OK, so... How do you get your photos the best level of critique and/or sharing opportunity /p?
I've used flickr for years, but it's so desperately bad now; and i can't take another bullshit comment with some generic banner, 20 gold stars, and glittery gif of a cat, and a link to some group consisting of swamp donkeys and hoopsniffers.
Instagram? - never used, for 12yo girls surely?
500px - Photoshop wankery, everywhere?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 5D Mark III Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.1 (Macintosh) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.2 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2014:02:10 09:54:50 Exposure Time 1/1600 sec F-Number f/1.2 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 250 Lens Aperture f/1.2 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 85.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2801063
>How do you get your photos the best level of critique and/or sharing opportunity /p?
tumblr/insta for sharing shit.
/p/ is the only place with direct critic. because every other site has a reputation system, so people try not to be unlikeable with their opinions.
>>2801063
Critique? /p/ and reddit are pretty good, so long as you present photos in the correct way. That is to say, only present your best photos, that you know are good enough to warrant critique. Present them in a humble self aware way, in your own thread, specifically asking for critique. State what you are proud of in each photo, and discuss your goals for the image, etc.
For viewing, instagram, flickr, reddit. Getting your stuff seen is a tough battle when there are a million other people out there trying for the same thing. Instagram and Flickr can give you easy likes, but nobody's really paying attention to those photos. They skim by at 40mph and tap if it looks good in passing. If you want attention, you need to stand out and do things better than those around you. (fairly obvious, but as it seems like you're asking for a trick to get views and attention, it's worth mentioning that there really isn't one)
>>2801073
>/p/ and reddit are pretty good
went there to see their critique, found this:
"If my dick could cry I'm sure it'll cry tears of joy from this picture. I like very much"
also this
"One key question, why are you centered? By centering yourself in the image you don't allow the viewers eye to move. Compare this image to the rule of thirds, or the golden ratio."
thanks, but no thanks.
>>2801077
also their posting system doesnt allow for critique of whole sets, so its focused on "critique this picture alone, contextless", which we all know is shit if you want to take photography as a serious endeavor. also external links.
/p/'s thread with all the work at the top in a sequence and then all the critiques/commentaries referencing stuff with >> feel like a real critique session by peers with pictures on a table. there is nothing like it in the whole internet.
>>2801077
So it's pretty comparable to /p/.
>went to reddit - Photo Critique and picked a random photo with 10 comments
1) Your subject is too flat and doesn't "pop" enough, I would add a rim or 3/4 back light. Also I think you could choose a more interesting angle or compassion, I would get closer, wider and lower. Exposure wise, you are on the mark. I'd think if you try this again you will get some really good stuff.
2) I agree with Dafrick about the backlighting the vehicle. In addition, I think you pushed the exposure too much in the horizon. The mountains and the sky have a bit too much noise in them, to the point of being a little distracting. I would pull it back just in that lower part of the sky, and maybe a bit on the mountain as well.
3) Your exposure time is too long and you are starting to get streaking/trails in the stars, but nowhere near long enough trails to make them look pleasant.
I am guessing that since this was shot at 18mm at f/3.5 that you are shooting on a crop frame body, correct? In which case, at 18mm according to the 500 or 600 rule, your exposure time should probably be no longer than about 18 seconds or so if you dont want the stars to blur.
Seems a lot better than the majority of what's posted here that is supposedly "critique"
>>2801084
>which we all know is shit if you want to take photography as a serious endeavor.
Most of /p/ are photos meant to be taken individually. If you can link me to three sets on here meant to be taken as sets, with coherent theme, subject, and processing, I'll give you $5.
>>2801088
>Seems a lot better than the majority of what's posted here that is supposedly "critique"
seems like basic "how to operate a camera 101", thats not proper critique. also
>astro
>photography
>>2801090
we have RPT for single photos or newbs, and individual threads for coherent sets by a single user. its a ladder. we have it all.
>If you can link me to three sets on here meant to be taken as sets, with coherent theme, subject, and processing, I'll give you $5.
here you go
>>2795349
>>2798380
>>2800396
bonus
>>2796049
>>2797740
>>2799176
do you have paypal?
>>2801093
>do you have paypal?
I do, what's your account?
