File :-(, x, )
heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>> Anonymous
"And then she put this many fingers up my ass and I ejaculated."
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>>122988
I LOL'D HARD :D
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>122990
Fantastic.
>> Anonymous
>>122986

that hand it the foreground is distracting
>> egas
>>122994


seriously, nothing is perfect, even your cock sucking abilities
>> Anonymous
>>122986
Perfect.

>>122990
Good, but I would've framed a little looser.

>>122991
Pretty good, but again it seems framed a little tight. Also, it seems dark to me, but I'm not on a calibrated monitor right now so that means crap for the moment. I'll get back to you later tonight when I hook my calibrated monitor up.

>>122988
Fuck your journalism career, sneak into your paper's offices late at night and change the caption to this.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>123014
In regards to the third shot, it's super dark, yeah. I was metered for the outside light, so it's mostly shadow with just a few highlights defining their form.

The tight framing is intentional as well. When you shoot for a paper, bear in mind that it will never, ever, ever run larger than about... 4"x6". And that's when it's DOM, which it probably isn't. Shooting nice and tight is essential to conveying your message. It's just a good habit photographically, as well.

One of the AP photographers around here, Harry Cabluck, is fond of saying, "tighter, tighter, tighter". I rarely see him with anything shorter than an 85mm, because frankly, that's what papers run. Now, these shots aren't necessarily going to run, they're just my personal choices that I flickr'd and blogged.

Whether you agree or not, there are aesthetic reasons behind my framing, and disturbing the frame and layering elements are two of my intentions. This tends to make for very tight compositions.