File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Pentax K1000, Kodak Pro 200 film, 50/2 SMC.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
As always, feel free to flame away. Creative flaming nets you more street cred among your peers.
>> creative flaming Anonymous
shitsux
>> Anonymous
Sooo.. ..what is this? Your test roll or something?
>> Anonymous
>>197611
How do you mean.
>> Anonymous
I suppose I should be honored that I didn't get flamed by the thousand fires of Bogard'an. But no one has any comments?
>> sage !ccqXAQxUxI
These would have looked better if you had used a $10 Targus CPL from Wal-Mart.
>> Anonymous
>>197886
Goddamnit.
>> Anonymous
the first two are nice
>> sage !btr76hqMa6
>>197946

Maybe you can go back and reshoot with a $10 Targus CPL from Wal-Mart?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>197853

these stink. they are underexposed, uncomposed, and not worth the time it took to look. you have the wrong film, for different reasons, each time, and a bald misunderstanding of how your camera works.

HOWEVER.

the first photo is interesting, only for the fact that you shot , more or less by accident, sothing interesting -a person. recompose this photo, that is, crop it until you have some elementary composition in place, and you will have something worth looking at twice.

fo you, i would suggest sticking to the rules- rule of threes, rule of 16, rule of use higher ISO film on cloudy days, rule of look through the viwefinder until you see something you like, etc.

here, I'll go first.

now you try.
>> Anonymous
>>197948

are you crazy?
>> Anonymous
>>197958
That crop is so tight and meaningless though, I don't think you should be giving advice.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>197964

you do it, then.

actually, i liked the first thing i saw, which was because my monitor was cranked down. see pic.

it's not like i'm trying all that hard, either- i didn't shoot vin diesel at his day job, and i hate geese.
>> Anonymous
>>197958
kind of agree with this poster but uh, you cant really crop that into a good photo even though there's some elements in it that could make a good photo (mainly the guy imo)
i'd assume this is probably like some of the very first pics you've ever tried shooting while thinking about it instead of just hitting the shutter randomly, so keep shooting.
>> Anonymous
>i'd assume this is probably like some of the very first pics you've ever tried shooting while thinking about it instead of just hitting the shutter randomly, so keep shooting.
You are sadly right. I've been spoiled by my DSLR, and unspoiled by high film developing costs. That's why I've been shooting with film lately.
>> Anonymous
ok forget that these are boring as shit and composed/exposed poorly.

why do they look so nasty? if you're scanning shitty walmart prints or something, stop. get a neg scanner or pay the 2 bucks for them to put it on cd. it won't be great, but it will look better than this grey muddy shit.