Photography
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
What went wrong?
>>2857121
anyone mind mirroring the image so i can properly make out what the OP's autisming about?
women think they can be photographers roflmao
>>2857121
her parents fucked and had her. that's what...
>>2857121
Digital photography happened
>>2857123
Sure, here you go. It was mirrored over some axis. Since you didnt specify...
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 500 Image Height 331 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:06:06 20:22:03 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 500 Image Height 331
>>2858416
toppest of keks
>>2858720
I only got 1 :/
>>2858731
Here ya go!
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Gordon Image-Specific Properties:
>>2857121
>self-referencial art
Pampered, trustfund only-children focussing way too much on "lifestyle" rather than life's works and with post-modern philosophies happened, that's what
>>2857121
When I see a girl with a camera, I judge her way more harshly that I would a male. I think women have created that reality for themselves, unfortunately. But they made their bed, now they need to lay in it too. A female photographer needs to be pretty outstanding to overcome the shittiness that all of the other 'look at how hot I am in my selfies' broads who only got where they are because of the men whose backs they have stepped on to get there. Some of us had to work every step of the way to get where we are. There arent nearly enough Peggy Olsons out there. This bitch is probably a Megan Draper.
That's what.
>>2858782
>I think women have created that reality for themselves, unfortunately.
I think your virginity has created this
sage because this is a undercover r9k thread
>>2857121
A lot of people are too lazy to actually get good at taking pictures. By this I mean: good at taking technically solid pictures. Not good at writing interesting stories (HONY), not good at applying VSCO, not good at finding a nice subject but then just shooting it with no real thought but getting 1 million likes because it's a pretty girl at the beach. Good at using a camera to take solid photographs that speak on their own.
I'm not an elitist, I'm just concerned with what photography is getting a lot of exposure and how that's effecting how people approach it and learn about it. Especially when I keep spotting obvious compositional/exposure errors in images uploaded by "great" photographers with huge followings on Flickr etc. It doesn't seem to be this way with other visual mediums - if you uploaded a drawing with crappy proportions and bad shading nobody would give it a second look.
>>2857121
>What went wrong?
Well, women are meme after all, what did everyone expect.
>>2858851
But on the other hand, isn't this increase in the popularity of photography good for 'real' photogs like yourself? Yes there are many shitty insta photogs who have more followers than you, but what does that matter? Ss more people get into photography, there are surely more real artists that come out. this increase in the population of real photogs grows the industry and gives real photogs a better chance of making a living.
But I do feel you on the laziness aspect. My roommate used to shoot with his iphone, and after seeing some of my photography wanted to climb aboard the SLR train. so he buys a d7100 and after 5 minutes of me explaining the basics to him (exposure triangle etc), he starts saying 'this is kinda complicated, i just want something that is super quick and takes [i] sick [/i] photos. i might just return this'. And i think that sums it up well. they want to easily take interesting photos. they think gear makes a photo. he never imagined he'd have to learn about ISO and shutter speed.
>>2858782
There's also plenty of women taking shit pictures and getting Instagram fame for "challenging the eurocentric white male approach to photography"
>>2858884
>"challenging the eurocentric white male approach to photography"
lmoa. what would that be? pics of tampons and such?
More p girls plz
>>2858861
>Isn't the increase in popularity good for photogs like yourself
Maybe it is and I just don't see it/take it for granted. It doesn't bother me if someone is more popular, it just bothers me to see how much mediocrity is celebrated in photography. I was at an Olive Garden a couple weeks ago and they had this wide angle shot of a cafe outside somewhere, probably in a European city. I couldn't get over how dull and flat the light was, and how mediocre the whole shot was. I don't think I've ever seen somebody put up a painting that bad. But I see it all the fucking time with photography, and it's just disappointing.
Add to it the fact that there is this rising trend of feelings/emotional exposition seeming to be considered the priority in photography. I'm not the only person who sees this either, PetaPixel actually ran an opinion article on it last week: http://petapixel.com/2016/05/31/opinion-disturbing-trend-photography/
>And i think that sums it up well. they want to easily take interesting photos. they think gear makes a photo. he never imagined he'd have to learn about ISO and shutter speed.
Yeah I guess that's bound to happen. People get turned off when they realize that they like the idea of doing something but don't actually want to work at it and do it properly.
Many people get into a photography but not many are into it for the long haul. I've known many people who buy a camera and start taking photos only to slow down or stop completely after a year or so. Or they shot as a hobby in college but then got married/got a career/had kids and it fell to the wayside. The number of people who stick it out for several years, decades even, are greatly outnumbered by the rest who get into photography for a couple of years then move onto something else.
>>2858888
Believe it or not... yeah, I actually used to follow one on Instagram who posted pictures of tampons and pads and menstrual blood.
Other subjects include: saggy and asymmetrical tits, naked fatties giving the middle finger to the patriarchy, hairy armpits, ugly black girls, etc
All with shitty lighting and composition. Lots of unbalanced built-in flashes and their terrible color casts. Zero post-processing aside from smartphone filter apps.
But hey, these are "beautiful" and we can't appreciate them because "we've been exposed our whole life to photos taken by white males."
I actually took a workshop once and out of the 12 people there, 2 were these shitheads. The instructor (who was a black woman, mind you) was showing legendary Magnum photos and these two were completely unimpressed because they "didn't show stuff from a female perspective."
>>2858913
>I actually took a workshop once and out of the 12 people there, 2 were these shitheads. The instructor (who was a black woman, mind you) was showing legendary Magnum photos and these two were completely unimpressed because they "didn't show stuff from a female perspective."
well they are right. thats why magnum is -or was- good.
>>2857121
mamiya 7
