File :-(, x, )
heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Texas OU game
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
I thought this one was funny. Certainly cleaner.
>> sv !!vC9KZM3Ch/H
I approve of all of these, but you already knew that.

FUUUCCCKK that game rocked.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
nice yo
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> M?e?e?s?e??? !iZn5BCIpug
Cool snapshots bro.

inb4 exif and gear thread
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> Srs Critique Fag !2y1il5Qy0g
     File :-(, x)
Whoo, college football photos.

>>274710
>>274726
Favorites.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeOLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.Camera ModelE-500Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Color Filter Array Pattern714Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution100 dpiVertical Resolution100 dpiImage Created2008:10:13 18:00:39Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias-0.3 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length14.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height600RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastHardSaturationHighSharpnessHard
>> Srs Critique Fag !2y1il5Qy0g
>>274738

Also favorite.
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
All of these are excellent.
>>274710
>>274738
These 2 being my favorites.

Not sure why, but your telephoto action shots look very low contrast, like something that would be fixable in photoshop.. Were these processed for printing?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>>274747
Yeah, I think there's some goofy color profile stuff going on...
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
Oh, also the super telephoto ones were shot with a 300 2.8 and 1.7x teleconverter wide open at f/4.8, so I think that fucked my contrast a little bit. Next time I think I'll stop down to like f/5.6 or something.
>> Anonymous
>>274710
Is it just me, or is there something funky going on with the bottom of this picture. Probably due to 4chan slowly dying.
>> sage rage !3I4SJbCh8M
>>274710
i furking lurve this pic.

Dammit, you're making me wanna shoot some sports now!
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>>274768
Woah, yeah, that's def not my doing. Not in the exported photo either.
>> Anonymous
>>274710
Win, but too much unused space off to the side. Like, I get what you were trying to do with the whole textbook give-moving-stuff-a-place-to-be-going-into-the-frame, but my eye just can't help but actually follow the guy's trajectory and see he's going out of it at the bottom and not the side. Just a little crop on that side edge.

>>274712
Well-composed, but like most sports shots way too abstracted for my taste.

>>274713
Again, too much space. A crop would help make this frame better, but best would be if you had moved your camera to include more of the left-hand side or lower-left area, just the two guys and the girl and not the two people distracting in the lower right-hand corner.

I know people on here have been telling you to shoot looser lately, but I think you're best shooting tight, it's just your style. Keep in mind these are the same schmucks who call your shots "snapshots" as an insult.
>> Anonymous
GODDAMN FIELD LENGTH LIMIT.


>>274715
Very much win. I don't know how much of a sense of humor your editor has, but if I was yours I'd run this.

>>274720
Don't like the angle of this much at all, though it looks like you didn't have much choice. Framing is too loose again, but it looks like the best you could've gotten from that spot.

>>274726

Never thought I'd say this, but this could benefit from a significantly wider angle. Like, really wide. There's just not enough separation between the mascot and the background, though the framing is excellent.

>>274730
I can tell there's definitely a good image in here somewhere, but the processing (batch, right?) you did on it just doesn't bring it out. Maybe moderately high contrast black and white? I don't know.

Same goes for the last three, but less so. If you ever get a chance to prepare undeadlined versions of these, post them.

>>274735
Very meh.

>>274738
Messy framing, referee adds nothing, all in all pretty bad. The moment's good, but nothing else about the shot is.

>>274750
I like this a lot, but it could just be because I like media-behind-the-scenes shots a lot.

>>274761
Does your paper really not have any 500mms so you don't have to fuck around with teleconverters?

The shot is good, well-composed, but it needs more depth of field. Give the background guy a more solid shape to stand against than the one he is now.

Oh, and overall, edit tighter. That used to be the only big crit I ever had of you, and you got a lot better at it, but here and especially on your Flickr you did an epic huge photodump this time.

Oh, and did you post that "Adrian and Eli, Duvie parking lot" on here before? It's rather good.