File :-(, x, )
heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA

EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:15 01:29:13Exposure Time1/50 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
Love the colors on this one. 50mm 1.2 i presume?

Oh yeah, I'm going to be joining you and !bHymOqU5YY tomorrow as a 5d /p/hag!
>> Anonymous
what gear did you use for this?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>235783
yuk yuk yuk
>> Anonymous
I like this. Despite your faggotry, you can still take good photos.
>> Anonymous
>>235788
>>235783
made me laugh when i realized

kinda neat picture you have there.
could have been great if she was brighter and maybe if you used a wider aperture to get real nice sharp lines.

i assume you used available light though so, well done.
>> Anonymous
>>235796
>>235796
>wider aperture to get real nice sharp lines
0_0
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
you're reminding me of why i fucking love your stuff so much.
damn nice, really.. i can't find a single thing wrong with it even if i tried to nitpick like a madman.
good job man

inb4 slurp slurp
>> Anonymous
>>235812
seems to me the other side of her face is out of focus, atleast slightly...
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>235782
Way to forget me, asshole.


:-p
>> Anonymous
>>235782Oh yeah, I'm going to be joining you and !bHymOqU5YY tomorrow as a 5d /p/hag!

pretty stupid to buy a 5D at this time of the year
>> soulr !lK4GD5SleY
so, having fun using the burn tool?
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>235826
Whatever, the 5d II has been rumored for like 2 years. I won't be able to afford one when they come out, and I don't think the prices for the 5d are going to go down anytime soon. The price in the used market for the 1ds II has barely fluxuated since the 1ds II came out. I'm getting one at a pretty good price now, so I don't really care.

>>235828
Ohhh i mixed up razor with nerdrazor on flickr.
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>235836
and i mixed up links to the comments too
>> soulr !lK4GD5SleY
also her front face is kinda glowing, maybe from sharpen?

photo is pleasant to look at nonetheless.
>> Anonymous
>>235836

it went to fucking $2,000 body recently with the rebates and the 24-105 kit was under $3,000

the next 5D won't be over $3,000 for the body

but whatever man, buy your archaic 5D tomorrow

the rest of us will enjoy clean SIXTY FOUR HUNDRED motherfucking ISO
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>235843
Whatever, still outperforms film, and i'm getting it for $1600, so i'll enjoy my full frame while you fap to 5dII spec rumors.
>> Anonymous
>>235812
oh i see smaller i guess is the word? i almost did that earlier my mistake
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>235844

captured for when you're crying for wasting your money
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>235847
Haha, i'll look forward to seeing that in december. Technology depreciates, i'm not denying that. I just kinda want one now and not wait 5 months from now to save another $100-200
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>235844
>>Whatever, still outperforms film
My F6 will like to have a word with you lol
>> Anonymous
>>235854
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have some delicious F6, but 36x24mm digital outresolves even 120 film.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>235855
narr, i understand. The 5D and new D700 are fantastic cameras. If i could afford one a D700 would be mine.
I'm not much of a pixel peeper like most of /p/, thats why my 4 year old D70 is still surving me well and i have nearly 7 times more film cameras than digital lol. The F6 is by far the best built camera i've ever had the pleasure to hold (now own).
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
>>235782
I _have_ a 5D? Why didn't anyone tell me of this fact sooner?
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>235874
ah it was my mistake, i copied and pasted the wrong tripcode from flickr. I meant to copy "!SDPEsPMnww"s
>> Anonymous
>>235874
where have you been, havent seen a post from you in a while
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>235898
The tripfags are staying in hibernation until newfag summer is over.
>> Anonymous
>>235906
aaah. good idea i guess. /p/ sucks with out them
>> ac
>>235911
/p/ sucks with us, too.
>> Honest So You Dont Have To Be !9UISPtwBPo
>>235775

Fantastic shot!

Love the lighting, the color, not to mention the beautiful bokeh.

Its the ponytail that makes it for me, just cutting up that back section of green light, its fantastic!

Bravo
>> Anonymous
>>235855

>>but 36x24mm digital outresolves even 120 film.

LOL WHAT .....0/10
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>235854
For real, I have a bunch of velvia 50 that says otherwise.
>> Anonymous
>>235924
The best 35mm film I've scanned had sharpness equivalent to ~10-15MP digital; this means that a carefully developed and scanned or optically printed 6x7 film frame can approach 50-60MP - but only if it's fine-grain, low-sensitivity film. The resolution of ISO 1000+ film is abysmal while an 1Ds-III remains pretty clean.
>> Anonymous
Holy fuck, OP shot is HORRIBLE.

Do you know how to do PP at all, Heavyweather?
That shit just looks awful.
>> else !L6xabslN96
>>235775
i fapped hard.
>> Harvey !!5Q6T5t9lMBq
>>236027
0/10

>>235855
>but 36x24mm digital outresolves even 120 film.
Not true. At all.
>> Anonymous
>>236034

It. Looks. Like. Shit.
I am not trolling, I am making an observation about how shitty it is.

Ass.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>235775
hey heavyweather
i significantly improved your image with about 45 seconds in photoshop

hope you like it

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:15 10:48:08Exposure Time1/50 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1000Image Height667RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Harvey !!5Q6T5t9lMBq
>>236045
Well then you're completely fucking awful at providing useful feedback.

Oh, wait, I'm doing it wrong...

Holy fuck, your post is HORRIBLE.

Do you know how to do critique at all, anon?
That shit just reads awful.
>> Anonymous
>>236047
Immense posterization, and it ruins the sort of soft, wistful feel the original has.
>> Anonymous
>>236055
there was "immense posterization" in the op image
but some of that is from me trying to sharpen the image since the op shot is so fucking soft and poorly focused

but you know feel free to ignore the fact that it looks worlds better when her skin tone isn't a dull gray-green.
>> Mr. Higgzbuffonton !!Xsltv1VWxZT
haha shit.. A day later I see this pic and imagine the shadow like some infection or disease or some shit crawling up from her neck... and now its slowly covering her face..

CANT BE UNSEEN

great pic though, I like the.. dunno.. atmosphere of it.
>> Mr. Higgzbuffonton !!Xsltv1VWxZT
>>236057
OP pic is better still, sorry.

the posterization is just too fucking massive.. one step forward, three steps backward kind of thing..

The soft-light effect is to its benefit imo, and the colour of her face can be changed more subtly without making her skin look retarded.
>> Anonymous
>>236066
>The soft-light effect is to its benefit imo

Soft focus, not soft light.
The focus is off.
>> Mr. Higgzbuffonton !!Xsltv1VWxZT
>>236068
oh god, my point just falls to shit now, doesn't it?

wait..
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>236066

just to show you, here's the OP image with very minor color balance adjustments, without any sharpening or change to the levels.

the problem with this image is that the blacks aren't really rich blacks, and the whites of her eyes are a dull gray. as long as those eyes are that dark this pic is going to look unnatural and shitty.

feel free to disagree, but you're wrong.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:15 11:20:04Exposure Time1/50 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1000Image Height667RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>236071
>oh god, my point just falls to shit now, doesn't it?

Actually, yes it does.
Soft lighting is 100% fine and can be used to great effect.
Fucking up the focus can only be used to show how you fucked up what could have been an otherwise good shot.

This isn't soft focus on purpose, it's soft focus because he fucked up.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
my try

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:15 11:26:23Exposure Time1/50 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width606Image Height606RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
i like that crop

but the image is still just too damn dull

wish i had the raw file to play around with. ;_;
>> beethy !vEawx7Krcs
     File :-(, x)
ooh, my turn!

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 5DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:08:15 11:33:46Exposure Time1/50 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width500Image Height500RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> else !L6xabslN96
>>236080
>too damn dull

wrong. i could look at it for years without getting bored.
>> Anonymous
>>236086
god you have terrible taste
even beethys edit is better than the op
and that's saying something since beethy is shit
>> beethy !xjvYygZYCQ
>>236086
My opinion is the only one that matturs.
>> Anonymous
>>236090
>>236090
>>236090
>>236090
>>236090

this
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>236075
No, her eye's in pretty critical focus. God bless the EE-S focusing screen. However, @f/1.2 and 1.5 ft, my depth of field is 6.09mm. ISO 1600 destroys a little more detail (though man, I really really like it at 1600... the grain isn't offensive and actually gives those plastic digital files some texture), and I'm shooting at a fiftieth, so it's easy to see why it's a little soft. But if I wanted crisp, I'd be shooting with a strobe @ f/11.

>>236077
Nice, though she looks a little inhumanly smooth.
>>236085
I like the bw conversion, and I love the grain. Your post work is getting better and better, beethy. Getting very tasteful.

Looking at this image on my work 20" Dell monitor is way different than at home on my iMac. Seems a wee bit darker than I edited at home. I'll give it another edit to brighten it up some more before printing.
>> Anonymous
>>236097

>>236077it's because i don't have the original.. it's kinda hard to re-add texture when it doesn't exist in the first place, because the resolution is too small.
>> beethy !xjvYygZYCQ
>>236097

successful fake beethy is successful
>> Anonymous
>>236097

great gear talk

would read again!
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>236102
oh lol, wow. Sorry man. Well, whatever. You need a secure tripfag or something.
>>236100
Fair enough.
>> Meese !xjvYygZYCQ
>>236104
I loled
>> Anonymous
>>236105
>I sucked heavyweather's cock.

FIX'D UR POST MAN
>> heavyweather !Ow/jymJMOQ
>>236113
>>I SUCK COCKS
fixed ur post man
>> Anonymous
>>236117
>I HAVE A SMALL COCK

fixed your post, brah!
>> Anonymous
HW do you have more pics of the girl in the photograph?
She looks like someone I know...
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>236120
None that I can get to right now. She goes to Yale, if that helps.
>> sage
this thread exemplifies everything that's wonderful about /p/

my favorite post is>>236085
where a fake-beethy troll made a horrible b&w "beethy edit" that was so true to his shit that people actually liked it and praised beethy for it

truly, you are all fags of the highest degree
>> beethy !vW/UaE6zYU
>>236085
This made me lol so much
Fake beethy is so awesome
>> Anonymous
>>236239
this thread only exemplifies that most of the people in /p/ dont understand that art is about personal preference.

>>236072
a beautiful example.... also ignorance
>> Anonymous
She reminds me of Natalie Portman.
>> Anonymous
The dodging and burning is too obvious in this shot
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
>>235898
I have been reduced to squatting on my dad's mobile internet due to certain... let's just say, 'incompatibilities' of 4chan with my ISP.
>> Anonymous
>>236349

B& evasion
>> Anonymous
>>236349
AoB....when did you come back?
Or did you leave? Forgive me I'm intoxicated.
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
>>236360
It's my old ISP they're after.

>>236424
I never left. I'm always here, lurking.