File :-(, x, )
Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
I fuckin hate Flickr sometimes.

For every great photographer there's half a dozen hacks and even more wanker who will constantly suck their asses.

That number is exponentially higher if the hack photographer is female.

Take this shot for example

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ilinas/1450850668/

It's blurred, out of focus and just plain shitty. IF it was posted on /p/ we'd tear it apart... but because it's a female... the amount of seedy male knobs out there saying 'oh it's good, oh it's fantastic' just makes me a little sick.

/end moan :D
>> Anonymous
Not as bad as these people http://photography-on-the.net/forum/
>> Anonymous
lawl, I know that bitch IRL
>> Anonymous
pretty sure you're just jealous that you don't get as many comments on your flickr.

srsly, man. this is a problem as old as the internet itself.
>> Anonymous
well the same could be said about any female in any predominately male area ever.
fucking danica patrick..

also, that photo of hers is awful. it just feels cheap and its horrible all around.
>> Anonymous
>>80031

although, on second thought, now that i actually look at that flickr page again, it's pretty fucking lolzy. look at the juxtaposition of her camwhorey self-portrait with all the profile pics of the dudez below. even the dog and the statue are smiling.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>80031

Thank you, I was waiting for you to arrive.

Now back to the topic at hand.
>> Anonymous
it looks like she stuck her head in a scanner to take that
>> annoyinmouse
the picture is not out of focus, what are you talking about?
however, either the light was bad or the white balance a bit off, because at full size the colors are boring for me.
and of course the very annoying distortion which I hate. You have to fix shit like that when you have a straight line in your picture running just parallel to the bottom/top of the frame.
But if she is a female, then "way to go babe! ZOMG it's gorgeous, I was just staring at it for like 5 minutes, and you know what - I dreamt about it last night, I just woke up and it was in my head, I can't remember the dream exactly, but I felt like crying WOW!"
>> Choamsky
>>80032

This man speaks the truth. Why are we always so nice to women? Because deep down we believe foolishly that there's a chance we may engage in sexual intercourse with said woman. News flash; You're not getting laid.

That photo isn't so bad, aside from being cropped too tightly and out of focus.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>80064

Oh btw, i really don't want this thread to seem misogynistic or anything. It's more a whinge at the LEGION upon LEGIONS of douche bags (MALE douche bags) who do indeed believe there's that slight chance of reproduction...
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>80072
lol i know what you mean, even on really stupid sites like myspace, see guys commenting about stupid phone camera pics of stupid myspace whores "wow i really love this photo, you look so beautiful here" bla bla bla
>> Anonymous
I don't like unoriginal pseudo-artsy portraits from egocentric camwhores either.

I wouldn't phrase it this way if I knew the girl, but I wouldn't say it's the best pic ever.
>> Anonymous
You know, she wouldn't notice all the male lapdog comments. She'd only notice the insults and criticisms.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>80377

... as times goes by my data for my argument strengthens... look at all the additional douche bags... god...
>> Anonymous
Dude, dude. Calm down and post one of your pictures and we'll let you know if you've got the ding dang right to come down like a motherfucker.
>> Anonymous
I agree the shot is bad, but it's not out of focus, just motion-blurred, I think.

At least her cheek seems to be in good focus.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>80395

Ding Dang? You can GTFO just for that. Way to miss the point of the thread. Bet you're one of the suckholes commenting on her shit right now.
>> Anonymous
>>80401

defensive much? and just what is the point of this thread? that guys like to comment on pictures taken by girls? so what?

her photos certainly aren't that bad. the picture isn't a self-portrait, it's a portrait of her sister. does it deserve all those glowing comments? nah, but lechery and photographers go together like fucking bread and butter. nothing new, so quit complaining.
>> Anonymous
>>80408
That doesn't make it okay. Seriously, one of the things I hate -the most- is the way people insist on sexualizing art and using it to get laid.
>> Anonymous
>>80409

it's unavoidable. artists are touchy-feely sensitive scumbags. every. single. one. of. them.
>> Anonymous
>>80410
And one would hope they'd be sensitive enough not to go for the shallowest sex imaginable.

Seriously, you think James Nachtwey is shacking up with some random cute soldier chick every night?
>> Anonymous
>>80411

two james nachtwey references in three days? busted!
>> Anonymous
>>80011
We should create our own /p/ Flickr account, And create a fake female persona and load it up with pics that are questionably bad..

Hell I might just do that on my own, WE need a face for the profile though..
>> Anonymous
>>80456

Anonymous agrees with that.
>> Anonymous
>>80456

i was thinking that /p/ needs a flickr account, or at least pool. not so much fake, but because there's good photography on here that disappears quick thanks to no archive.
>> Anonymous
>>80449
?
>> Anonymous
Alright its decided then, We need at least one Flickr account, Anyone one here lurk enough (+ have enough of a /p/ saved folder) To create a /p/ Pool account?

Or anyone have a believable female pic we can use for a bait persona?

For the Pool account We could have a forwarding email we use to dump in /p/'s better pics, And the account owner would get to decide which ones get posted or not. And then we can all argue wether or not they should be up when we check the flickr page.
>> Anonymous
>>80492
Would you like an actual /p/ girl to do it?
>> Anonymous
>>80078
i agree, but deviantart is even worse, and if you dis some cameraphone/scan that they did ull get banned or flamed.
>> extermin8tor
>>80397
trust me its blurred, she shot it at some weird exposure and moved. (eg she zoomed onto her face then used like 1/20th or 1/5 because she failed at cameras. plus its probably shot from the hand (ie typical camwhore photo) the lighting indicates she just shot the photo in some dark room with a light.

the particular bitch should be shot.
>> Anonymous
>>80408
here 'photos' ARE bad!, thats the thing. stop being a grumpy douche going off at the OP. he has a point.
>> extermin8tor
>>80456
hmm worth a shot.
>> Anonymous
>>80509
NO!
>> Anonymous
>>80525
Why the fuck not, Someone post their pic (or someone elses pic, just make sure you have a few to make this more believable) as credentials
>> /P/roject Flickr coordinator
In the meantime someone set up a forwarding adress to keep this all anonymous, I have the technology, So if need be I can Use one of mine to do so.

We need someone to volunteer to be our Admin for the /p/ersona page. No sharing passwords for this, we need one person only. Lurking on /p/ 24/7 isn't needed as most additions will be submitted by email.

Good writing skills, and "trap" like instincts, is a must. Please apply in this thread,
We can use our own flickr pages to get the comments started, and then after a large amount of groups have been joined the Desperate Flickr users will finish the rest for us.
>> Anonymous
>>80536
I'll apply. Give me a shot of the model and what camera they'll be using (something like, "I used to shoot with a EOS Rebel XTi, but then my dad bought me an EOS 5D, and I love it" would be great, but we'll have to find someone on here with a 5D willing to participate. Pskaught and who else on here has one?), and I'll whip up some profile page copy.
>> Anonymous
Another example I found, two clicks away from this girl's profile... ugh.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/beaujangles/page1/

And this is just horrible:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/beaujangles/508368352/
>> Anonymous
>>80541

these are really irrelevant, because there isn't a billion guys jizzing all over the place.
>> Anonymous
>>80542

see


http://www.flickr.com/photos/beaujangles/508368352/.

Excess of obviousness makes up for lack of quantity.
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
this thread is a great success. camwhore bitches are annoying indeed. I know only a few girls that can actually take photos. One of em has a few photos with herself on it, but doesn't whore herself.

>>80540
well we can just fake the EXIF photos. lets use all kinds of different cameras and relabel them as 5D photos. photos get posted on /p/ first, we shoop them accordingly, then post to flickr.

to give her a face, and find a way to post diverse landscapes across the world, lets say our girl travels a lot across the world and takes a lot of photos. we could make some glamour bitch with bling bling, jewels, pearls and all.
>> Anonymous
>>80544
Her dad runs some company, not some huge thing, but something where they've enough to basically subsidize her, and something where he would travel enough where she would end up travelling.

And not too much jewels and pearls... a huge diamond necklace as casual wear screams "rich and pathetic," but a Chanel purse screams "at least moderately wealthy and most likely moderately snotty."
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
>>80545
heheheh. I can supply photos of expensive stuff like crystal, silver, high-end fashion etc... as defocused or messed up as you people want it.

we do need one person to orchestrate the whole affair, so we do look credible enough
>> /P/roject Flickr coordinator
Ok weve got one application,
So someone is willing (whoever they are)
Please become a namefag if just temporarily.

We need an alias for you, so please repost in here with a suitable one.

Also now we need a female profile shot (PRobably 3 or 4 shots to make it credible)
Any /p/females who look cute enough to pull it off? (Or a hot Trap for the perfect poetic justice)

Heres the Email I set up for Forwarding, All I need is the applicant to email here, and I'll set it up to forward all incoming mail to their inbox.
projectflickr@anon.norristology.com

Also Strip All Exif data (Save to web etc) For sending pics in, we can't have too many cameras showing up on the profile page. Also a 5D might be overkill to claim to use, maybe an Xti? Its more believable in my opinion.
>> Ashley
     File :-(, x)
>>80576
Me on the left.
Am I hawt enough to be your profile girl?

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePanasonicCamera ModelDMC-FZ3Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)43 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2006:04:16 19:26:51Exposure Time1/13 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating400Exposure Bias2 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceFlashFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.60 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1008Image Height678RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationLowSharpnessSoft
>> jarryd
>>80576

I've got a 5D if still required.
>> Anonymous
>>80522
I can take clear photos at 1/5th, I don't see the problem.
Michael J Fox can't, obviously.

>>80541
Someone draw a rectangle (like the ones for the tatoo and the legs) around her crotch and comment "It's a trap"
>> Anonymous
>>80460
Thats a good idea, the only one that I know of is the the "/p/ Weekly Photo Contest" http://www.flickr.com/groups/4chanphaggots/

But thats in active.
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
>>or sending pics in, we can't have too many cameras showing up on the profile page. Also a 5D might be overkill to claim to use, maybe an Xti? Its more believable in my opinion.
claim its a 30D, pretty credible. also, post photos first to /p/ so we can rape them and forge a proper EXIF
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
You people are beautiful. I even appreciate the douche attacking me, cause suckasses like him are the reason why we're doing this.

To increase impressions of legitimacy, we need:

1. To get the account to join alot of groups, preferably those ones for Female photographers, seedy old men lurk there all the time.

2. If we have flickr accounts, write testimonies about the account (increases impression of legitimacy...though this can be left later on)

3. We should try and get some consistency in photos, by that i mean it'd be better to have 6 or 7 photos uploaded first by one person than to have 6 or 7 different individuals. As the stylistic difference may be more noticeable in the latter.

3. ???

4. Profit.
>> Anonymous
In b4 this plan peters out and nothing comes of it because nobody really cares that much.
>> /P/roject Flickr coordinator
Still waiting for an application email
projectflickr@anon.norristology.com

All we need now is someone to step up and create the account, and then I can use this email to forward all submissions to them.

>>80578
Also yes that would work, But guess what, LOL I know that picture. I know the guy on the rights name, And I know where that picture was taken.
So where the fuck did you get that from? (cause I doubt thats yours)
>> elf_man !fBgo7jDjms
>>80584
Since the group is already there, if anyone wants to use it to archive photos they like, feel free. Might give us a jumpstart on the photo contests if anyone's still interested.
>> Applicant For Copywriter Of This
>>80576
I don't know how to get a tripcode, to be honest. But I'll send an e-mail along later.

I still think a 5D would be the way to go: in addition to "omg yer hawt," you'll get some pretty sappy camera envy going on. Plus, unless someone shoots sports or wildlife, if they're not working on a tight budget, there's no reason why someone would get a 30D over a 5D. Same camera with different sensor and a slightly different spec sheet because of the 5D's age.
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
>>80660
in the namefield, fill in
"Applicant For Copywriter Of This#password"
place a # between your name and the password, the password gets encrypted to a tripcode. only with the right password you can generate one specific tripcode
>> Applicant For Copywriter Of This !6ltsl5iOS2
>>80664
>> Anonymous
Bump, keep this thread alive, I'm looking forward to this
>> Anonymous
>>80628

This. But I still kinda want to see it happen.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
LOL i just noticed the comments on that photo... hahaha...

but seriously, we need a someone to volunteer. I dont wanna represent /p/... i've got no talent. Werd
>> Anonymous
Last comment on OP's link:

"why would someone bother to leave a comment like that? these photography rules are for slaves... judging a photo by blurriness is just foolish... it's a great portrait and i think vmm787 and alec are just jealous of the attention you get... i like this shot very much... it makes me FEEL something... that's what a great photography does!!!"
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
i must admit, looking through her photos, i am kinda jealous, because i have no idea how to use photoshop to make photos look like that, i'm a PS n00b :$
>> Anonymous
>>80879
>t makes me FEEL something
Like a boner, amirite?

Seriously, the problem with the shot isn't the technical flaws, it's that there's nothing there at all in it. It's a MySpace-type shot taken with an APS-C size sensor and a decent lens.
>> Anonymous
>>80882
It's not too hard. Probably just putzing around in the usual stuff... curves, levels, saturation, etc.

I used to make some shots look like this somehow with those basics, but I outgrew the look of them and I don't remember exactly how I did it.
>> Anonymous
>>80882
Levels, Curves, Channel Mixer, Shadow/Highlight. It takes some experience, though.
For more complex shit, Selective Color and gradient or copy layers with various kinds of blending (mostly Soft Light or Hard Light). But overdoing it like she does in 3/4 of her photos is probably not a good idea.
>> Anonymous
More Flickr suckiness:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8117553@N03

Some girl gushing about people who have bought her a DSLR and a pro account.

And look in her "Nature" section... she used a motivational poster generator to put a border around two of her shots.

She's got two good shots of a military parade in her third section, but otherwise, it's just bad.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>80885
still too complex for me, maybe i'm just too lazy to learn.
My process goes, Point -> shoot -> dev -> scan -> resize -> upload
>> GENDER EQUALITY des
>>80888
Where are all the horny middle-aged women on the internet who'll buy me cameras?
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>80890
TRUTH BE TOLD!
>> Anonymous
>>80889
The "dev" step in your process is basically the same as Levels/Curves for digital pics. You do push or pull the film sometimes and use different kinds of paper, don't you?
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>80895
i get my C41 and E6 films developed and not cut only, then i scan it at home. I dont print to paper anymore, waste of time and money.
>> Anonymous
>>80898
I still get prints for my C41 because I like being able to see what my pictures look like immediately and when I'm looking through my binders of film.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>80946
i use to as well,
but as with print film, the prints are only as good as the lab techie who printed them.
since i've got the SA30 roll attachment for my Nikon 5000 scanner, i can batch scan the whole roll of film at once. saving time and money
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
I have some blurry shots I can contribute :D
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>80898

I do the same thing. Find the printing to be an unnecessary expense and something there's no need to pay for. Except i get them cut and use my Nikon coolscan. Hasnt' failed me yet (when i shoot print film, of course)
>> Anonymous
>>80949but as with print film, the prints are only as good as the lab techie who printed them....

theres no lab guy, you need to be concerned about the calibration sequence
>> /P/roject Flickr coordinator
Still waiting for someone to volunteer, Email here so I can set up the forwarding address.
projectflickr@anon.norristology.com

The person volunteering would just have to peruse through submissions and maybe make minor edits to keep the "feel" of the pictures / exif data the same (or nonexistant in the Exif data case as its much easier)

Someone please apply before this thread dies or we all lose interest!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
HAY GUISE CAN I BE ON YOUR WEBSITES