My urbex set
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
Going to dump 15 shots from this week. Im pretty happy with how they turned out, maybe some are a little soft. I had to shoot wide open (2.8) on most because the lighting was really dim. Critiques are more then welcome. Been shooting for 6 years, still trying to find my niche.
2/15
3/15
4/15
5/15
6/15
7/15
8/15
9/15
10/15
11/15
12/15
13/15
14/15
15/15
>>2799191
hello OP. this one in particular looks pretty dope. i dig the editing too, even if the start is a little lazy, it getts better soon after. its an interesting set. cant feel the 2.8, the DOF is pretty large in most shots (must be a sensor size thing), which sometimes hurts the view, as it makes things flat, i cant sense the space, specially with the not so good lighting.
also im not so sure about the color work, might be the harsh light, but i feel its bordering b&w, without being b&w.. so id boost the colors, or, go b&w. like here, you have >>2799194
and >>2799196, both very rich tonally and different on close inspection, but in the thumbnail look pretty similar, you compose with colors in mind, but it doesnt show in the final output. could benefit with some highlights darkening.
pic related has some toning and color boosting, also general darkening, i think it gives better view of the space.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:03:22 21:28:22 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 424 Image Height 640
>>2799208
Thanks for the reply. I was trying to be conscious of over processing the images. They looked a little too gritty when I was darkening the shadows. A few of them could use retouching for sure.
