Let me hear what will make this (and any other pics annons wish to post here) a better photo. What do you like and what do you not?
Make it level, fix your black-point, make it sharper.
>>2752578
i fucking love that image. its perfect. i live in a shitty city that blows horse cocks. id kill to be there in that morning mist in a comfy cabin.
>>2752578
Also, no subject.
>>2752585
>make it more my flickr HDRs!
lmao typical /p/.
>>2752588
Thanks. That's out near Chilliwack, British Columbia FYI.
>>2752596
One of the most beautiful places in Canada for sure. Here's another shot. Does the brightness above the mountain distract? Should I have toned that down?
>>2752601
I like this one much more compositionally. What camera are you using; when I zoom in it looks a little muddy.
>>2752603
Nikon D7100.
Also, not to make excuses but they were transfered to Facebook, then downloaded to my phone and posted to here so I'm not sure what they look like on a monitor (im posting from my phone) but I'm guessing there will be some loss of overall quality?
>>2752615
They look fine zoomed out, but feel smudgy when full size.
>>2752618
Any tips on how to prevent this assuming it's the photos themselves and not from processing?
BC hype! Lived here all my life.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 6D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.4 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:01:19 13:09:56 Exposure Time 1/90 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Spot Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2752578
1. it's underexposed.
2. it's not leveled.
3. the quality is potato. did you crop this?
>>2752637
ok thanks
I'd like to get some feedback on this one actually
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 700D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.5 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.6 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:30 20:28:06 Exposure Time 1/6 sec F-Number f/5.6 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 800 Lens Aperture f/5.6 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 10.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2755833
wtf ok I know what I did wrong, my aperture was so fucked there, how did I not notice it before
Take a look at this one then
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 700D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.5 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:30 22:22:04 Exposure Time 2 sec F-Number f/22.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 800 Lens Aperture f/22.0 Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 10.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Bracket White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2755833
cancer
>>2755837
AIDS
>>2752592
Making it level has nothing to do with HDR you knee-jerk defensive faggot.
>>2755836
I like them both. Kinda creepy
>>2752637
OP here. Not cropped.
>>2752578
I personally like this one but let me know your opinions.
>>2756096
It looks pretty nice, maybe a tad underexposed but what can you do with the sun in your face
I really like it, it has a nice feel to it
I'll post something for the sake of posting something, that's the only photo of mine I have on my phone
>>2755866
>Make it level, fix your black-point, make it sharper.
but yours was literally knee-jerk advice.
>make it sharper!
>m-make it clearer, dunno why just d-do it!
as if that shit helped anything on the picture. do you really need to see more detail? as it is the less detail the better. you dehaze abuser pleb.
>>2756096
North Shore? Endowment Lands? I miss BC
>>2756357
im not the OP, you bloody retard.
>>2756095
Then why is the picture quality like that? It looks worse than my smartphone. Not trying to be insulting, I'm genuinely curious as I think the technical side needs work.
>>2752601
Thats a fantastic photo
>>2756351
Just north of Mission. Its a mountain bike trail. I forget the name.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. Camera Model SP-2000 Camera Software Paint.NET v3.5.8 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2014:10:05 14:43:56 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1840 Image Height 1232
>>2752622
not that guy but to me it looks like you could have recovered the shadows to help make the trees look less muddled
>>2756391
No, I appreciate the honest feedback. Not sure what happened there if its really that bad up close. Hows the quality on the others I've posted (mountain, forest path with sun and I'm going to post my dog next)
>>2752578
Here's one of my dog
>>2756344
It has a pretty cool feel as is but just for kicks what if you darkened the dark outsides abit. Kind of a light in the darkness sort of thing?
>>2756433
I thought about it, but then it kinda smudges the shape of the light coming in from the window
