Quake3World

Some of you are hardcore photographers with all badass 200.000.000.000.000 pricetag cameras.
I just recently got into photographing and i'm a total noob.. worse than a noob, but i still would like to get some feedback on both my photos, but also cool stuff to do and shoot at.

I prefer hardend b&w urban photos with motives based around decay, rust, creepy, destroyed, broken etc. alot of concrete and whatnot.

But i also been trying to play around with light, which is going so so..

My next project is similar to Denis Darzacq ( http://www.denis-darzacq.com/chute-vignettes.htm )with floating/falling people but i have no idea what settings to get and so on.

So i would appreciate some tips both from you pro's but also from amatures on these boards, basically anyone.

Here are some pics i've taken.

Trying light ideas






B&W urban










Are they plain shit?
Too much hardend? Bad motives? Boring? Wrong ISO? Too long shutter?
Has any of you been trying this with floating/falling pictures and know some good settings?
Good shots when playing with light.. any ideas?

Hey queefburper, good to see you again

Not a photographer so have no technical suggestions, but your composition in the BW ones looks pretty good (not so much in the colour, but I guess they were technical experiments). I like the one of the stairwell, maybe PS out the guy at the bottom.

http://photoinf.com/General/KODAK/guide ... ition.html

The light ones are meh but the B&W ones I like. I know shit about photography however.

Photographers are the new comedians.*

*Everyones a photographer.

someone ban the op please...k thx...

4days wrote:Hey queefburper, good to see you again

Not a photographer so have no technical suggestions, but your composition in the BW ones looks pretty good (not so much in the colour, but I guess they were technical experiments). I like the one of the stairwell, maybe PS out the guy at the bottom.

http://photoinf.com/General/KODAK/guide ... ition.html

*Bookmarked* Thanks for the tip 4days. On a sidenote those people in the pictures from the link you gave are pretty fucking early 80's hardcore.

Yea, your probably right Kracus.. they are pretty meh, nothing really spectacular with them.. gonna have to try harder.
You get blind by looking at your own photos.. after awhile they tend to look really good, just like playing offline for a year in Q3 and think your good, then when you go online.. BAM!!! FUCKING OWNED BIIIIIIIIAAAAAATCH!

Just a new-found hobby (the PS3 have made me fat(ter).. i'm far from any good.

I like light photographs to be honest but what typically makes them cool is the glow the light throws onto the items surrounding you.

In that particular spot, you don't get that effect because it's overpowered by the streetlights. I'd try that again but in a dark room or area and I bet it'll look awsome. AD mirrors for more awsome.

theyre fine

what cam was used?

Hey it's that emotional scandinavian guy, hi.

Black and whites are not bad.

plained wrote:theyre fine

what cam was used?

Dare i say it?.. gonna get fucking slaughtered by doombrain and the bunch..

It's a bridgecam for under $200, Fujifilm finepix S3200 with 24x zoom, fuck the zoom i bought it for all the DSLR features, it's basically a point-and-shoot cam with alot of auto functions but for enthusiasts/hobby photographers it has manual and most of the features from the big boys, electronic view finder (EVF), iso settings, shutter and aperture settings whitebalance and even an option to save original picture (doubt its RAW though).




I might be emotional and crazy, but i'm not that stupid buying a Canon for $1000 when i hardly know how to operate a bridgecam. With that said, i did look at the big brother Finepix HS20 EXR which has even more features like turnable lcd screen and manual zoom. It cost's $500. Might get it when (if ever) i'm good at taking photos.





And hi Ryoki

tbh the last 2 b&w ones are pretty darn good (esp the stairwell), the other b&w ones aren't that interesting though. try not to rely on post-processing to do all the work for you. pp can make a good photo great but a shit photo will just look like you tried too hard

as for the light thing: good idea but try a setup no one's used before rather than flailing about with a couple of sparklers (or whatever you were flailing). do some totally original, like setup a model train set out in a clearing in the swedish forest (you might need a generator or a long extension lead, lol) then do a long exposure of it going round and round, which should give off enough light to throw some on the surrounding trees. that would look pretty awesome

seremtan wrote:
as for the light thing: good idea but try a setup no one's used before rather than flailing about with a couple of sparklers (or whatever you were flailing). do some totally original, like setup a model train set out in a clearing in the swedish forest (you might need a generator or a long extension lead, lol) then do a long exposure of it going round and round, which should give off enough light to throw some on the surrounding trees. that would look pretty awesome

I know, the idea is really shitty.. but i had to start somewhere, it's so un-original it can be.
A modeltrain? A bit far fetched.. but you did give a good idea of lights and forest and as both you and Kracus have said, it's more about the light on the surroundings.. hmm.. good idea.

I will think of something and let you guys see the result.. forest, lights, mirrors...hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

i like the black and white ones but you say you don't really know what you are going for and then ask how they can be improved....not sure what to say

Some feedback and tips:

This shot has great content and the sky is really nice, but you framed it too square with the focus smack-dab in the middle of the frame, which is usually visually boring as opposed to putting the focal object slightly off-centre and using negative space to make the photo more interesting.



This one of the stairs is again ripe with great content but again your framing is flat. Lower the camera a bit and move to your left or right by a step to get a better angle.



This one is nice but I'd have preferred if you kept the shutter open a bit longer to give the people in the shot a blurrier appearance. Blurrier people = reinforcement that the stairwell is the main thing in this shot, and the people are simply "passing through".



This shot is perfect.

xer0s wrote:Photographers are the new comedians.*

*Everyones a photographer.

This is true - especially as someone growing a business right now I've seen it on both ends, as the guy who was just starting without a clue and now as someone with a bit more experience and a growing business.

I quickly realized, for example, that weddings were a ridiculous amount of work and required a lot more technical proficiency than I had at the time I wanted to get into them. Luckily I was able to apprentice under a phenomenal
professional for several weddings. But that strategy seems to be the exception - in all aspects of photography. It is no exaggeration that there are people who are buying an entry level DSLR (still capable of good pics of course) and
a week or two later making a business ad offering to shoot weddings for $300 or family portraits for $25 or whatever.

u want some?

tnf, what does your wedding packages and prices look like. I'm actually searching for one.

I'm not interest in hiring you of course, but I'm just curious. Cause it looks like I'm going to be shelling out around $3k for a damn photographer...

GONNAFISTYA wrote:Some feedback and tips:

This shot has great content and the sky is really nice, but you framed it too square with the focus smack-dab in the middle of the frame, which is usually visually boring as opposed to putting the focal object slightly off-centre and using negative space to make the photo more interesting.



This one of the stairs is again ripe with great content but again your framing is flat. Lower the camera a bit and move to your left or right by a step to get a better angle.



This one is nice but I'd have preferred if you kept the shutter open a bit longer to give the people in the shot a blurrier appearance. Blurrier people = reinforcement that the stairwell is the main thing in this shot, and the people are simply "passing through".


This shot is perfect.

Thanks for the feedback.
So the top pic (lamp post) should have had a wider scenery? I thought if i just took a centered shot on the lamp, it would have had a greater effect and just focus on it since it had alot of details (the plastic melted from a fire). I will have this in mind when taking similar photos.

The stair pic i tried to line up in a center and i took the camera really low.. but yea, now that you mention it, it's way off really.. i see what your saying here.

Still testing around on shutter speed.. i thought it came out good, but maybe it should have been a bit longer.

Anyway, appreciated and i will take with me what you said.

feedback wrote:u want some?

Otherwise i havent mentioned your name in the topic

The Asians.. taking it to the extreme when taking photos of floating people?

"Chinese performance artist Li Wei, who uses a combination of mirror, metal wires, scaffolding and acrobatics to create his remarkable real-life montages.

His work is a mixture of performance art and photography that creates illusions of a sometimes "

http://curiousphotos.blogspot.com/2009/ ... s-not.html

kewl

reefsurfer wrote:

plained wrote:theyre fine

what cam was used?

Dare i say it?.. gonna get fucking slaughtered by doombrain and the bunch..

It's a bridgecam for under $200, Fujifilm finepix S3200 with 24x zoom, fuck the zoom i bought it for all the DSLR features, it's basically a point-and-shoot cam with alot of auto functions but for enthusiasts/hobby photographers it has manual and most of the features from the big boys, electronic view finder (EVF), iso settings, shutter and aperture settings whitebalance and even an option to save original picture (doubt its RAW though).




I might be emotional and crazy, but i'm not that stupid buying a Canon for $1000 when i hardly know how to operate a bridgecam. With that said, i did look at the big brother Finepix HS20 EXR which has even more features like turnable lcd screen and manual zoom. It cost's $500. Might get it when (if ever) i'm good at taking photos.





And hi Ryoki

fuji ey really

It seems to work well

i have noticed the fujis dont seem to be plagued with the mega excessive noise reduction the sonys and canons have,

They look quite nice

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:QUEEFSLURPER

shaft wrote:kewl

*Waves*

plained wrote:

fuji ey really

It seems to work well

i have noticed the fujis dont seem to be plagued with the mega excessive noise reduction the sonys and canons have,

They look quite nice

Yea... thats what i thought aswell, but after reading every review(most reviewers are hardcore photographers and don't give an objective side when reviewing a bridgecam) on the web and trying it in the store, i was hooked.
Got some friends with Canon(EOS and D5 and whatnot) cameras and they are really impressed (not in a we-are-his-friend-so-we-have-to impressed) both by all the functions, the zoom feature and mostly by the picture quality when looking at the pricetag.

They belive it's a very good first time pick, especially for a noob like me with no insight on DSLR cameras.
And while the friends carry thier heavy cameras AND a bag with 2-3 objectives to get some zoom pics, i carry this little puppy around and still get better zoom than them. Oh and did i mention the macro?.. it can handle wicked pics with objects as near as (if i get it right) 0.7 inches from the screen.

I'll highly recommend it, check it out at the local store (+ it's this years cam, they got out on the market around may.. i think).

Btw, i tried some floating/levitation pics today.. decent, but i'm not gonna show them on here.. gonna try some more before it's somewhat flameproof around these parts..