[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 40 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]



File: FullSizeRender+121.jpg (365 KB, 2500x1666)
365 KB
365 KB JPG
>Brandon Woelfel
This guy literally has three different types of photos (maximum) that he shoots ad nauseam and puts them all through an enormous amount of post editing.

Why is he so popular?
>>
>>3491200
Because 12-16 year old love him and they make up most of Instagram.
>>
He will fade out into nothing. Eventually everyone will realize he's a pedophile and a creeper. That's why he's always taking photos of girls with absolutely no curves. Always flat as a board all around. Probably looks too old for him like that.
>>
>>3491204

Stop body shaming. It's hate speech.
>>
>>3491209
do you also identify as an attack frenlicopter? honk honkler amirite? XD
>>
>>3491209
Body shaming is part of life, dick breathe. Girls with under developed bodies will always look more child like. No hint of a tit, makes you look 11. He's not right. I'm telling you if someone hacked him they would find out he's some creepy Ted Bundy shit. He doesn't sit right with me.
>>
>>3491210

Yes, I am an AH-64D.
>>
>>3491212

WRONG, it is hate speech and there is no place for it in society. You may critique his methods, but not the bodies of his subjects.
>>
>>3491200
He's all the filters turned to max, perfect for instagram girls that want to hide between lens flares.

I still prefer his things to almost all of /p/ though.
>>
He and that other YouTube hack Peter McKinnon ruined the market for so many photographers....

They do made it look like it's only about pushing a button and add the same preset to everything
>>
>>3491213
Please kindly leave, only RAH-66s allowed here.
>>
>>3491263

Pipe down, you were canceled.
>>
File: DmbVDitV4AAsvWd.jpg (39 KB, 1024x448)
39 KB
39 KB JPG
>>3491209
>>3491213
>>3491215
>>3491263
>>3491267
>>
>>3491215
Not hate speech. It's an observation. I didn't say the models were in the wrong for their bodies, I'm saying he's in the wrong for only working with his sexual preference
>>
>>3491280
how are you taking such garbage bait repeatedly?
>>
>>3491281
How are you/they?
>>
>>3491200
You sound triggered. Delete instagram and throw your smartphone away. Watch your creativity and morale improve
>>
>>3491277
If the left was actually funny, you wouldn't need applause signs in every studio.
>>
>>3491320
lol are you one of those dipshits who thinks that late night hosts are leftists instead of just rich hollywood liberal centrists?
>>
>>3491200
Does he even shoot outside?
There are overlays of bokehballs all over the place, like the ones on top of her chest and hand, the smaller ones on her glasses, and probably the huge ones are composites too.
Even the rows of bokeh balls on the top seem more composite than actually part of the scene.
Main light seems to be a beautydish or similar from the bottom, the area around her neck looks really weird in terms of temperature and tint, I guess it's the editing.

This style does nothing for me, but if it's his thing then consistency is a good thing and not bad. It might be overdone now, but if he was the one that made it popular, consistency is what made it popular and a trend. Your style is much more recognisable if it's consistent.
>>
Isn't this just a specific part of the industry? If you don't like it, don't get involved, it's pretty simple. There's a demand for these kinds photos which is why they're so popular and the guy's probably making mega bucks. But that's only one part of a broad market.
>>
>>3491200
Because people like the look.

Outside of the literal crapshoot that's the art work, the business of photography is pretty simple: you shoot what people like. The more people who like it, the more business you get. Add in basic people skills, and that's it.
>>
>>3491213
>not even an echo model
>>
>>3491253
I like McKinnon more just because his pictures at least have a bit more substance (not the same goddam "portrait of someone in neon lights with a fuckton of added lens flairs"), and he takes some genuinely good landscape shots.

I don't like the "influencer" personalities of either, and I despise that they use post processing to add things to their pictures (snow, lens flairs, etc). I'll excuse using the healing brush to take out a sign or something distracting in the background, but anything else crosses the threshold of authenticity in my book.
>>
>>3491200
I wish we could make it a rule that if you want to criticize Woelfel, McKinnon and their ilk on this board that you should post some of your own work first. Because I'm 99% sure that the people complaining about these guys have never taken a single photo better than them. I'm familiar with /p/'s general skill level, I've seen the rpt and the instagram threads and for the most part, none if it is particularly impressive. There's rare instances of an interesting photographer dumping their stuff here and there, like that guy who posted photos from the Adriatic coast awhile back. But those types of people are few and far between and I'm almost certain that you're just the average rpt snapshit shitter and not these rare photographers here that actually show some promise.

tl;dr
Stop worrying about what Woelfel is doing and worry about improving your own shitty photography you mouthbreathing shitter.
>>
>>3491326
That's just mean, putting the glory hole so close to the ground.
>>
>>3491355
Hey McKinnon, GFYS.
>>
>>3491380
Go take more pictures of the back of people’s heads. Loser.
>>
>>3491343
>There are overlays of bokehballs all over the place, like the ones on top of her chest and hand, the smaller ones on her glasses, and probably the huge ones are composites too.
She is holding a string of fairy lights you sperg
>>
>>3491355
/p/'s good photographers don't post in the rpt lol
>>
>>3491277
righties have the need to pat themselves on the backs
>>
File: large[1].jpg (232 KB, 1242x1947)
232 KB
232 KB JPG
>>3491200
I'm looking into getting into photography

how easy would it be to make a similar image? is it just a lot of photoshop?

>>3491343
>Does he even shoot outside?
see pic
>>
>>3491400
and are there any tutorials i can watch on how to take and edit a picture to make it similar?
>>
>>3491401
Use Instagram filters.
>>
>>3491353
his landscape shots are good, but everything else on his insta is not that interesting imho
>>
>>3491204
> Eventually everyone will realize he's a pedophile and a creeper. That's why he's always taking photos of girls with absolutely no curves
Isn't he gay?
>>
>>3491403
instagram filters can turn >>3491400
into >>3491200 ? i don't believe you
>>
>>3491408
Try it big boy.
>>
>>3491401
>>3491408
>get fast lens
>open aperture all the way
>buy a string of chinkshit fairy lights
>put mildly attractive girl in middle of frame holding said lights
there you go
>>
>>3491420
Instagram famous, here I come!
>>
>>3491390
Why would I take instructions from you? You're just an out of touch, burned out Canadian dope.

How's that algo change treating you?
Have the un-follows slowed down yet?
>>
>>3491400
Cheers anon.
In the OP, I can't see where the string of lights continues to, after her hand on the right. Maybe it's blurred by DoF or he masked it out.
>>
>>3491451
>In the OP, I can't see where the string of lights continues to, after her hand on the right. Maybe it's blurred by DoF or he masked it out.
She is holding the end of the string of lights, it doesnt continue anywhere.
>>
File: IMG_6825.jpg (811 KB, 2500x3325)
811 KB
811 KB JPG
>>3491408
>>3491437
also here is the before and after, beside the bokeh balls from the fairy lights it is basically just a instagram filter
>>
>>3491485
and the bokeh balls shooped in to the reflections of the glasses. looking through all the before and afters on his website it seems like he shoops in bokeh a lot
>>
What's the problem with editing, adding fake bokeh, etc.? What matters is the final picture. And his pictures look better and attract more people than your shitty street photography or whatever.

That's why he is famous, earns shit tons of money while you still live in your moms basement.
>>
>>3491511
that isnt even good bait
>>
>>3491529
Might be bait but he's correct about the final picture being all that matters.
A result is a result, if you went out of your way to achieve it through a hard way, good for you, but you don't get extra points artistically just because you used a different method.

There can be appreciation in the artistry of doing things in a hard way, but if the result is subpar, that's all there is to it.
For instance you can appreciate a very skilled machinist using a lathe to produce a mechanical part. But that doesn't make the part "better" in practical use, than a precision CNC'ed one.

If you have an issue with photo manipulations, you have to remember that the extensively manipulated work of the early pictorialists is what first convinced people to consider photography an art and not a scientific tool.
>>
File: 1550415007764.png (752 KB, 1278x1000)
752 KB
752 KB PNG
>>3491511
>>3491554
>there is literally nothing wrong with photoshopping in a mountain
So this is what digital """artists""" believe
>>
>>3491267

gg no re
>>
>>3491567
I honestly prefer the picture on the left.
As I said, the proof is in the result, and here the result on the right looks like shit, and that’s the end of it.

If he managed to produce a better result with editing, power to him. In the picture you posted, he failed (in my eyes).
>>
>>3491567
I hate sky replacements, but wedding photogs make lots of money doing it and clients don't seem to care.
>>
>>3491567
Also, if you think this is bad, you should see when videographers do it.
>>
>>3491567
i was just watching this video

>every picture given to him is dark
>he makes everything brighter
is this what photography really is about?
>>
>>3491567
He could have at least mirrored the mountain so the shadows matched up.
>>
>>3491567
was this from his series, "How to be a complete hack?"
>>
in case you're so simple to not have noticed, that's how most of the successful instagraners work, they have one """style""" (gimmick) and that's about it
milk it while you can and then find another gimmick
welcome to consumerist art
>>
>>3491200
Thomas Kinkade did the same thing with his paintings for decades. It wasn't about pushing the envelope and taking massive risks on new ideas or concepts. Dude just wanted to make a pleasing image that a lot of regular people who don't pay attention to contemporary art would want to hang on their living room wall. It's ok. We don't all have to be Picasso.
>>
>>3491326

this is a bad photo no matter how much grain you put on it.
>>
>>3491576
kek Only if you are shit at metering and so is A on the dial.
>>
>>3491570
>I honestly prefer the picture on the left.
Anyone who doesn't is crazy
>>
Looking good in the eyes or normies and being actually good are two different things.
It's like the MCU movies. They're not actual good movies, but they do all the right things for normies.
>>
>>3491576
Normies and retards here are scared of a little underexposure.
>>
>>3491567
>shadows facing the sun
>>
>>3491576
>expose to the right
>lift shadows in post
pretty much my workflow anon
>>
File: 1555911901615.jpg (43 KB, 640x631)
43 KB
43 KB JPG
>>3491200
>digital looks bland out of camera because you're SUPPOSED to edit it, get on with the times gramps
>wow look at this loser editing his shit lawl
>>
>>3491394
/p/ doesn’t have good photographers lol
>>
>>3491200
Makeup covered wimmens. That picture is awful. It’s what I imagine all the canon shooters over on reddit jerk off to.
>>
>>3491213
Sound like a F4551T
>>
>>3491485
Before looks better lmao
>>
>>3491567
>2 suns

what can you expect from someone who thinks b-roll is content?
>>
Why is instagram so shit
>>
>>3492360
Why is /p/ so shit?
>>
>>3492375
Last i checked /p/ doesn't fuck with your pics like instagram does, that alone makes it an infinitely better site. So no, it's not shit.

Why is instagram so shit?
>>
portraiture is retard tier photography
>>
>>3492377
Last time checked there's no photos of value on /p/ to edit. It's like polishing a turd, why would you even try?
>>
>>3492463
Last i checked you were still browsing instathreads on /p/



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.