File :-(, x, )
Shooting from the hip heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
hah. there are 2 threads w pics shot at UT on /p/ right now (the other is mine).
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Linkage?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Why is it that photo critique threads get no replies?
>> Anonymous
>>128979

You never said or requested anything. You just posted two pictures.
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
good stuff heavy, the first shot is awesome
>> Anonymous
god damn lower your contrast, get some midtones.
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
>>128979
don't ask me, I don't get too much feedback either
IMO photos might be more interesting than the generic crappy snapshot, crappy black-white contrast and vignetting (wtf?) killed it
>> Anonymous
>>128899

I like this one.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
funny if it was anyone else posting these, they will get flamed into a crisp.
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>129138
why is that?

sure, heavy is well respected.. but that's all well deserved also. (i haven't seen a series of photographs on /p/ that are better than his firemen series)
this stuff is very different from his other work, sure .. it's not BETTER but it's far from bad.

but yea, clarify thx
>> Anonymous
correct focus, or GTFO
oh wait, you already chose GTFO
>> Anonymous
>>129145
Because they're high-contrast black and white ("insta-art," minus ten points) photographs taken breaking one of the big rules of photography (no shooting from the hip, minus ten points) with focus off on the first one (minus ten points). All the usual stuff /p/ haets.

Despite all those "flaws," they're really good. Though this statement is a bit cliche it's true that good art is usually right on the brink of failure, and often good because it's right on the brink. I think these are a great example of that. For another, Koudelka's theatre work is -20 points for high-contrast black and white insta-art and -20 points for focus off, and -20 for grain, but I've never seen performing arts photography done better.
>> Anonymous
Photos suck, namefags suck.

If you're going to shoot from the hip, at least learn to use hyperfocal distance. The second one is really bad, I'm OK with the contrast but the (complete lack of) composition really kills it. The first one would be mediocre if it were in focus, but as it is it's basically trash.

These are not high art, they're not interesting, and they're not on the brink of failure. They are failure.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Here's one of mine
>> Sicko !L3HRY/miC.
     File :-(, x)
Not really fond of the out of focus foreground guy in the first one, nor the headcutting on the second.

Do you know either of the people? I'm still trying to work up to getting closer to strangers for street photography, so kudos on that.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX K100DCamera SoftwareGIMP 2.4.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern564Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:02:16 23:09:45Exposure Time1/10 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating800Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length18.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeDistant View
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
     File :-(, x)
Delicious repost.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>129200
Scathing comments from someone who doesnt understand how yotsuba works correctly.
>> Anonymous
Don't people notice the shutter sound?
>> Anonymous
>>129203
Oh look, its one of the three pictures butterfly always posts. I cant wait to see the crappy surf photo or the blurry tower photo.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>129206
Tis indeed, i quite like it and its a hip shot which is why it gets posted a lot.

Whats the tower one, i dont remember posting anything like that?
>> Sicko !L3HRY/miC.
     File :-(, x)
>>129205

Find people too engrossed in what they're doing. I found no-one even paid me a second glance or seemed to hear, which I found weird since it seemed really loud to me, I kept looking away right afterwards as if it wasn't me because I was sure they'd heard it.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX K100DCamera SoftwareGIMP 2.4.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern564Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:02:17 01:57:43Exposure Time1/125 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length18.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeDistant View
>> Anonymous
>>129213

Or if you have lots of money, get a Leica or other rangefinder. Effectively no shutter noise.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>129283
I really want a Ricoh GR Digital... digital rangefinder, boyyyy. :D
>> Anonymous
It's not a rangefinder.