Almost Good Shots

I always look at this shot and think...why doesn't this work!! hehe
8711409170_84e30e24fc_z.jpg

Like it!!
 
For me, if it is not museum or portfolio material, it has good trash potential. We all have borderline shots we hope will oiffer some use in the future. But I don't have time to fool with trash. And I have no shortages of images.

I put a few of my rejects here:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/Danielteolijr

I have lots more, but they show up on a Google image search with my name. I don't like that, so I scaled back on donations to the Wiki. I want my prime stuff to show up with my name searches, not my low end stuff. (I also put a few good shots on the Wiki mixed in with the low end photos for this very reason of upgrading the image search.) If I had to do it again, I would not have put any of my photos on the Wiki except for test results.

The 'Steeplechase' would have been nice if i shot in RAW. But, being an old film photog and just starting digital. I didn't know what RAW was so, I used low res JPEG.

My photos that are lower quality than are on the Wiki usually gets trashed. But, even blurred up messes can be great shots...

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/photobooth/110321_elisabeth-_p4656crop.jpg

by Mary Ellen Mark
 
Last edited:
Following DragonHeart's theme... Ugh I was so mad when I got the roll developed only to find I had done the same!

 
Photobomber!
john and cyndi_1.jpg
 
Hedgcoe hand project, first shot. Oh my.

handse.jpg
 

Most reactions

Back
Top