File :-(, x, )
hello again pskaught

EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution100 dpiVertical Resolution100 dpiImage Created2008:02:06 22:50:28Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/20.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating50Lens Aperturef/19.9Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length105.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width772Image Height1000RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
eh, not a fan...
>> Anonymous
Normally your lighting setups blow my mind.. this just isn't as good as the rest of your stuff you've posted here.
>> pskaught
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution100 dpiVertical Resolution100 dpiImage Created2008:02:06 23:04:09Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/20.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating50Lens Aperturef/19.9Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length16.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width665Image Height1000RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
this sucks. as usual.
>> Anonymous
>>122502
More disturbing but not quite as good as previous work. Still good, though.

>>122507
Yay lighting setup!
>> ken-t !wQS5KmrMzU
plz post or link some of ur other work as i have not seen
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>122513
http://www.impsofmargeandfletch.com
http://toasterfoot.houseofsprouts.com/
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
pskaught, you are so fucking good..
but this photo is rather bad compared to your other stuff
>> Thumper !VFtk2VroH6
oh, I love that asian gentleman. Always has the most interesting faces
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Yeah, this one's kinda meh compared to your other stuff.
>> crap Anonymous
you got an interesting model, scene and lights and thats what you produce?
Go post it on /b/ but they have already seen better.
>> Thumper !VFtk2VroH6
where is the trademark woman in the photo frame? and why is he puking?
>> Anonymous
so, can you take any other kind of photographs that dont feature your fancy equip and your set of models?
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>122567
Go to the second of the two web sites that I posted in>>122514.
>> Atomic !eB5C4Rw5bU
Wow, all that expensive looking light equipment, a 5d, and you crank out a boring picture of a guy not actually puking. Bravo.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
Im sure you know I dont like pskaught's style, but he has more creativity and technical skill than the rest of /p/ combined. I know you are all hatin because of it but grow some balls.
>> elf_man !!DdAnyoDMfCe
>>122571
This is like... one element of most of his other stuff. The lighting's nice, but it's more like a test shot than anything else.
>> Anonymous
>>122559
that was only in the calender series
>> Anonymous
>>122571
We're "hatin" because the picture's crap.

Quality control is an essential skill to become a great photographer, maybe pskaught needs an editor to stop him posting any old shit he takes.
>> Anonymous
>>has more creativity

im really sorry to drop the bomb on this one but this guys photos arnt creative in the slightest.

technically good? yes. creative? no.

im not really sure why he posts on 4chan. his humor pales in comparison to the weakest meme. its like he wants a pat on the back from a bunch of retards.
>> Anonymous
I actually think it's pretty lulzy
>> Anonymous
>>122606

in terms of 4chans humor its very flat. you wouldnt raff in you raff you ruse.

oh and scott stop hiding behind photoshop and finally post some full scale un-edited versions.

oh wait...he never will.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122596
>>122605
>>122607
Needs more you posting counter examples (following the rules ofc) before you have a point instead of an opinion.
>> Anonymous
>>122611
>>122596here

My counter example is just about any famous photographer ever.

Pretty much every pro photographer has good skills in quality control or someone to do it for them. Even people who love to cream over pskaught aren't liking this shot, because it's not good.
>> Anonymous
Everyone is entitled to a bad day/shot. Not every photographer can take a great photo everytime. Although I think this is not his best I still think it's worthwhile posting so others can judge for themselves and make comments on why they either like or dislike a photo. Feedback is everything in photography. Well unless you prefer masturbation to full on sex that is.
>> pskaught
this is all very typical. I actually have not received any criticism yet for this picture, just "it sucks as usual." from the same people who always say it.
this was just an experiment in capturing action from a concept by todd, in this case my roommate drank some ipecac.

enjoy your hdr and vacation photos 4chan, you can see new work on my websites.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122628
Dont worry about it, you are one of if not the top end of /p/. If i cared about your style you might have gotten something worthwhile out of me but thats just bad luck. Everyone hates you because of it, dont let it get to you its the same world over.

>>122617
You dont critisise either my post or his work with that waffle.
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
>>122571

Dear /p/, why does pskaught win? He has some access to great gear. No other /p/hotographer has ability to use same lighting equipment as he has. Or at least no one hasn't posted anything.
Other thing most of the /p/ lacks, is models, who are willing to model.
That's why pskaught is as good as he is.
>> Anonymous
I actually like his style (calendar is awesome), but this one shot evokes nothing in me. Maybe because there's just one subject and nothing to "explore" as I am used to...

His kitty will be one of my faves for eternity tho
>> Anonymous
>>122630
I criticised his shitty editing skills

>>122626
>Not every photographer can take a great photo everytime.
But every photographer can post good pic's when they take them and leave the shit ones in archives where they belong.

>>122628
>BAWWWWWWWWWW I'm not posting here anymore because you guys didn't praise me and acted like /p/ always does

It's not like we wanted to see any old crap you happen to take just because you took it. If it's not good enough for your site what makes you think we want to see it?
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>122628
now you're just being a giant faggot.
you post 1 boring ass picture that you expected people to looooove, you get bad criticism. and you say "HEY GUYS, I'M LEAVING BECAUSE I CAN'T TAKE CRITICISM SO ENJOY YOUR SHITTY PHOTOS ON 4CHAN BUT MY NEW STUFF IS ON MY WEBSITE SO PLEASE LOOK ANYWAY"
faggotry
>> pskaught
also, i suck gigantic cocks.
>> OPFOR !8vKpfCqy8A
>>122628
Truthfully, I can not criticizing because my photography level would not be up to par with yours. So essentially, any comment I give photo wise,if it sucks or rocks, would be considered hallow. But having experience in lighting, I would say that your set up rocks. I would of tried a bounce card on the ground to fill in the chin a little but just for experimentation to see how it would of looked. I still love the kids busting the adults picture as one of your greatest work and it reminds me of the Beastie Boys Sabotage music video.
>> Anonymous
>>122628

why post here then? oh and nice mention of HDR. way to act like a fucking moron when everything you've shown on here has been photoshopped into the ground.

>>122633

its rare to fined anyone on /p/ that seems to have some sort of understanding. Thank you.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
Can someone show how this is a bad picture please?

You can bitch about his editing and if he should have posted it all day, but no one posts things to avoid critisism. Why dont you take your head out of your ass and stop pretending you are some awesome critic when you cant make any single statement regarding the photograph. How can he even try to make new ideas when this is the shit you are giving him?
>> Anonymous
>>122641

>>Truthfully, I can not criticizing because my photography level would not be up to par with yours

hold on there a second. why is everyone so set on a single aesthetic that justifies quality? Where has this been learn? Christ, broaden your understanding and learn to appreciate more than the shit youve been fed though magazines.

whoever this guy is posting pictures hes not worth your time in anything other than the technical aspects. he doesnt even seem to want to explain properly how he works.
>> Anonymous
>>122645

>>Can someone show how this is a bad picture please?

you could say this about ANY picture and never get an answer. Equally why is it good?

anyone that was criticizing him was doing it in general. all of these pictures merge into one and lack any content. the rest that are from these series are full of overused symbolism. its boring recycled content doesn't suit the medium. Or rather the medium adds nothing to the content. it should.

the worst thing about this guy is that he calls this art but seems to have no contemporary understanding of artists using photography. he is stuck in the technical lighting and tries (or shows) nothing different.

anyone can produce photos like this. all you need is the equipment. ive beeen ranting and its all probably shit but let me sum it up.

Technical understanding aside, his ideas are diatribe.
>> Anonymous
>>122645
It's a boring photograph of a guy in a shirt and tie throwing up. Noone's saying it's a bad picture, it isn't. It's just an average picture, nothing more.

Nothing about it is special. There's no message, nothing makes you think, nothing makes you want to look twice at it. It's just dull and meaningless.

It's an awkward photo and the only thing going for it is the lighting. The concept alone should never have gotton a green light in pskaught's head.

Hey Butterfly, how about you try and tell us how this is a good picture?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122656
This isnt part of the same series the others belong too, good job.

The op photo has good expresion on the model and has taken an idea and brought it into fruition. I think the model is slightly lacking emotion, there doesnt seem to be a motive for him throwing up like that. The lighting is his style, its technically acomplished and doesnt have any flaws, i dont like the style that much but it isnt a bad one. The photo has its own identity, im sure i would recognise it again.

Happy, i've used enough rubbish in one paragraph to keep you going for a while, its how you seem to communicate best. you must know I am not an artist, i dont look for artist merit for the most part its not something I do. Why do you hate it so much? A photograph doesnt have to imply something to be art. There is no meaning behind good architecture for the most part but its generally considered to be art.

He doesnt even claim its his idea, but you attack him about it.

Now the rest of you are probably wondering why I'm bothering to defend him, knowing I dont care about his postcards and his style of art. No its not just because I enjoy trolling its because Im tired of pretencious fucks who have nothing better to put down photographs on some made up grounds with no backing and refuse to provide any reason when asked. A lot of you do it and its pathetic.

(tl;dr? you're a faget)
>> Anonymous
>>122656
If by "the medium" you mean his style, it very much adds to his content. "Imps" contains messages on consumption, sex, greed, family life, nationalism, politics, vanity, etc.

And it's done in a style somewhat reminiscent of contemporary advertising. It fits. The values of the hyperreal society have their aesthetics turned on them.

And if by “the medium” you mean photography in general, that's what he works in. People work in the mediums they know and are comfortable in; one wouldn't turn around and ask Bob Dylan to do a painting.

>the worst thing about this guy is that he calls this art

He's explicitly rejected the label "art." He's called it "comedy" and "social criticism" (or "social commentary," I forget which), but not "art." (In my book, that would make it art, but not to him, so you can't toss this out.)

>seems to have no contemporary understanding of artists using photography
Counterexample, please. Post a link.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122662
hey hey, stop stealing my thunder!
>> Anonymous
>>122661

series. same time frame , same technique. who fucking cares.

while we are on pretentious fucks lets concentrate on the op. your criteria on what judging what makes a photograph good is the lowest common denominator ive ever seen. "I like modelz face durr dur."

well done for having no formal education regarding photography. it shows.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>122661
>Im tired of pretencious fucks who have nothing better to put down photographs on some made up grounds with no backing and refuse to provide any reason when asked.
>pretencious

You just said the secret word! :D

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:02:07 22:46:30Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width290Image Height225
>> Anonymous
>>122666
You don't have to have a formal education in anything to enjoy a good photograph you belligerent little idiot.
I'm now confident you're a troll.
>> You are worth my time OPFOR !8vKpfCqy8A
>>122646
You made me laugh so hard. Oh please enlighten the sheep with your "unique" ability to assume that everyone here is a conformist. I think you are a conformist or a troll but I cannot be sure in this state of mind. Christ man calm down its only 4chan.
>> Anonymous
>>122662

>>He's called it "comedy" and "social criticism"

but its neither as A) the photos arnt funny and B) he has openly stated that he wants to be a fashion photographer so any of that social comment nonsenses is bullshit. he would sell his dick for a magazine shoot. "OOHHHH its a critique of our modern reliance clothes and social status perpetuated by fashion...blah"


no. by medium i mean the type of photography. i should have been clearer. he could have done this on polariod and it wouldn't have changed anything about the story or content. none of you would have batted a fucking eyelid if it wasnt in this ultra sharp harsh lighting bullshit. None of you would have asked OOOOH how did you do that. all of your primary interest is in the technical, making the content void, making your arguments weak.

post a link? like that would validate everything?
>> Anonymous
>>122671

lol way to fail with no comeback.

>>122671

who cares if im trolling or not.

i dont really have a problem with scouts photos.he can do whatever he wants. i have a problem with /p/s ass licking. its vile and obvious to the point of disgust.
>> OPFOR !8vKpfCqy8A
>>122675
I am sorry for no comeback. I am just not in the mood to flame on 4chan. Whats the reason you may ask? Well I have recently "broaden" my view and come to realize that arguing ,especially on 4chan since it is serious business!!!!, is like being in the Special Olympics. No matter who wins, everyone is still fucking retarded. Good night sir :)
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122675
You have a problems with /p/'s ass licking? You dont understand, you are worse than those people who like a photo and say so. All you are doing is mindlessly trying to devalue one with no actual argument.

You are one thousand years too early to deal with me.

Oh and I said i _didnt_ like the models face, wait to not be able to read.

If you are going to try and troll us, at least put some effort into not being so fucking obvious. Picking on pskaught is easy because its known that /p/ as a whole likes his work.

a thousand years...
>> Anonymous
>>122672
>A) the photos arnt funny

I totally disagree. But besides, even if they weren't, bad comedy is still comedy and bad art is still art.

>B) he has openly stated that he wants to be a fashion photographer

I'm pretty sure I remember him posting that he wants to do more in the line of “Imps” and less fashion, and just did those as favors to friends who were/are fashion students or for money or something like that. Ansel Adams and Elliot Erwitt did/has done and does a huge amount of commercial work. Does that make them not artists?

>so any of that social comment nonsenses is bullshit.

If you don't see social commentary in "Imps," you're a moron, plain and simple. If you go to the impsofmargeandfletch.com, the very first thing that pops up is a satire of the Skull and Bones. "Vice Garden," "Priorities," "USA USA!!!" are probably the three most explicit in their social commentary, but they all have it in abundance.
>> Anonymous
>>122683
(Con't)


>no. by medium i mean the type of photography. i should have been clearer. he could have done this on polariod and it wouldn't have changed anything about the story or content.

>none of you would have batted a fucking eyelid if it wasnt in this ultra sharp harsh lighting bullshit.

And no one would read Shakespeare if he wrote like a four year old with Down Syndrome and a lobotomy. Form is as integral to art as content; it's how the content is transmitted. No matter how good the content is, no one will pay it any attention if the form sucks.

>None of you would have asked OOOOH how did you do that.

Of course not, because every non-noob to photography knows how to set the ISO, aperture, shutter speed, focus his camera, and all that. Not everyone knows how to set up strobes like that, or mix paints, or write in iambic pentameter, or play the guitar, or...

>all of your primary interest is in the technical, making the content void, making your arguments weak.

TBH, I'm not generally too keen on this style or on strobework. It works perfectly for him, though.

>post a link? like that would validate everything?

No, it wouldn't "validate" anything, but it would, at least in theory, provide evidence for your position. What sort of work do you consider "artists using photography?" And how does it differ from pskaught's work? You're case is entirely a negation: one big long "pskaught sucks gaiz and you all are cocksucking sycophants" is not an argument. Offer real points or GTFO.
>> Anonymous
>>122684
Oh, I forgot. Under this:

>no. by medium i mean the type of photography. i should have been clearer. he could have done this on polariod and it wouldn't have changed anything about the story or content.

Should be a simple link to>>122662.
>> Anonymous
Still not posted why it's good, Butterfly (because it isn't) making the majority of your whining in this thread worthless
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122687
I havent posted much on it no because you may be aware i am not particually impressed by it. That is my oppinion as a landscape photographer, people just dont interest me much. However as I have given some reasons why I think it is not crap, you should do the same and follow through with some reasons why it is. I've made my points, makes yours or be a troll.
>> Anonymous
>>122691

Read

>>122659
>> Anonymous
>>122692
That's a critique of this particular photograph, which is decent but not great.

You apparently have a problem with all of pskaught's work. Critique him as a whole, or just "Imps" even, since it's his main was thus far.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>122672
If you don't think "Intellectual Dog Fight" is hilarious, sir, you have no soul.

For most people, if they'd posted this, I'd have said it was great. He's just set a high bar for himself that this particular shot doesn't meet.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
Can't believe you dicks sometimes. THe one person that actually know his shit on /p/ and you jump all over him. I can agree this isn't his best work, but it's still better than most of the pictures I've ever taken. Sometimes it's like if it's not HDR, ya'll just hate on it. And if it is HDR, you hate on it. But it takes HDR to get your attention.
Would you rather hen posted a "Should I get an xxxxx or and xxxxx camera thread? Shit guys, this man has come to us, and let us see a great pic, but he went the extra mile, he showed us HOW he made it. Even if the pic was a donkey getting blown by a herpes infested trucker in baja mexico, I still would have loved it, because of the extra pic with the lighting diagram.
I learned something from the second pic, and that alone makes it worth it, regardless of the subject.
tl:dr lol ipecac.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
also, pskaught, when are gonna start selling prints? intellectual dog fight is guaranteed to get me poon on my g/f's birthday.
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
haha so much fuss over 1 shitty photo by a good photographer
*grabs popcorn*
>> Anonymous
>>122694
I have nothing against pskaught's work in general, I like a fair few photo's he's taken, just not this one.

>>122699
>Can't believe you dicks sometimes. THe one person that actually know his shit on /p/ and you jump all over him.

Most people didn't jump all over him - They just said that they didn't like the pic, fucking drama queens (especially you pskaught, if you're still reading this)
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122692
read
>>122661
Well done you missed one of my stunning posts, im sorry if i used english in a way that might be hard to understand if you are a festering pile of fecees disguised as a person but then thats just your hard luck. Prehaps taking the time to read my posts in their enirety would benifit you as you would have shut up and fucked off by now.

You are intent on not bothering to argue properly, being the shitty malnourished of intelligence troll that you are and your attitude reminds me of an attention seeking todler.

No one thinks you are making any worthwhile points, you cant seem to make any rebuttals for ours either. Learn to argue/troll or learn to critique.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>122699
>Even if the pic was a donkey getting blown by a herpes infested trucker in baja mexico
What the fuck, man. That picture would be *Epic*.

I think you mean something like "Even if the pic were a macro of a plastic flower he keeps on his desk"
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>122709
someone needs to take that picture =D
>> Anonymous
>>122705
This is where I'm getting at with the drama queen thing. You asked to say why it wasn't good and that's precisely what I did. Your post's version of what makes it a good photo is weak at best - you've said the expression is good and had to resort to saying
>he has taken an idea and brought it into fruition
as a good point. Well done to him, he took a picture he set up. You've also been utilising ad hominem statements of 'pretentiousness' to keep your argument flowing.

You haven't a single solid reason why this is a good photo because there isn't one, but here you are still arguing pretty much for the sake of it.

Maybe you should keep away from /p/ for a couple of days butterfly, to calm yourself down.
>> Anonymous
>>122704

are you

>>122656

In which case, square

>I have nothing against pskaught's work in general

with

>all of these pictures merge into one and lack any content
>full of overused symbolism.
>boring recycled content
>the worst thing about this guy
>no contemporary understanding of artists using photography
>he is stuck
>nothing different.
>anyone can produce photos like this
>his ideas are diatribe
>> Anonymous
>>122717
>are you
No, I'm not.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122712
I was never arguing the photo was good, I was wondering why you felt the need to make it seem much worse than it is. I stated several times I didnt think much of the photo because of where I come from.

I have stated before, I dont care about pskaught, i want you (anonymous of /p/) to make constructive critisisms be they either negative or positive.

Disliking something is fine, but there is no need for baseless assertations. This is why I have never commented much on pskaughts work, I have nothing to say about it.
>> Anonymous
>>122728
>make it seem much worse than it is.

Overreaction? On MY 4chan? It's more likely than you think.
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>122728
Your apparent impartiality is confusing me.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122742
I was trying too, but after being forced into commenting by someone who doesnt like losing I had to say something. I'm not a fan of pskaught but im not a fan of idiots either.

>>122739
/p/ should know better, its one of the best boards tbh.
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>122745
I've learned the hard way that /p/ is 4chan, no matter how you look at it. Sorry to burst your bubble.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122746
do you think i tried to make a point to make the point, or to have a massive argument?
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>122747
Of course I believe you did it to make a point, but the people of 4chan are just going to further waste your time. You should quit while you're ahead. I agree with you 100%, but there's no sense in arguing your point with a bunch of people who come here to fuck around and don't really give a shit.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122748
I was born a troll... It was just for fun (with good intentions).

Also i hope this constant bumping has put this thread on the front page a few times, the image is worth it.
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
Oh shi-. Did I just get trolled?

10/10
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122752
For your sake, i hope not.
>> Anonymous
Whats wrong with you fuckers?
You're not cool!
>> Anonymous
>>122611

Seriously, does anyone actually care what you say?
>> hai guyz Butterfly
disregard that, i suck cocks.
>> Anonymous
lol .i love it when one person is so desperate to cool their nerd rage they think that every anon is the same person.

this butterfly guy isnt trolling hes just saying that now because he looks like a massive prick.
>> Anonymous
hi guyz ill sum up this thred quickly.

pkscoot = eh pretty nice guy and doesnt afraid of extreme fast shutter speed.

Seriously Scott, why do you bother posting on 4chan? It must be for the inevitable shit storm of incomprehensible post that follow and the lulz they produce.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>122822
>>122823
>>122841
Whats wrong, too much BAWWWWW in you? You care because you posted, nice job.