File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Just got back my B&W roll of film back. I decided to put some pictures up. They're not amazing in any sense, but constructive criticism and feedback is appreciated.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:17 21:39:05Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1228Image Height1818
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:17 21:53:26Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1228Image Height1818
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:17 21:45:16Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1228Image Height1668
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:17 21:49:18Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1818Image Height1228
>> Anonymous
You might want to find some models other than Ray, Garrett, Tom, Josh, and Cliff - mainly because these fellas don't quite seem to grasp their motivation.

Some issues:
>>237517
Posing is too stiff. It's obvious you told Garrett to stand like this, and he's not doing what he would normally do. I smoke, and I don't stand like that. Also, as an active duty USMC SSgt., I'd appreciate it if you ditch that cover.

>>237518
If the focal point here was Garrett's junk, good job. I'm not sure what exactly you were attempting to do here, but you've blown up on the pad. Also, lose the cover.

>>237519
Could be better if you cropped the top edge at his ankles. It will throw the balance off a little, but I think it might work slightly better that way.

>>237523
No, no, and no. You're posing people and you've clearly got no clue how to go about doing that. I'd recommend just shooting them for a bit, then _THINK_ about how they naturally move before trying to dictate their positioning.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Thank you, I appreciate your feedback. As for the first one, I actually didn't ask him to pose, but I think I simply photographed him in an awkward position, while he was bringing the cigarette down. The last one, also not posed per say, but I told them to just stand with their backs towards me. But yes, awkward position. What do you mean exactly by "ditch the cover?" Also, can someone critique my composition in these pictures? I know that 237518 is not so good, due to many mistakes, but I would like to know what people think of the others. Thanks

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:17 17:48:36Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1818Image Height1228
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>237793
I'm guessing he doesn't like the hat.

Quick composition tip from looking at the thumbnails: you're leaving too much headspace, a pretty common mistake. Try and put the heads of your subjects a little higher up in the frame, because the extra bit of sky isn't interesting.
>> Anonymous
>>237793
Get rid of the hat. Some military do not like civs wearing their outfits.
>> Anonymous
Thanks!
Oh, and he's not a civ. He's going through basic training right now for the Marines. I believe that was his father's hat.
>> Anonymous
>>237793

237617 here.

>>237797and>>237798are right, I don't like the hat. That and it doesn't do anything for the composition.

>>237793I actually lilke. This is a lot less staged and more candid than the others. Are you developing these yourself? Furthermore, I assume you're scanning prints here and not the negatives. Whoever printed these used warmer paper, (not that this is a problem) which means that you've a brownish tinge to some of them.

I tend to scan negatives in grayscale and then convert them over to Adobe RGB, following which I'll apply a very light blue filter to give them a cooler tone. Just personal preference.

If you are developing your own negatives, I'm concerned by what seems like a density problem in>>237793. The gap between the two rocks has an inconsistent spot.

Again, this may be attributable to too much agitation (or bad temperature control), but I'd probably guess you're having an exposure problem before any of that.

If I was to print this, I'd probably split filter this to bring the highlights out of the rocks.
>> Anonymous
No, I don't develop them myself, but I would really like to. The inconsistency spot was me trying to darken that spot a bit because a processing mistake led to it being overblown. I'm relatively new to photography, but I'm guessing that scanning negatives is superior to scanning prints? Is the quality better?