How good do your photos need to show them off without looking like an idiot? I like to take pictures occasionally but I don't want to embarrass myself by calling them "photography" if they're actually terrible. I'll post a few examples of my "work".[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot SX160 ISMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.5Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFirmware VersionFirmware Version 1.00Lens Size5.00 - 80.00 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2020:10:25 22:13:20Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/4.5Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias1/3 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length15.88 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width4608Image Height3456RenderingCustomExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandardImage Number124-1675Focus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeISO Speed RatingAutoSharpnessNormalSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeUnknownImage SizeLargeFocus ModeSingleDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance0.460 mWhite BalanceUnknownExposure Compensation4Sensor ISO Speed192
>>3749161[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeAppleCamera ModeliPhone 6Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)29 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2020:10:25 22:21:37Exposure Time1/178 secF-Numberf/2.2Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating32Lens Aperturef/2.2Brightness7.0 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length4.15 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3264Image Height1965Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardTime (UTC)16:36:44Date (UTC)2017:08:06
>>3749162[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeAppleCamera ModeliPhone 6Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)145 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2020:10:25 22:22:32Exposure Time1/1014 secF-Numberf/2.2Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating32Lens Aperturef/2.2Brightness9.6 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length4.15 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3264Image Height2448Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoDigital Zoom Ratio5.0Scene Capture TypeStandardTime (UTC)16:46:11.90Date (UTC)2017:08:25
>>3749164Last one[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeAppleCamera ModeliPhone 6Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)39 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2020:10:25 22:24:47Exposure Time1/1319 secF-Numberf/2.2Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating32Lens Aperturef/2.2Brightness10.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length4.15 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3264Image Height2448Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoDigital Zoom Ratio1.3Scene Capture TypeStandardTime (UTC)16:44:3.86Date (UTC)2017:09:16
>>3749160Well first and the most difficult part is your photos generally should be interesting to other people. (Unless shooting for desktop backgrounds or images for decorating a dentist waiting room.)
My photos are shit. What do I care?
>>3749160>Post shitty photos >Ask for real critique >Ignore "It's shit" posters>Figure out what could make it better>Take more pictures with purpose >Get better>Come back post more repeat
I've not taken a good photo in my life, doesn't stop me bombarding anyone who'll look
What's your definition of a 'good' photo? How about just taking an interesting one? Just be in the moment. See something that you think needs to be photographed, then do it.
I choose my audience. /pee/ hates just about everything but mummy and my drunk friends like my schotts[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAXCamera ModelPENTAX K-50Camera SoftwareAperture 3.4.5Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image Created2015:04:03 22:45:24Exposure Time13 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating6400Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length18.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1230Image Height814RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeDistant View
>>374921113s, iso 6400, f3.5?Was it 3am with no moon, inside of a cave or something?
>>3749213yeah it was a vurry dark night, and it was cloudy and foggy. all the skylight is basically just whatever light pollution was captured in the clouds[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePENTAXCamera ModelPENTAX K-50Camera SoftwareAperture 3.4.5Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Pixel CompositionUnknownHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2015:04:03 22:51:10Exposure Time13 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length18.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1230Image Height814RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeDistant View
>>3749214That sounds pretty dark. It still came out very nice. Outstanding, actually. I really like it.
>>3749214The spots you highlighted look pretty cool, too.
>>3749216Welcome anon to the inner circle of drunk friends and family members
>>3749178>>3749210That's very subjective. Some people have a talent for shooting interesting pictures even with a mundane and uninteresting subject. A friend recently took a pic of a bathroom from above where you see the (closed) toilet, the sink, the dark gray floor and a white rug. It's an amazing composition. And he does shit like that all the time, he has a great eye.Meanwhile all I can do is shoot landmarks and aggressively edit the picture in lightroom only to come up with a handful of pictures worth looking at out of tens of pictures. I have the desire to create but I don't believe I have the talent. Very rarely do I identify an interesting shooting opportunity, my pics tend to be normalfag snapshits.
Maybe you'll get lucky - I just saw this dumbass in Pinellas Park the other day. I didn't have much time before the light changed, so I took the best shot I could.I think it turned out OK.
>>3749178>>3749225Neither of you are really wrong. You can take a photograph of a subject that's not conventionally interesting and make it appear interesting and tasteful. But a subject that's interesting will still be interesting even if the photo itself is not the best in terms of execution.
>>3749225What you lack in talent you can make do with discipline anon. The good eye will come eventually
>>3749229extremely blurry, I bet you cropped it? Shoulda chased him and got the shot
>>3749160As good as you intend them to be. Some of the more popular people just repost their same photos with different edits, making them look neon, or dreamy, but would otherwise be ripped apart by a more traditional person. Blown out and pushed past the white points or not pushed enough, pick or choose what you see as a flaw. Just have confidence in what you do and instill it's own value, but apply the basics of good photography, and anyone will be interested.
>>3749160>How good do your photos need to show them off without looking like an idiotpost em on /p/ for crit until you get positive feedback>>3749160gimmicky and boring, but some normies might like the out-of-focus look. Problem is the rain isn't uniform or pleasant to look at, and the window is dirty too...>>3749161might work as generic wallpaper, otherwise boring>>3749162messy, flat lighting, boring>>3749164not very good tbqh, what were you trying to do here? "trying to be artsy" is never a good motivation for taking a picture>>3749166boring, looks like a selfie background to prove you went to an apple orchard, rather than a picture you would want to show for its own sake>>3749211underexposed, generic long exposure waterfall with lots of distracting elements (branches on right, messy dead leaves and branches on bottom left)>>3749214like above crit but now with meme light-writing distracitons
>>3749161I like it very much!>>3749166Mom liked it!
>>3753281Why would you post and all of your critiques be "boring"? Why not post something interesting so anon can see what you think is boring about them by comparison...
>>3749160Depends on the context in which you show them off. When dealing with friends and family, never violate the most scared rule of photography: don’t bore people with your photos. If you showing other photographers while asking for feedback, it doesn’t matter how shitty the pic is as long as you can describe why you thought it was worth sharing.
>>3749160Sometimes you just get lucky.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakemotorolaCamera Modelmoto e5 playCamera Softwarejames_t-user 8.0.0 OCPS27.91-150-14-13 18 release-keysMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2020:10:23 11:27:10Exposure Time1/1246 secF-Numberf/2.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating50Lens Aperturef/2.0BrightnessUnknownExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length2.85 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3264Image Height1836RenderingCustomExposure ModeAuto BracketWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationLowSharpnessSoftGeodetic Survey DataWGS-84
>>3753281"Trying to be artsy" sounds gay but I do think it's a good motivation for taking a picture
>>3749160Looks like photography to me. I mean, they’re not terribly good photos, but I can see what you’re going for. Maybe some more post processing would help, but even the fact that I’m bringing it up probably means your subjects aren’t that interesting. I would place these solidly as “dump them on instagram so I can see how much I’ve improved in a year” tier.
>>3761562it might be good motivation for taking a picturebut it won't be motivation for taking a good pictureIf you're trying to force something to look good that doesn't look good, then what makes you think other people viewing that photo (who aren't invested in it) will think it looks good?
>>3761706Definitely forcing won't be good. To me it's just that "trying being artsy" is not too different from "taking a good picture". Both come down to making choices of composition and lighting and so on. All I'm trying to say is that aesthetics (obviously) play an important role in premeditating a photo. But yea, you can definitely also fall into a mindset that results in "style over substance", though sometimes the style IS the substance.
>>3761722>sometimes the style IS the substance.that's how you end up with instagram filter and lightroom preset tier photos, They'll might good in the thumbnail or scrolling through your phone, but spend more than 30 seconds looking at it and it'll fall apart.There's reason instagram tier photos aren't printed out and hanged on walls, even on the most normalfag of normalfag cafes and stores
>>3761768What I had in mind when I said that is more examples of images that don't necessarily have a subject, but are more about the textures, colours and effects applied to them to create an interesting visual. Noone should be looking at photos on instagram in the first place. I can see its networking value of it but you will get eye cancer trying looking at any kind of compressed image on a phone-sized screen.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiColor Space InformationsRGB
I just fuck around on Photocrowd and Gurushots. I'm not making any money off of my hobby and never planned to.But if you want to feel better about your pictures, go check out a "professional" selling their photos at a gallery or coffee shop. It's almost invariably overexposed snapshits if barns and horribly HDR'd pics with huge amounts of halo artifacts from where they slapped a filter on it.
>>3761800>It's almost invariably overexposed snapshits if barns You sure you're not talking about the Fuji tranny?
>>3749160First thing people do when they get a camera is training aesthetics. This is what you seem to be doing now, you're taking those shots of rain on window, macro things, you snap good frames you notice around, and all of that is very good for you, but it's not quite a "photography material". Keep doing what you do and don't let anyone tell you otherwise because it's very important to learn how to take this kind of photos, but also be humble and realize that your photos are hardly interesting for now. One day, you'll go for a walk, on a trip, you'll find something that's actually interesting and worthy, and then you'll have your good photo to show to people. Meanwhile, enjoy the process of learning. Keep in mind that all of your skill that lets you capture things so they look pretty is just a nice wrapping for meaningful content.There is nothing wrong with macro bokeh pics everyone takes at first, it's a necessary step, but if you want to show someone a photo, then best case scenario is when it it contains something so interesting that it would be worth checking out even as a quick one hand blurry smartphone snap. "I went to abandoned factory with my compact" beats "I took photos of my coffee cup with my full frame" any day of the week.And none of that makes coffee cup snapshits bad. Fun things are fun.
>>3761722The difference is that in one you're trying, and in the other you're doing. Don't get me wrong, you need to try for a while before doing, because that's how it goes with anything, but trying can be counterproductive to actually doing because it's just a performance put on rather than a genuine attempt at understanding. I don't know if I'm being clear with what I'm saying, so ask me for elaboration if you want to discuss
>>3749160>>3749161>>3749162>>3749164>>3749166Anon, being unabashedly bad at something is what we should all do when starting out. You can't just pretend like you know what you're doing. Play with your camera, review your snaps, and ask for critique on your best onesSide note, I've taken photos similar to #4. Posting so you can check them out
>>3762211Some time when you see a subject you like, take a moment to observe it and see what stands out to you about it. This is because it trains your eye, and because the best aspect of a photo isn't necessarily the first thing you see