I have a problem, the more I look at my shots the uglier they seem. Too much rain, too much time spent on pp, there is no peace from this evil.
East view from San Marino.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:29
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:31
Thought I would be shooting dripping wet. I was about to be correct.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:41
The storm is coming.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:40
Time break, the swallows know it's not over yet.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:46
LET ME GUESS
IS IT A SONY OR PANASONIC?
>>2858771
best one. I like the rays in the atmosphere.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:33
>>2858768
I went for a high contrast, slightly underexposed, vivid color style for this set and I decided to keep the dark areas to accentuate the gloomy day, as long as they retain information.
>>2858772
Nope.
>>2858773
Thanks.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:34
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:42
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:35
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:44
...and that's it, I didn't process the rest yet.
inb4 don't bother with the rest
Hope you enjoy at least one.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:08 14:45:45
>>2858772
who cares? fuck off, gearfag.
One more, maybe the best one.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:06:08 21:31:07 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1500 Image Height 963
>>2859030
can you post raw or untouched file? sooc jpeg is ok too.
>>2859036
Here you go man.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make PENTAX Photographer Massimo Centemeri Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 52 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:06:02 16:51:41 Exposure Time 1/160 sec F-Number f/6.3 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash No Flash Focal Length 35.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Distant View
>>2858788
>...and that's it, I didn't process the rest yet.
Leave at least the rest of them alone please. You already fucked up the exp in every single one, have some mercy.
>>2859092
Your opinion is worthless.
>>2859094
But there aren't opinions in that post.
>>2859030
I feel like the spot where the sun is shining is too far off the frame. It's what your eye gets drawn to because the lighting in the rest of the scene is fairly boring, but it's frustrating because the most interesting part of the scene is sliding off the frame. the pic you post in OP is my favorite of the bunch.
>>2859092
>Leave at least the rest of them alone please. You already fucked up the exp in every single one, have some mercy.
Well you can elaborate more. Given the fact that I said that I underexposed a little on purpose (mainly to retain information everywhere and not burn the highlights) and I know my camera can easily sustain that, what exactly is your point here? I'm all open to criticism unless it provides nothing but pointless bashing.
thank you. this is what i think can be done with that image. youre trying to make country life bombastic and lolepic, but it just doesnt work. no use into bringing forced drama into a pastoral scenery.
[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 2016:06:08 16:16:39 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2000 Image Height 1325
>>2859098
There isn't much to say, really.
You're just underexposing "on purpose :DDD" by over 9000 stops low contrast shots "to retain information everywhere and not burn the highlights :DDDDDD" that you're overprocessing without direction; I mean, just even looks at dem halos...
Even a phone could handle that dr, learn the basics and then come back. Or not.
>>2859116
That looks like a really unpleasant place to be. I don't want to step into your photo. I also doubt that it looked that flat and cold in person
>>2859098
Just ignore him. His entire argument is going to be "It doesn't look good to me, so you did it bad and need to go away until it's better to me"
>>2859116
How did you manage to make that edit less interesting than the raw file?
Your original edit was much better...
ITT: Tripdropping.
>>2859125
OP's edit was better i mean*
>>2859116
Fair, but that's not what the scene looked like. I know, I was there. It wasn't even that "epic" as you call it but pretty close, indeed. Either you shoot raw or jpeg or whatever the result is not what you see and most likely it doesn't reflect reality. Shouldn't photography be the personal interpretation of the author? I mean, the word literally means drawing with light.
>>2859118
Dude, that childish style of arguing doesn't really make you sound smart, just saying, and if you see halos I think you need to calibrate your monitor.
>>2859127
Not sure what you mean but if you are accusing me of samefagging you are wrong. Pic related.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Massimo Image-Specific Properties:
>>2859132
You're wasting your time. There's one asshole all over the front page right now being a dick to everyone. Just ignore him. He won't go away, but at least you'll keep your sanity.
>>2859137
this board really needs IDs. Someone call Hiroshima
>>2859116
Too yellow
>>2858767
I do kinda like the light peeking the clouds
>>2858760
they look good to me, my main complaint is the lifted blacks, its kinda weird when you have stuff in the distance that has that atmospheric haze, then the stuff in the foreground looks the same way
>>2859137
his name is isi
