File :-(, x, )
Looking for Creative Input on my photo Scolio
Hi guys, I am playing around with long exposures and this is one of my first attempts. Any suggestions for theis photo aside from lens flare, copyright info, vignetting, killing myself or any other smart-assed comment I didn't mention here?
>> Anonymous
>>211919
Ego will not get you constructive criticism, even if anonymous is a dickface.
>> Scolio
>>211913
Yeah I understand. I just like that building, which does nothing for others.

>>211917
it is fuzzy because I forgot to hit it with some unsharpen mask when shrinking it down so small. This was taken with a Nikon d200 and was in perfect focus. Yeah, I have too much train track in there. There was however a awesome historical train bridge that I was standing on while taking this, perhaps I will go back.
>> Anonymous
>>211913
Goddamn artfags. I understand what you are getting at, but you don't need a reason to take a picture. You don't need social commentary for your work. You just need it to look nice.
>> Anonymous
>>211927
This is why you will always take snapshots. If you want to take photographs seriously, you need to start thinking about what you're doing and why.

Short of that, you're just jerking off.
>> Anonymous
>>211930
Look at the artwork that has stood the test of time, in any discipline. How much of it was created to look pretty and nothing else. Not one fucking bit of it.
Samefag/artfag/whatever. Call me what you want - I know how this shit works.
>> Anonymous
>>211932
>>211928

You're right, just about all of HC-B's work is shitty snapshots. That and most landscape photography. OH, like Ansel Adams.

Oh and any truly objective photojournalism's quickly dismissed and fails to stand the test of time. Nat Geo's full of hacks. Call me what you want - I know how this shit works.
>> Anonymous
>>211907
turn up the contrast

if you could go back i would say try some hdr shots, could work well there
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
     File :-(, x)
>>211942
Cartier-Bresson's work isn't "shitty snapshots", do you understand a single thing about composition?

But you also compared all landscape photography and Ansel Adam's shots to snapshots, so I'm just going to assume you're either a total hack or a troll.

Pic related; just a snapshot, right? lol

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution130 dpiVertical Resolution130 dpiImage Created2006:03:30 02:52:19Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width400Image Height597
>> Anonymous
>>211950
He was being sarcastic about the other posters comments about how pictures are "Never" about just looking good / pretty.

Basically he was arguing that a lot of HCB's and Ansel Adam's pictures are simply to look good and there isn't a lot of meaning behind the pictures (which is a very subjective term)
>> noclue !!2yUmAID3520
     File :-(, x)
it's not very well thought out in every aspect. but can save a lot by cropping some. pic related. also you might wanna retake it from the place pointed facing the camra a little more to the left

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePaint.NET v3.22Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpi
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>211951
I kind of figured, thats why I called troll. either way though, that's completely off and shows that he expects "meaning" to mean that it sends some societal message or something. If a picture makes you feel an emotion, overpowered like a lot of Adams' stuff does to me, then it has a message/meaning.

A picture of traintracks really doesn't have that, there are diagonal lines, there are horizontal lines, and there are vertical lines but none of them dominate the image and they aren't leading my eye to each other or anything.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Go square or go home. Cliche-boring shot is cliche-boring.

Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:06:24 02:41:30