File :-(, x, )
:D Anonymous
Yeah so Im a 1st year photography student. Im sure a couple of you will remember me since I had some distinctive pictures. anyway I want some critiqueness for my new pictures
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareMicrosoft Windows Photo Gallery 6.0.6000.16386Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2007:12:01 21:58:44
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareMicrosoft Windows Photo Gallery 6.0.6000.16386Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2007:11:30 18:48:34
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareMicrosoft Windows Photo Gallery 6.0.6000.16386Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2007:10:18 14:52:28
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
oh yeah and i know this pictures crap but still its one i developed

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareMicrosoft Windows Photo Gallery 6.0.6000.16386Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2007:12:01 22:03:49
>> Anonymous
same comments as last time: needs less blown out and contrast.
>> Anonymous
>>96663

less huh, in that merrygoround picture I have every single shade of gray :(
>> Anonymous
>>96663

what do you mean by blown out anyway? yes, im uber newb >:)
>> Anonymous
>>96661
i think you already posted this one btw. if not, stop taking the same pics over and over.
>> Anonymous
>>96666

i wasnt sure if i posted that one or not :(
>> Vincent
I think its your processing methods, it makes the contrast super high, so you blow both the shadow detail and the highlight detail (Thats what the complaints are)

Overexposing portraits usually works alright, BUT overexposed landscapes / object photography RARELY does.
Next time try a less contrasty film / developer method (You can always edit the digitals afterwards)

Not sure how you do prints, but most labs now scan the negatives (or positives) then Print from digital files. IF thats the case then I would work more on maximizing your dynamic range on film and doing your editing in post (where you have an undo button)

I like the girls portrait, I'm an oldfag but I don't remember that..
>> Anonymous
>>96670

I wish i could do all that post stuff but I have to do the nice old fashioned way. The 1st pic was really really bad. I had to burn in that back little hill for like an extra 2 minutes after the rest of the picture (which was done after about 40 seconds...) the sky was basically impossible. Seeing as there was none on the film >.>
>> Vincent
>>96672
Well whats your film and developer? (and timing?)
>> Anonymous
>>96673

heh I have no clue what the film is. I got it from my neighboor...its some stuff he used like 40 years ago but apparently is still good. I dont know the developer...lol but i dont know the timing! 2 30 6 10! woo!
>> Anonymous
>>96681
you are obviously a really good student.
>> Anonymous
I like the high contrast; it gives it a distinctive look. Probably not right for every shot, but it works for these pretty well, especially>>96660and>>96657.

The others aren't very good photographs, too, but those two are good, especially>>96657, which is very good.
>> Anonymous
>>96660

yeah the high contrast in this picture I think adds a really dark feeling to the forest in that picture