File :-(, x, )
Area Focus Anonymous
ITT: hr pics without center focus
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
One I took.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
original content, on my /hr/?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>399796
samefag with more OC
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>399799
one more
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Orange Juice... taken with a film camera (shitty film too) so that explains the darkness. the shutter speed was messed too
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
here I just took this one.
>> Anonymous
>>400753
>>400753
>>400753
>>400753
>>400753


you should follow suit. Kill yourself.

learn to take fucking photos....im not asking you to be Ansel Fucking Adams...but for the love of god, at least get your photos in focus or far enough out to make it look intentional.

FUCK!

well then why the fuck would you post it? Out of Focus, incorrectly exposed....and in my opinion, too much film grain....kill yourself.


>>400811

>>400811
>>400811
>>400811
>>400811
>> Anonymous
>>400899
FUCK!

Learn to post what the fuck were you thinking, your formatting make no sense!
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
     File :-(, x)
like this?
>> Anonymous
>>400811

is that en E90f+ ? liek mine?

if so you fucking rock.
>> Anonymous
>>400922
Nah, mine is the A90f+, pretty close tho.
>> Anonymous
>>400899

Goddamnit, you're a fat fucking prick.
>> Anonymous
>>401450

Fat...no. Prick...maybe.

For real though. There isn't a single photo in here that is worthy of publishing. Every single photo has at least one LARGE flaw in it.

I understand that this isn't exactly a photography critique but atleast have alittle pride in your work. Just because you shoot a role of film dosen't mean that there is a good photo from it. It is a very rare case when you don't have to shoot and then re-shoot to get the correct shot.

all of the photos are of stationary objects...they weren't running away or anything. There is no reason for any of them to be shot at a high ISO (Unless you wanted the grain) and there is no reason for any of them to be incorrectly exposed or out of focus.
>> Anonymous
>>401675

Jealous much?
>> Anonymous
Awesome shots for use as backgrounds. Their soft focus really works well and does not distract from composited foreground elements.
>> Anonymous
>>401702

no

>>401779

Soft focus? Soft focus is what was used for 1980's senior photos. Theses are just NOT in focus.
>> Anonymous
>>401675
NERRRRRRD RRRRRAAAAAAGE
Jesus, dude, you may be good photographer, but you're a shitty teacher and worse poster. If you want someone to benefit from your wisdom, you shouldn't start by recommending suicide.