moment and working myself up to take photography more seriously, and no I'm not a gearhead, and yes I have my principles and priorities, and this is an exercise for me and my self satisfaction tangents and mistakes included not for anyone else. Most people who buy my pictures probably couldn't give two ****s about the artistic merit or even technical merit beyond the obvious and I'm not hiring a photographer who will only impose their own artistic vision and limits. I decided I wanted to do something better than I need to and the exercise of doing it is useful plus it's a lot harder when you're the model because there is a lot more work involved than a still life or landscape. I have plans for some photos and it requires a lot of setting up as well as fixing the light before I press the shutter. Today I saw some examples by my competition and at best they are snaps so don't give me a hard time for deciding to take things seriously when you don't know what the hurdles and expenses are to take anything good especially as I have to work with what I have in terms of both equipment and locations etcetera which has its own limits. Yes I can sweettalk people into taking snaps and they may have some appeal but this comes with a lot of other issues. They're either going to involve too much work, or be inconvenient, or simply not practically possible. -- Melanie van Buren |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Two images
On Jan 7, 2021, Melanie van Buren wrote
(in article ): On 07/01/2021 20:40, Bill W wrote: On Jan 7, 2021, Melanie van Buren wrote (in article ): I'm learning MY way because this is what works for me and I am finding myself motivated by what interests ME. I bet I also sold more pictures to paying clients this week than all of you put together. You see, this is the part that doesn’t fit with everything else. You claim to derive income from photography, yet you are here talking about the most basic aspects of photography, and you don’t even know where your real camera is, and even if you did, it has problems. What is your website? Nothing comes up on a Google search. Maybe if you read my two topics and the comments therein very carefully the penny would drop. I'm also not on here to promote a website or any other business. Again, as commented. Yes, well I think I can guess what you’re talking about. The thing is, bragging about selling what I think you’re talking about as if you’re winning some competition on a photography discussion group does not make sense. What you are selling would not be most readily described as photography, but as something else a bit more clear. And posting these brags on a usenet group populated entirely by men - folks who would be far more likely to be purchasers of your work than sellers of the same thing. It’s admirable that you want to learn, and everyone is very welcome to jump in here - it has been slow, for one thing. But another thing I don’t get is the anger. What’s that all about? You’re getting honest comments from some very smart people with a lot of photography knowledge (and I’m trying, too). So keep posting. And feel free to post some of those other “pictures”... I'm just having a bit of fun at the moment and working myself up to take photography more seriously, and no I'm not a gearhead, and yes I have my principles and priorities, and this is an exercise for me and my self satisfaction tangents and mistakes included not for anyone else. Most people who buy my pictures probably couldn't give two ****s about the artistic merit or even technical merit beyond the obvious and I'm not hiring a photographer who will only impose their own artistic vision and limits. I decided I wanted to do something better than I need to and the exercise of doing it is useful plus it's a lot harder when you're the model because there is a lot more work involved than a still life or landscape. I have plans for some photos and it requires a lot of setting up as well as fixing the light before I press the shutter. Today I saw some examples by my competition and at best they are snaps so don't give me a hard time for deciding to take things seriously when you don't know what the hurdles and expenses are to take anything good especially as I have to work with what I have in terms of both equipment and locations etcetera which has its own limits. Yes I can sweettalk people into taking snaps and they may have some appeal but this comes with a lot of other issues. They're either going to involve too much work, or be inconvenient, or simply not practically possible. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Two images
On 07/01/2021 22:29, Bill W wrote:
On Jan 7, 2021, Melanie van Buren wrote Maybe if you read my two topics and the comments therein very carefully the penny would drop. I'm also not on here to promote a website or any other business. Again, as commented. Yes, well I think I can guess what you’re talking about. The thing is, bragging about selling what I think you’re talking about as if you’re winning some competition on a photography discussion group does not make sense. What you are selling would not be most readily described as photography, but as something else a bit more clear. And posting these brags on a usenet group populated entirely by men - folks who would be far more likely to be purchasers of your work than sellers of the same thing. It’s admirable that you want to learn, and everyone is very welcome to jump in here - it has been slow, for one thing. But another thing I don’t get is the anger. What’s that all about? You’re getting honest comments from some very smart people with a lot of photography knowledge (and I’m trying, too). So keep posting. And feel free to post some of those other “pictures”... First thought? Oh, do **** off. Second thought? I'm not angry. I just don't have time for men who don't read what is written and who project or bring too much baggage into the room. I'm positively nice compared to some reactions. No sorry. Photography is photography. Period. I don't publish anything too overt. I prefer art or erotica or possibly something self-expressive which might touch on the edges of feminist photography. Anything I learn with this photography domain can translate to other photography domains. Also how a photograph is interpreted is dependant on context and as much in your mind as anything in the actual picture. For example I could take the type of picture you would see in a brochure or lifestyle magazine to pick two similar types with slightly different tilts and they would still sell as the audience is looking for something else because of the context. The context changes the interpretation. I like Helmut Newtons pictures for the composition and light. There's plenty of his pictures I admire technically and can appreciate as art I don't actually like and wouldn't do myself for a lot of reasons. I like a lot of other pictures too and just because I haven't talked about them or posted attempts doesn't mean I don't know about them. Maybe stop trying? I don't need people to "try". I'm not an idiot. I also don't brag. I'm also perfectly capable of critiquing my own photos. There isn't a single fault with the two pictures I have now posted I didn't already know about. Yes, my pictures are cackhanded and lazy and get basic technical things wrong. I KNOW THIS. It's also not the first time in my life I started doing something new or taking it more seriously. Like I said, it's not still life or a landscape. They are a lot easier. This is different. It's like picking up a piece of clay for the first time or a fancy recipe and put what you know into practice and eff up then do it again. -- Melanie van Buren |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apple has confirmed that it's automatically scanning images backed up to iCloud to ferret out child abuse images. | Arlen Holder | Digital Photography | 0 | November 13th 20 12:16 AM |
Converting Konica Picture Show images to JPEG images | nospam | Digital Photography | 0 | November 28th 16 03:16 AM |
Converting Konica Picture Show images to JPEG images | Alan Browne | Digital Photography | 0 | December 31st 15 02:47 PM |
Converting Konica Picture Show images to JPEG images | Savageduck[_3_] | Digital Photography | 1 | May 30th 14 08:06 PM |
clear images on auto, noisy images on manual | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 4 | June 19th 07 03:27 PM |