File :-(, x, )
Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
How's the processing? Me just fucking around
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70SCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)25 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:12:14 22:53:12Exposure Time1/10 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceCloudy WeatherFlashFlash, Return DetectedFocal Length17.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1518Image Height1005RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastSoftSaturationHighSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
     File :-(, x)
shit that's huge... slightly smaller version

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70SCamera SoftwareACD Systems Digital ImagingMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)25 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:12:16 21:46:13Exposure Time1/10 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceCloudy WeatherFlashFlash, Auto, Return DetectedFocal Length17.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1139Image Height754RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastSoftSaturationHighSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
nice, but those white reeboks kinda don't fit the overall style
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>101501

ahhh cheers, yeah i actually wanted the girls on the chairs (we had some friends who model) but i was just testing.

I'll go back sometime and get proper lighting. The Trainers guy is funny as hell.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>101503

Tell that whippersnapper to sit up properly and get a haircut.
>> Anonymous
>>101503
I don't see what's so bad about your current lighting. Although it can be improved with more shadows, I think.

And don't replace guys with girls. Girl models just don't go well with sound equipment and faux Soviet posters.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>101506

But the girls are well hot. If only my girlfriend wasn't there that night... i would have loved to gave been rejected by them. oooooh yeah.

The current lighting is ONE single Speedlight... i think i had the LS II on it so i was damn please with what turned out. I think with two extra sources of light i can have it down pat... or just stay with the current :D

>>101505

oh that's him being a slut. see them legs spread? ahhh... he makes me laugh
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>101506
>And don't replace guys with girls. Girl models just don't go well with sound equipment and faux Soviet posters.
False. Girl models go with *everything*.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>101514

fuckin eh, esepcially these girls, now i don't consider myself gorgeous, but i certainly aint ugly... except in the prescence of these girls i feel like the ugliest bridge troll.
>> Anonymous
>>101491
What "processing"? All you're doing is screwing around in PS. By the way, the contrast, color balance and sharpening are all bad.

Unless you wanted to make your D70 output look like an el cheapo POint and Shoot...
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>101550

What's the difference between "processing" and "screwing around in Photoshop" then?

You can call it whatever you like as long as you get the desired results.
>> Anonymous
>>101555
Knowing what you want and playing with the controls.

Experimentation is nice, but sooner or later you need to know what does what to what and incorporate them.

Screwing around means that you have no tools.

Proper adjustment for a certain look does.

Got it?
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>101568

So it's just semantics and your personal preference then. Best sticking to criticising his photos than quibbling over the terms he used to describe the processing. Especially when they were valid to start with. "Processing" doesn't inherently hold any positive or negative connotations. I can "process" something badly just as I can "process" something well, on the computer or in the darkroom.

Your criticisms and opinions of the photos are no less valid, of course.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>101550

the editing are all bad? nice constructive criticism there dude. You critique is smell jelly.

>>101577

I knew exactly what i was doing with the process i can walk you through each of the 5 layers. It's about trying to get one step closer to processing work like Zach Taylor and stuff Kaught does too. :D

And of course his criticisms aren't valid... WHAT criticisms? he just said they were bad... that's not criticism, that's borderline trolling :D

Especially since he hasn't seen the original thus not knowing what the extent of the processing was... yet he's still making a judgment on it.

My point proven.