File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Opinions?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSamsung TechwinCamera Model<KENOX S630 / Samsung S630>Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)35 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiImage Created2008:02:15 21:35:29Exposure Time1/180 secF-Numberf/7.1Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating80Lens Aperturef/1.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.80 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2112Image Height2816Exposure Index1Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationUnknownSharpnessNormal
>> Anonymous
Great potential. Love the angle!
>> Anonymous
Cliche
>> Anonymous
>>170942
How so? Can't really get input if there's none given.
>> Anonymous
>>170945
Can't people think for themselves anymore? Jesus Christ.

This particular towers has been shot thousands, maybe even millions of times like this.

Cliche. In layman's terms, it's been overdone to death. Be more original and take a new approach. Ride a plane, jump out and take photos while you're falling to your death.
>> Anonymous
>>170946
So because someone wants input that means they can't think for themselves? Right.
If the tower has been shot like this MILLIONS of times, please, provide evidence. I for one have /never/ seen the tower shot from this point of view. Enlighten us, oh all knowing anon.
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
almost good but not quite
>> Anonymous
lol i googled "big ben cliche" and got better looking photos than this.
>> Anonymous
>>170980
proof or GTFO
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>170984
>> Anonymous
>>170987
a tiny photo manipped pic is your "proof"? puhleeze.
OPs isn't great but it's better than that POS
>> Anonymous
>>170988OPs isn't great but it's better than that POS

lern2compose
>> Anonymous
>>170988
OP pic: There's a barb blocking the view of the tower. Blue, boring sky. Too "touristy".

The other pic: The tower is neatly framed by the bars. Smack in the middle, but I think it makes it look more iconic, so I like it. The color of the tower makes it stand out from the gray & dramatic sky.

If you're still going to argue that your (since I can't think of another person who would love OP's pic besides himself) photo is better, then you need to learn more.
>> Anonymous
>>170984

...just google 'big ben cliche'

I did, and I lol'd, anon was indeed correct
>> Anonymous
>>170994
just because you don't like it doesn't mean someone else won't.
and i happen to think youre quite idiotic considering the picture you posted is itty bitty on top of being shopped to hell and back. i happen to like the fact there's a foreground, it looks boring and stereotypical if its perfectly framed. not to say the OPs pic doesnt need work, like I said, but it is a million x's better than the faggotry you posted.
>> Anonymous
>>170995
odd, i just goggled it and the only thing that came up that looked anything like the OP was the crappy ass pic that was posted. that POS probably is a cliche, the OPs pic, not so much.
>> Anonymous
>>170933
*sigh*

If you can't accept honest criticism, then don't post here. Go to deviantart or flickr.

ITT: We pamper OP with praises.

"OMG!!!!!!!!!!1 THIS IS JUST SOOOOOO COOOOOOL!!!!! THIS IS AN AWESOME CAPTUER!!!!!!!!!! AAA+++++ QUALITY!!!!!!!!!!!"
>> Anonymous
>>171001
o.O I haven't seen the OP post in here since like, hours ago. i however, have been posting. last i cked i havent been to europe, i fucking wish. thanks for thinking i could afford such a thing though!! arent you the sweetest.
>> Anonymous
holy fucking shit.

either google is REALLY fast or /p/ is REALLY slow

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22big%20ben%20cliche%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozill
a:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=iw
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>171010
Google's really fast.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>171017
and /p/ is really slow.
>> Anonymous
>>171010
What is this supposed to show? I'm obviously missing it.
>> Anonymous
>>171010

i don't get it
>> Sicko !L3HRY/miC.
     File :-(, x)
Does the pigeon make it less cliché?

It's pretty hard to take a shot of any tourist attracting famous building or monument without it looking the same as the other four million shots of it. Personally I take them anyway for my own personal shots but I wouldn't ask for critique on them.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAX CorporationCamera ModelPENTAX K100DCamera SoftwareGIMP 2.4.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern564Focal Length (35mm Equiv)52 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:14 18:56:42Exposure Time1/1000 secF-Numberf/9.5Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length35.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeDistant View
>> Anonymous
>>171055

1) Not a pidgeon.
2) Terrible shoop.
3) Needs moar lenz flare, DOF, and HDR.
>> Sicko !L3HRY/miC.
>>171059

Seagull then, or whatever it is, I don't know my birds.

Not a shoop though.
>> Anonymous
>>171055
What he said. Other than the fact that I usually call those seagulls instead of pigeons.

Everyone is going to take pictures like that. Not everyone is going to show them off.
>> Anonymous
>>171059
>pidgeon

STOP! GRAMMER TIME
>> Anonymous
>>171055
oversharpened photo is oooversharpened
>> Anonymous
>>171146
Oh the irony. Firstly, spelling isn't part of grammar though they are both part of linguistics. Secondly, it's spelled grammar.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>171178
>> Even_Steven !!rUmVORA7JiP
>>171055

Do some perspective correction and maybe fix the minor barrel distortion. Also less sharpening and lower the saturation a tad.
>> Anonymous
>>171180
lol troll got pwned