chairs n track

[bribrius]

 

[mmaria]

#1 if I was there I would probably shot this in landscape to get the symmetry. In portrait you have that trees on the left that are larger than the ones on the right. The shot is slightly leaned to the right and it could be better in bw

#2 maybe a different composition, and maybe I'm completely wrong because this is a crappy computer but did the bg go completely black?

 

[bribrius]

#1 if I was there I would probably shot this in landscape to get the symmetry. In portrait you have that trees on the left that are larger than the ones on the right. The shot is slightly leaned to the right and it could be better in bw

#2 maybe a different composition, and maybe I'm completely wrong because this is a crappy computer but did the bg go completely black?

my ten second processing attitude sucks. I can admit that.

I posted this in the just for fun section earlier. still pretty much a chit shot though.

 

[hamlet]

I should travel more. Love the first one, but i would probably expose for the ground and for the sky then mix them in a blender .

The second one looks underexposed.

 

[hamlet]

View attachment 75198

This one is also very nice, but you've lost that beautiful sky completely.

 

[bribrius]

View attachment 75198

This one is also very nice, but you've lost that beautiful sky completely.

lost in transition. suppose I could go find it. The second one is high sun. I don't like bright photos generally. I dropped the exposure to get rid of it and up the contrast a touch. Result is the background went black. I really just wanted the picnic table in the background anyway what is black the shadow from a tree. I didn't put much time into it. I just really cant stand bright photos i find them hard on the eyes, and it was too bright from the high sun so I dropped it hard. shadow became black. That would have actually made sense to expose for the background and foreground separately, but honestly I wouldn't put that kind of time into it. I give processing about ten seconds a shot or none usually and have about 600 hundred photos to go through f#ck the background. My photography attitude pretty much sucks it is becoming too much like work. :roll: I've noticed there are very few photos now I enjoy taking I probably should stay in the "just for fun section" until i decide to curb my attitude and enjoy this more i'm purposely throwing them under the bus at this point.. :scratch: I might be due for a long break seems i just don't give a chit lately. .

 

[hamlet]

You can go to museums, watch plays, study the works of people who have done photography their whole life. Watching movies also helps, i particularly like watching the works of Stanley Kubrick. I love his cinematography.

 

[bribrius]

Want a bench? The chairs above, bench here, most of these are cropped down from photos of the kids summer camp I shot over the weekend. I've been going through the photos for two days.

 

[bribrius]

You can go to museums, watch plays, study the works of people who have done photography their whole life. Watching movies also helps, i particularly like watching the works of Stanley Kubrick. I love his cinematography.

Thanks for the input. I was thinking a good drunk and a weekend without a camera.

 

[hamlet]

You can go to museums, watch plays, study the works of people who have done photography their whole life. Watching movies also helps, i particularly like watching the works of Stanley Kubrick. I love his cinematography.

Thanks for the input. I was thinking a good drunk and a weekend without a camera.

Try Barry Lyndon or 2001, they are not very bright movies.


Also an example for you to study:
The Cinematography of ?2001: A Space Odyssey? (1968) @ Evan E. Richards

 

[bribrius]

You can go to museums, watch plays, study the works of people who have done photography their whole life. Watching movies also helps, i particularly like watching the works of Stanley Kubrick. I love his cinematography.

Thanks for the input. I was thinking a good drunk and a weekend without a camera.

Try Barry Lyndon or 2001, they are not very bright movies.


Also an example for you to study:
The Cinematography of ?2001: A Space Odyssey? (1968) @ Evan E. Richards

cool link I looked through some. Cant put much time in now I have other things I need to get done.
Here is where the chairs came from. Unnecessary shot really. The white building on the right in the frame is one of the kids dormitories. Really just shooting the grounds and for a anniversary game they are having later this summer. Photo scavenger hunt sort of thing. Involves me taking photos that are obscure. They hand them out during the anniversary celebration of the kids camp and everyone is suppose to go find where the photo was taken. "see how well people know the camp" kind of things. suppose to be in a couple different levels of difficulty to find. so im taking photos of some pretty abstract things as well. I still have one more time up there I think. it is turning into a seriously lot of work.


think this is dark enough?
no worries. i'm not using that one just playing with it.
mod really should move this thread to off topic or somewhere else....:lmao:

cool link. I looked through a little. Some nice stuff there. I will look more later when I get more time.

 

[hamlet]

think this is dark enough? View attachment 75210.

I really like this shot. I would be proud if i shot this, though i'm not sure if adding a little detail of the parts that are completely black would make this better or not? Just a little bit of detail that is enough to barely see what is there but not to distract from the parts you've forced the viewers attention to.

 

[mmaria]

View attachment 75210

hey, I really like this one

 

[snerd]

This is a great capture!

 

[bribrius]

View attachment 75210

hey, I really like this one

it really isn't what I am supposed to be doing though I keep getting off track....