File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hay /p/orcupines!

I wonder what aspects of a post make people more or less likely to look at the attached photos.

C&C welcome, encouraged.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePix F30Camera SoftwareDigital Camera FinePix F30 Ver1.02Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaMaker Note Version0130Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2007:04:28 11:38:26Exposure Time1/480 secF-Numberf/5.0Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/4.9Brightness8.9 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length8.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2848Image Height2136RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownSharpnessNormalWhite BalanceAutoChroma SaturationNormalFlash ModeOffMacro ModeOffFocus ModeAutoSlow Synchro ModeOffPicture ModeProgram AEContinuous/Bracketing ModeOffBlur StatusOKFocus StatusOKAuto Exposure StatusOK
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
It seems like I'm less likely to check out someone's pictures if they post a whole bunch without any comments whatsoever. Conversely, I also skim more if the poster has a long explanation of each shot.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePix F30Camera SoftwareDigital Camera FinePix F30 Ver1.02Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaMaker Note Version0130Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2007:05:04 21:59:41Exposure Time1/26 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.8Brightness-1.2 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length8.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2136Image Height2848RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownSharpnessNormalWhite BalanceAutoChroma SaturationNormalFlash ModeOffMacro ModeOffFocus ModeAutoSlow Synchro ModeOffPicture ModeProgram AEContinuous/Bracketing ModeOffBlur StatusBlur WarningFocus StatusOKAuto Exposure StatusOK
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePix F30Camera SoftwareDigital Camera FinePix F30 Ver1.02Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaMaker Note Version0130Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2007:04:28 14:48:48Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/5.0Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/4.9Brightness5.5 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length24.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2848Image Height2136RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownSharpnessNormalWhite BalanceAutoChroma SaturationNormalFlash ModeOffMacro ModeOffFocus ModeAutoSlow Synchro ModeOffPicture ModeProgram AEContinuous/Bracketing ModeOffBlur StatusOKFocus StatusOKAuto Exposure StatusOK
>> Anonymous
This picture says a lot.

It says that the photographer said "LOOK A CHAINLINK FENCE. LEMME GO TAKE A PICTURE OF IT AND POST IT ON 4CHAN. MAYBE THEY'LL THINK I'M COOL."

IT'S A CHAINLINK FUCKING FENCE. IT'S NOT EVEN LIKE YOU SET THE FSTOP TO A LOW NUMBER SO THAT THE BACKROUND WAS BLURRED.

JESUS. GO TAKE A PHOTOGRAPHY CLASS AND STOP TAKING PICTURES OF RANDOM SHIT THAT ISN'T PHOTOGRAPH WORTHY.

by the way, this post sums up almost EVERY FUCKING PICTURE on /p/
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>46154
Actually, it was "THAT SCHOOL LOOKS LIKE A FUCKING PRISON. ALSO, WHY DIDN'T I SET MY FSTOP SO THE FENCE WOULD BE OUT OF FOCUS SINCE WHO THE FUCK TAKES A PICTURE OF A CHAINLINK FENCE"

Oh, and good to know that most of the stuff everyone else posts here is shit. Maybe I should look up some real *artists*, like you, right?

And how do you deem photograph worthiness? I guess it's "Just what you like" since all perception is relative. But that qualifier of 'just' makes what I like worse than what you like because you went to a photography class. And did you ever think that maybe I can't afford a photography class and THATS why I'm on /p/?

Although I do respect a lot of the guys on here, they're not exactly superstars or photo gods. I'm here because I figure I could get some constructive criticism, not some douchebag complaining because he jumps to conclusions about someone's intent.

And if you don't like the other 3 then feel free to just sage away. And here I thought "/p/haggot" was just a little comedic self-deprication.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePix F30Camera SoftwareDigital Camera FinePix F30 Ver1.02Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaMaker Note Version0130Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2007:04:25 16:48:07Exposure Time1/75 secF-Numberf/4.3Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/4.3Brightness1.6 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length18.10 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2848Image Height2136RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownSharpnessNormalWhite BalanceAutoChroma SaturationNormalFlash ModeOffMacro ModeOffFocus ModeAutoSlow Synchro ModeOffPicture ModeProgram AEContinuous/Bracketing ModeOffBlur StatusBlur WarningFocus StatusOKAuto Exposure StatusOK
>> Anonymous
>>46155
I only really think one poster uses that the term /p/haggot. I'd prefer to be called a /p/-tard, myself. Also, don't feed the trolls.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>46155
>Maybe I should look up some real *artists*, like you, right?

I never said I was a real artist. I am, however, a whole fuckload better than you. Picture definately fucking related.

>But that qualifier of 'just' makes what I like worse than what you like because you went to a photography class.

I never implied that shit. However, I'll take the time now to explain that if this is the best shit you can come up with, you suck and should read the manual that came with your camera. None of your pictures have any real good composition, you make shitty use of light, and fstop and blah blah blah you get the picture. Learn to use your camera.

>Although I do respect a lot of the guys on here, they're not exactly superstars or photo gods. I'm here because I figure I could get some constructive criticism, not some douchebag complaining because he jumps to conclusions about someone's intent.

I think that was some pretty constructive criticism. I constuctively told you that you suck and should find a better way to take pictures.

Also, I bet you look like a huge loser on the streets trying to take artsy photos with that shitty quick-snap-and-go camera of yours.

>> Anonymous
>>46154

Unfortunately there's a lot of truth to this.

Almost every aspiring amateur photographer, as soon as they get their hands on a decent camera, runs out and just starts photographing everything they lay eyes on. First they start with mundane objects/locations and try to take really artsy photos by using weird angles and shutter speeds or doing macro work.

Then they realize that all their subject matter is boring as hell, so they graduate to the other standard cliches - flowers, silhouettes, sunsets, generic landscapes, kittens, etc. Then they realize that all of these have been done millions of times before by other much better photographers, and they finally begin branching out to develop their own style and find new and interesting things to photograph. It's not necessarily bad; it's part of the inevitable learning process as you develop your technical skills and artistic eye.

The problem arises when trying to get advice from more experienced photographers. It's one thing to look at an interesting photo that has flaws and point out things the photographer could have improved. It's another thing entirely when you're flooded with people in that first stage who ask for comments on every random piece of crap they snap a photo of.

About the only constructive comment I can usually give is, "You subject matter is boring, therefore your photograph is boring. Go find something interesting to photograph and then come back."
>> Anonymous
>>46166
I agree with him.

However, when anyone is reaching out and asking for advice, you should not disrespect them by>>46154

Yes what you say is true, but when someone asks for assistance and is new to anything, you should at least have respect and help them the best you can. Not lash out and be rude.

>>46151
>>46152
>>46153
I say to improve your shots, find an object in your frame that would jump out and show interest to people.

My advice: keep playing around with your camera, find what you think can be best for certain shots, take shots and compare with professional shots (see what you can improve), and move on from there.
>> Anonymous
>>46170

Good point - I certainly don't agree with>>46154's attitude, just trying to point out why he would react that way.
>> Anonymous
>>46157
>>Also, I bet you look like a huge loser on the streets trying to take artsy photos with that shitty quick-snap-and-go camera of yours.

you are the cancer that is killing photography, seriously.
>> Anonymous
46152 is a better photo than 46157.
>> ac
>>46157
Wait, how is this photo related to the "I'm a better photographer than you" argument?

I'm seeing blown out highlights in the background and an underexposed subject. Along with that, I'm seeing Look-mommy-I-just-gots-mah-first-photomotography-book rule-of-thirds composition.

And looking at the EXIF data, I'm seeing that you're shooting at ISO1600 on a bright sunny day for some reason.

Finally, if you can't get good pictures out of a Fuji F30, I don't care what you can do with your Digital Rebel, you're not a very good photographer.
>> Angry Kid from Po-town
I feel like Carlos fucking Mencia. And I hate him.

I just said what everyone feels, and I'm sure when you were reading my angry fucking post, you all were nodding your head in agreement. Don't lie.
>> Anonymous
>>46151
Nudity.
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
>>46157
pick 10 random idiots off the street and 5 could take a shot like that with 2 minutes of training. if this is your proudest moment flagship photograph you have no place bragging about your skills.
>> ac
>>46271
The sad part is, the other five would still be utterly bewildered by the necessity to hold the button down halfway to focus...
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
>>46277
my dad couldn't figure that one out when i saw him in florida. he ended up just using his cameraphone.
>> ac
>>46279
This one time, my dad used my old PowerShot A95 point&shoot. He chose to frame using the viewfinder rather than the LCD. Afterwards, he complained that the viewfinder display was a big pixellated.

I had to explain to him that the viewfinder was just a plain glass viewfinder, not an EVF, and that if there was any pixellation, it was in his eye.
>> SR !bpvX/Dj8ec
>>46282
> I had to explain to him that the viewfinder was just a plain glass viewfinder, not an EVF, and that if there was any pixellation, it was in his eye.

I LOL'd. Sorry, probably not as funny for your father!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>46157
OP here. As irked as I was by what you said, I shouldn't have flamed back. Additionally, you made me realize that I really *do not* know my camera that well. In spite of re-reading the manual today, I'm still not sure what the settings are and even though I know what fstop is, I always have the damndest time figuring out how to change it when I find something interesting.

All in all, I have to say thanks for waking me up. If I really want to make good use of the camera I have I should put more effort into it. Laziness ftl :(
>> elf_man
>>46412
Well this one has an interesting subject, at least.
>> Anonymous
>>46413
Is the guy taking the shot with the cameraphone the OP? I kid I kid.

This is a step up though.
>> Angry Kid from Po-town
>>46412
It's all good. I'm not sorry for flaming you, but yeah, it's all good.
>>46271
Hey buddy. I didn't brag about my skills:
>I never said I was a real artist. I am, however, a whole fuckload better than you. Picture definately fucking related.
Never said it was good, I said it was a whole fuckload better than op's stuff. Never said it was my best photo. (it definately isn't)
Never implied any of that shit, etc etc.
>> Anonymous
>>46166

I'd just like to say this: that was very enlightening. I realized that 97% of my pictures are exactly what you described in the second paragraph, and I'm almost afraid to admit that 2% fall in the first paragraph category. D: