have someone ever used the services of a photography travel guide? someone who takes you to the best locations to take pictures. what is the fair price for the service? thanks for helping
>someone who takes you to the best locations to take pictures 5000 people have also done before
why bother
>>2829647
go by yourself. Guides have some rules you must follow, boring rules.
>>2829738
like he said, pictures everybody already shot, so why bother?
Here's the deal, get this travel by yourself, use your time to find some unique place and unique lighting, even if the subject is far known, you can take some nice photos.
Like this one I took in Torres del Paine, chile. It's a national park with thousands of people every SUMMER, so what I did? Find some other view and wait for another events to happen. I was in a forbidden place while snowing to take that picture, a guide would allow me to do so? Of course not, so why bother with guides? Do it yourself.
*guides can be a nice idea for first know the place tho
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D7000 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/3.5 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 750 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 27 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:03:14 15:26:11 Exposure Time 1/400 sec F-Number f/11.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/11.0 Exposure Bias -1 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Fine Weather Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>tfw when no asian photographer gf
>>2829647
Photography travel guides are dumb. >>2829738
put it very nicely.
Being a photographer is basically being an artist, would you want to recreate art that someone else has done and has been recreated dozens of times or would you want to spend time working on your own masterpiece?
Even if the shot is shitty as fuck you will still hold it near and dear to your heart because you took it and it is a frozen memory of the time you went to poo in loo or wherever.
>>2829738
I don't take photos to impress you. I take photos because I like taking photos, and I like looking at nice photos I've taken. It also motivates me to go see cool places that I may not have gone to see otherwise.
>>2829845
Then go take a picture of yourself holding up the tower of Pisa and stop posting here you fuck.
>>2829746
Too bad you went out off your way just for a terribly composed photo.
>>2829852
God damn /p/ is such a great place.
>>2829873
yep
>>2829873
It is not supposed to be
>>2829869
Sold this 'terribly composed photo' for about 2k us and bought new gear, tho
>>2829957
Doesn't make it a good photo. Just means some people are retarded and/or have too much money.
>>2829746
>27mm for landscape
>DX for landscape
hahahahahahaha
>>2829746
>ƒ/11
Enjoy your loss of sharpness.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 700 Image Height 441
>>2829852
fucking kek
>>2829960
I still don't like it. Can't give a fuck how much it sold for. There a number of problems.
>>2830079
idiot
>>2829869
So I don't like this photo a whole lot, but as a newphag could someone explain a bit more as to why it's composed so terribly?
>>2830079
You won't notice any in a final product. In fact, in a lot of cases, fashion and product work are done between f/11 and f/16 to keep DOF sufficient to keep a whole outfit/product in focus at non-distortion distances (and their requisite focal lengths)
>>2830604
It's not terrible, but the photographer could've done better by moving to a different place so there wouldn't be such a close distance rocks. For a scene like this you need very narrow aperture to have everything relatively in focus and causing diffraction softness throughout the whole image.
Like I said it's not terrible but can be done better.
>>2829843
>Being a photographer is basically being an artist
>being a dog is basically being a cat
>would you want to recreate art that someone else has done and has been recreated dozens of times
>implying this isn't how real artists learn and practice
