File :-(, x, )
first post... jesster
comments...
criticism...
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
grainy photo is graaaaaaaaainy
>> jesster
its supposed to be
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
>>37510
well then it's awesome since that was my only complaint.
>> Anonymous
The graininess is really harsh on the eyes. Consider softening it.
>> Anonymous
Its like aomething you would see in the WWII era. i say its good
>> Anonymous
good stuff, nothing wrong with the grain here
>> Anonymous
hmm, imo you should've changed the composition to get more sky, now it's liek 30% water.
just a thought, making it a skyline picture would've made it cooler
>> des
>>37584
I like that the very soft reflection on the water leads you back up to the subject, you'd lose that if you went with more sky
>> Anonymous
>>37585
what he says.. it's a good photo.like it is
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
The composition isn't bad it's just that I think it doesn't help in any way either. I cropped it in photoshop a little but I think that there should be more sky to the right hand side. Also The grain distracts. Get rid of it.
>> jesster
     File :-(, x)
i like the graininess, but it was never meant to be presented at full resolution... only half really. heres something closer to what ive wanted.
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
>>37590
yeah, see that makes the grain look much nicer. in full res it kind of killed all the textures for me.
>> Anonymous
I think it's an all matter of opinion on this picture really. You can either like it or not, just matters how you feel about the grain
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
>>37621
i like the content of the photo, its just that i'm big on sharp textures and vivid contrast (in bnw -- vivid hue and saturation in color) and the homogenous grain kind of threw me off of enjoying the content. i dont think its necessarily all about the grain.
>> jesster
well thanks for all the comments, to back myself up, im a film photographer first and foremost, and i shoot 1600 neopan with 8x10 enlargments... so graininess is a given! though in future posts, i will remember to stay away from this kind of content...
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
>>37631
don't steer away from it just because i ran my mouth. i don't know what the fuck i'm talking about. share what you wanna share.
>> jesster
its not that, just felt as if i was repeating myself, and if i made the graininess apparent, it shouldnt have been to great a concern but it took the majority of criticism
>> Anonymous
It just seems like a ridiculous amount of grain for such a bright scene. You could shoot 50 or 100 speed there without any problems so why use 1600? Or if this is just photoshop grain, it doesn't make any sense.
>> des
>>37631
Have you tried neopan 1600 pulled to 800? I've heard good things about that. I still haven't had the chance to poke at neopan.
>> jesster
i photoshopped the grain in, because again i liked it. ive only made a few stabs at digital photography, and no i havent tried shooting like that i do pull back around too 1200 though so not not all detail is lost.
>> des
>>37649
If you really have to do that, do it with something like grain surgery which allows for profiling scanned film grain and tweaking grain for shadows, midtones and highlights.