File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Im Back.

Today i did a serious shoot (i thought so atleast.) It was my first time taking band "promos" for a press kit, so i was a little pressured. They said they didn't need anything fancy, so this is what i have so far.

what say you /p/ ?
>> Anonymous
Unless the guy in the center is the only one that matters, I think you are putting too much attention on him. The guys on the sides are blurry/aberrated. I would also lower the camera a bit (or change the angle to a more top down perspective).
>> Anonymous
what's with the $10 eBay fish eye adapter?
>> Anonymous
>>182113

not going out to buy a $500 wide angle for my first shoot
>> Anonymous
Off topic, but are you from the 610 or anywhere else in PA?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
hey, I made your image more cool. great band shot, you can probably charge them $120 for a print, $150 if you took it with a Nikon b/c of the extra quality.
>> Anonymous
>>182121not going out to buy a $500 wide angle for my first shoot

too bad there's no way to rent lenses lol

what a world we live in
>> Anonymous
IMO, next time use a smaller aperture, there will be more detail and less distorted depth of field.
>> Anonymous
let's take bets on what camera OP has

i say D40
>> Anonymous
>>182129
The DOF looks fine, nothing in the back is out of focus.
>> Anonymous
>>182131

Doesn't matter that much, but probably a Canon Rebel XT(i) or Nikon D40... maybe even a Sony, lol.
>> Anonymous
>>182122

yes, good ol' 610 Pennsylvania

and sorry i lost my exif guise ;_; canon rebel fag here, and more of a fag <- grey body
>> Anonymous
>>182144
>silver body
You stand, corrected.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>182149

this is like, at least 2 times better than the first one, minus the guy looking down
>> Anonymous
>>182149

kind of looks like film
i like this one the best

but get some fucking exif next time.
>> Anonymous
>>182149
>>182134

610 FTW!

And anyway, just don't save in .PNG next time.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
but wait
i used my brand new photoshoooop on this pic

MS paint, i think its called.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>182149
just a little modernization
>> Anonymous
>>182158

lol'd
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
in your honest opinion /p/... should i shoop this, or just leave it how it is.

i mean, LENS FLARE IS OBLIGATORY...

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:05:15 00:14:12Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/4.5Exposure ProgramShutter PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias1.7 EVMetering ModePatternFlashFlash, Compulsory, Red-Eye ReduceFocal Length35.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>182156
this one is excellent. Did you do more with this lighting?
>> Anonymous
>>182169

i took everyone in the bands individual shots. Some were hits, and some were misses.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
after this shot, the vocalist (in brown) gave me a hint that he was done taking pictures for the day.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:05:15 00:28:06Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/4.5Exposure ProgramShutter PriorityISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias2 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length35.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>182177
Probably because you were bending down with your head near his crotch.
>> Anonymous
>>182177
I'm sure every band wants their picture taken in your mother's living room. Seriously, find a real place to shoot and invest in lighting. The shadows they cast and the ones on their faces are simply ridiculous looking.
>> Anonymous
I like these>>182101
>>182149
>>182156
>>182165
Wondering though, why is all of this so soft? What lens were you using? And you did shoot raw, right? You might wanna push up sharpening somewhat.
>> Anonymous
>>182194
>Wondering though, why is all of this so soft?
Cheap fisheye attachment.
>What lens were you using?
See above.
>And you did shoot raw, right? You might wanna push up sharpening somewhat.
WHAT
>> Anonymous
>>182190


Mother's living room? these were taken in an abandoned warehouse. I dont know if this is what your mother's living room looks like.

and as far as comments about lighting, i'd rather not shoot a metalcore band in a studio. thanks though.
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>182101
almost awesome... but the ugly ugly distortion on the guys on the left and right totally kills it
i love the lighting though, kickass

>>182149
this one's nice, but the expression of the right guy is lame

>>182156
awesome!! you should've taken a head shot with a 50mm lens or something along those lines with the same light setup IMO

>>182165
i dunno, i think it sucks compared to the rest.


OP i'm curious about your other stuff now, i'm liking what i see
have an online gallery you could link me to?
>> Anonymous
>>182223
abandoned warehouses have really plain drapes where you are. they are kickass at my abandoned warehouses.
>> Anonymous
OP Here

I'm not sure if I've got the balls to link you to my flickr. I know better then that. (In b4 yahoo sucks). Now that I think about it, 75% of the shit on my flickr blows, so have at it...

www.flickr.com/photos/danielmcgee/
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>182156
This one was the only one i really liked out of the set. Looking through your flickr, you should have taken all the individual shots like this.

>>182149
acutally, this one is good too.
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>182257
Damn you're improving quick
Well, keep at it
You need to work a lot more with people, you're almost instantly good at it
>> Anonymous
>>182101
I was hoping so much that this was a troll, because these are truly terrible photos.
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>182389
funny how you don't have photos any better than this though, you shit stain
>> Anonymous
>>182389
Troll. Srsly, post something better yourself or give som constructive criticism. This whole "shitsux" mentality is fucking lame.

>>182156
Awesome, the lightning is great. The other shots are ok. Work on getting a more interesting or less distracting background. Also, loose the fisheye effect, use an ordinary wide angle lens or just step back a few steps. The distortion is too much and the fisheye adepter is too soft.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>182396
O hai. Lifestyle/promo shots you say?
>>182417
You want real criticism?
1. Fisheyes are a tool that have an extremely limited utility, and should only be used in very select situations, and only then if they will not turn out cheap and looking like you put a glass bowl over your lens.
The perspective shit here adds nothing to the overall photo, it's just cloying.
2. Lighting (Or shooping). the 'halos' around the subjects are a distracting element, and ugly.
3. Composition. Oh, hey, symmetry! I fucking love looking at boring things!

And so on.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>182438
More.
And yes, every element of this photo is intentional.
>> Anonymous
If you're working with distortion you have to work with it, not just shoot normally and let it do what it does.

I don't see why you would want the distortion here, though, just get any wide or normal (I know I'm in the minority, but I think shots like this look best with a normal or slightly wide focal length, ~35-~50mm 35mm equivalent range, going any shorter into wide or longer into normal doesn't turn out as well IMO) that doesn't look like shit and you're set.

>>182149
is the only one where the distortion adds to it, and is good. The rest just don't work.

>>182156uses the distortion well, but it still sucks.
>> Anonymous
>>182440
LENS FLAAARE
>> Anonymous
Thanks to everyone who posted positive c&c in this thread, as well as giving me some pointers for future shooting. I appreciate those who took the time to look through my flickr as well. Sorry I couldn't have more of an extensive gallary for you.
>> Anonymous
>>182438
Good. Continue writing posts like this one instead of posts like the previous one you wrote.
>> Anonymous
>AWELLTHOUGHTTRAGEDY3.png
>AWELLTHOUGHTTRAGEDY3
>AWELLTHOUGHTTRAGEDY

Hardcore, lawl.

The fat kid looks left out.
>> Anonymous
im just happy theres an actual thread with photos, and not fucking gear.

win.
>> Anonymous
>>182468
I'd rather have a good gear thread than a shitty photo thread. Then again, those things are rare.
>> Anonymous
>>182101
Usually bans in promo shots don't wear other bans tee shirts.
>> Anonymous
>>182477
Actually, for smaller bands, they usually do, to pay tribute.
>> Anonymous
>>182472
Actually, I'd rather have shitty photographs.
>> Anonymous
this thread sucks and all the pictures in it suck. stop bumping.
>> Anonymous
>>182124

Are you kidding? If you charge a local band $120 for one print you're a shithead


Also, these pictures are alright, but they could be much much better
>> Anonymous
>>182440

worst photo in thread
>> Anonymous
for the way /p/ has been lately, these photos are bad at all.
>> Anonymous
I like OP pic. It's solid, it's simple, and you made them look like a band.
Don't let these bastards get you down.
>> Anonymous
>>182746
It makes the people on the ends look like fucking mutants...
Yeah, solid
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>182438
is this shot meant to show you're better than OP?
i'm falling asleep
your criticism was good though, i'll give you that

>>182440
lol wtf
horrible poop
>> Anonymous
way to shoot a bunch of pictures of dudes with their hands in their pockets. fucking boring
>> Anonymous
>>182440
The people you hang out with are unforgivably white.