# 2 for C&C



## er111a (May 19, 2010)

thank you 
1)






2)




bonus
3)


----------



## wisv1k (May 19, 2010)

I am no pro, not even close but I noticed that the first one is crooked and not centered.  Perhaps out of focus too.  I prefer the first edit on the second picture more.  Others may not, but there is something I like about it.  Maybe because I am a dog person.


----------



## white (May 19, 2010)

Most good prose does not call attention to itself. The language is easy to understand, the sentences are smooth and flowing, and before you realize it, you've read 30 pages.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

^ :thumbup:


:lmao:


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

Really?

That's a shame.

Maybe it just got stuck in your hair?

You just need to tease it out.


----------



## Sbuxo (May 19, 2010)

. . .I honestly just come to your C&Cs to see what new torture you've put more photos through.

#1: Too much Gaussian blur (or something!), composition sucks: it's crooked and off-center like the person above said. It really just hurts my eyes looking at it, it could have been a neat image if the whites were white and not blue, and if there was some actual substance to it rather than being on 95% blur.

#2/#3: I think you'd enjoy taking photos with an holga camera. The shadows are so black there is no detail, but it's still on the verge of becoming a somewhat interesting shot, I feel that the subjects are somewhat boring. It just looks like a snapshot you tried too hard to fix with PS.  But that's nothing new to you, now is it? :er:


----------



## Sbuxo (May 19, 2010)

erose86 said:


> white said:
> 
> 
> > Most good prose does not call attention to itself. The language is easy to understand, the sentences are smooth and flowing, and before you realize it, you've read 30 pages.
> ...


I think it has to do with a good picture doesn't need so much fxcking photoshop to be good!


----------



## Aayria (May 19, 2010)

erose86 said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Really?
> ...



   I think that may have been what he was going for.. But it would really help us out if he described a bit of his artistic interpretations on things instead of just posting up the picture for C&C. 
   When a picture is just put out there, we're judging it based on what we know makes a good photo.
   If he posts it along with an explanation, then maybe we can help with feedback on whether we feel he achieved what he was after. :blushing:


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

Aayria said:


> I think that may have been what he was going for.. But it would really help us out if he described a bit of his artistic interpretations on things instead of just posting up the picture for C&C.


 
I have suggested he do that. Again, and again, and again, and again...


----------



## PerfectlyFlawed (May 19, 2010)

Oh my...
What were trying achieve with the Pp?   :raisedbrow:      
 :waiting:  I dont think I'm gonna PP on these.. I'm curious to see what Happens.


----------



## alarionov (May 19, 2010)

well crop number 1 to just the door Frame and you have a nice Christmas card cover other than that not much else to be done with it.

2. No Opinion.


----------



## Noonz (May 19, 2010)

Hmmm you kind of remind me of Jocelyn Wildenstein.. no matter how bad something gets, you continue to make it worse by doing the same thing over and over. Focus on the photography, dude. Pretty sure this sort of 'graphic design' doesn't belong here. Peace :er:


----------



## PerfectlyFlawed (May 19, 2010)

erose86 said:


> PerfectlyFlawed said:
> 
> 
> > I'm curious to see what Happens.
> ...



Yep...:violin:
:waiting:....I understand he *LOVES*( perhaps being an understatement) his Photoshop... but, like everyone has said *many* times before..
When your asking for C/C, you have to be willing to make the changes.. and learn from your mistakes...The persistence is growing old.  :Face-Palm:


----------



## ShutterBird (May 19, 2010)

I sorta feel sorry for him. He's young and you can tell he really enjoys photography. He at least takes the time to try different things. How many young people nowadays do constructive and artistic things instead of being lazy and doing nothing or playing video games? If everyone cant stand his pictures, why do you keep looking at them?


----------



## PerfectlyFlawed (May 19, 2010)

erose86 said:


> ShutterBird said:
> 
> 
> > why do you keep looking at them?
> ...



Hmm.,. Exactly what she said ^.

He HAS potential... he just needs to lay off the PP that he frequently over uses. 

Still hopeful!


----------



## Geaux (May 19, 2010)

Ok, in the last thread you said you were going to delete PS after those pictures.  I told you not to and to just live and learn.  I should have just said delete PS .... LOL j/k


I'm starting to wonder if your use of photoshop filters is to compensate for bad photos (oof, composition, etc).


----------



## Geaux (May 19, 2010)

erose86 said:


> (HA!  I said pee pee veil... :lmao: )



:lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## creisinger (May 19, 2010)

For what it's worth I think especially the first image looks smudgy. It doesn't have the warm, glowing appearance of the holidays. It just looks like an accident.

I would really like to hear how you processed that? Did you use the blur tool selectively?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

Hmmm...he still seems to shoot in Auto Mode.
I don't think he really understands photography, how to use his camera, or how to get a good exposure, let alone creative exposure. I have come to think he loves Photoshopping more than photography. I am unsure whether he _understands_ composition and how to use it. Photo #1 kinda exemplifies this. That image should be symmetrical. He doesn't use photoshop to fix the bad things in images, he uses it to apply "effects".


----------



## FattyMcJ (May 19, 2010)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Hmmm...he still seems to shoot in Auto Mode.
> *I don't think he really understands photography*, how to use his camera, or how to get a good exposure, let alone creative exposure. *I have come to think he loves Photoshopping more than photography.* I am unsure whether he _understands_ composition and how to use it. Photo #1 kinda exemplifies this. That image should be symmetrical. *He doesn't use photoshop to fix the bad things in images, he uses it to apply "effects".*



Bingo


----------



## ababysean (May 19, 2010)

I don't understand why so many people are being so rude?
This is a child?? who obviously has a passion about something.

OP: The first pic is not centered, that is why it looks off, the lights on either side, one is cut off, the other has extra space, make sure you look at stuff like that when shooting....

I really like the other 2, I don't see anything wrong with them.  Would they win 5000 dollars at a contest, no, but how many people do?

Keep it up!


----------



## Derrel (May 19, 2010)

I think your first shot had some potential. A more-strictly controlled composition woul have really elevated the shot; the porch and doors are designed and decorated in a very formal, symmetrical manner, but the composition you made is out of balance, and the lack of symmetry works against the picture. The post processing however, is actually interesting to me, since it creates an almost surrealistic feeling. Good job on the PP technique, but the underlying scene, the symmetrical, formally-balanced scene does not quite come together with the hand-held type of composition/photograph. This is the kind of scene where it's critical to get the camera **exactly** aligned so that you have a formal balance, OR from an angle that's clearly offset enough so that we get the sense that we're looking from an off to the side point of view.

The second shot, of the woman and the dog...it has a "look" to it. I prefer the toning in the first shot over that in the third or so-called bonus shot. The photo is obviously manipulated, obviously adjusted in post. To a lot of people, that's what digital photography is all about. One thing about these types of efforts: you need to consider who the viewing audience is, and where these images are being presented. Your woman and dog photo would work as a stock photo for several types of articles...it has "feeling", it has "a look". It's not a great photo, but it does have "a certain quality". I see that you have an interest in photo manipulation...I 'get' some of where you're at right now,at your age. If I were you, a teenager in the 2010 era, I'd be very careful about who I listened to in terms of criticisms of your work and your results. Different audiences will have different opinions of your work, based upon their own points of view and experiences and degree of art appreciation. Let me put it this way: you'd probably flunk out of a school of photojournalism, but your work might find acceptance among the fine arts department...


----------



## ababysean (May 19, 2010)

yep I see every time he posts people tear him a new one about how he over processes, ok, he doesnt get it, move on.  Stop posting to him, if you ignore it, it will go away.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

You're absolutely right. We need more coddling.
No negative posts and only positive ones.


Your images are beautiful, you have a natural eye, keep it up!

There, hows that?


----------



## FattyMcJ (May 19, 2010)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> You're absolutely right. We need more coddling.
> No negative posts and only positive ones.
> 
> 
> ...



Normally, I despise your brand of sarcasm, but this time you said exactly what I was thinking.


----------



## er111a (May 19, 2010)

your wrong bitter I shoot in program mode and play around with tv and all the other modes, that include bulb


----------



## vtf (May 19, 2010)

And yet we look with grand anticipation that this time the mighty er111a will throw down his magic wand of photoshop land and produce a creation of such magnitude that we will all bow to the true master of the photography. A true inspiration for all who dream that dream of excellence.


----------



## er111a (May 19, 2010)

lol thats funny because there is a magic wand in photoshop


----------



## reznap (May 19, 2010)

They both need an artificial Photoshop lens flare.  :thumbup:


----------



## ababysean (May 19, 2010)

I'm not saying to LIE or fluff up his @#% but really, you guys need to take a chill.... 

Ok he over photoshops. every. single. picture.  

He's been told a billion times, dude you over photoshop, yet he still does....

If you don't like the style, move onto the next, if he didnt hear you the first billion times, do you think the billionth and one time is going to matter?  haha

I'm just sayin'


----------



## ababysean (May 19, 2010)

and I'm confused, is this not a BEGINNERS Forum?  I mean what do you expect, if we were pros' we'd be on the OTHER forum, for PROS?  or am I reading it wrong?


----------



## vtf (May 19, 2010)

reznap said:


> They both need an artificial Photoshop lens flare. :thumbup:


we tried to help the other nite, guess it didnt take


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

ababysean said:


> and I'm confused, is this not a BEGINNERS Forum? I mean what do you expect, if we were pros' we'd be on the OTHER forum, for PROS? or am I reading it wrong?


 

Yes it's the beginners forum. You know, where people come to learn because they want to get BETTER.


----------



## vtf (May 19, 2010)

I've seen his potential sooc, its there, we just have to wait with "Grand Anticipation"for the day he posts one soocastf (straight out of camera and straight to forum).


----------



## Scatterbrained (May 19, 2010)

I think the OP really enjoys photoshop. Maybe more so than photography; therefore I am going to recommend that he go to Worth1000 Home where he can try his hand at creative photoshopping to his hearts content.  Beyond that, I have no C&C.


----------



## Sbuxo (May 19, 2010)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> You're absolutely right. We need more coddling.
> No negative posts and only positive ones.
> 
> 
> ...


LMAO i love it.:hug::


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

erose86 said:


> I need to learn to talk less and get to the point faster. :lmao:


 
Nailed it.


...and back to babysean, he is posting for comments and criticism. People are commenting and being critical. What's the problem again? Is the problem that _you_ don't like what people have to say?


----------



## creisinger (May 19, 2010)

Regardless of who took the picture and what the intended look is, in my opinion this was edited with Neat Image or Noise Ninja, something along those lines using destructive noise reduction settings to cause this smudgyness.

Obviously this was used on a 2nd layer and wherever details were important the eraser tool was used. 

Just look at the door handles, they seem to be floating on the door.

I dare to say that the image looked better in the original than with this post processing.


----------



## creisinger (May 19, 2010)

And no, I wouldn't consider this "a style". It's screwing around with filters nothing more.

And I almost wanted to say



> Yes it's the beginners forum. You know, where people come to learn  because they want to get BiTTER.


 :lmao:


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

Jerk.
































:lmao:


----------



## er111a (May 19, 2010)

now now what did people say when Ansel Easton Adams, Anne Geddes, Robert Wood, or Margaret Bourke-white first showed there stuffhttp://www.annegeddes.com/modules/anne/aboutanne/biography.aspx*
*
​


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

Yeah, run with that.


----------



## creisinger (May 19, 2010)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Jerk.
> :lmao:



You crack me up.:mrgreen:


----------



## Derrel (May 19, 2010)

Wow, the thread is up to 56 helpful,constructive posts so far. Can we manage to gang up and maybe push it to 100 helpful,constructive posts before midnight?


----------



## mrpink (May 19, 2010)

er111a said:


> now now what did people say when Ansel Easton Adams, Anne Geddes, Robert Wood, or Margaret Bourke-white first showed there stuffhttp://www.annegeddes.com/modules/anne/aboutanne/biography.aspx*
> *
> ​



they didn't tell them to delete Photoshop.






p!nK


----------



## DRoberts (May 19, 2010)

My question is, why did this thread have to turn into another BS thread? The OP asked for simple C&C and it has turned into 4 pages of immature babble.
 Yes there are specifics of the photos that would fall outside of "standardized correctness"...so state your opinion and move on. All we can do is state our opinion...no need to keep badgering. For every aspect that has been stated as being "wrong" with these photos, I can find several photographers who specialize in that very aspect of being "wrong"
     "tilted and to soft"... maybe not tilted or soft enough. 
     " the wreaths seem to 3D, they pop out to much"...3 words..._*nuetral density filter*_. These are used all the time to lessen the brightness of one area of a photo to make another area (or subject) "pop out". Usually in outdoor settings to lessen the sky.
 My point is getting on here with critiques that are nothing more than some generic recital of some rules that you have read or repeating what you have seen on here are in no way helpful to the people who are asking. If you are all knowledgable enough to tell the OP his work "sucks", then impress us and tell us how to make it better. Or do you know how to yourself?


----------



## Scatterbrained (May 19, 2010)

er111a said:


> now now what did people say when Ansel Easton Adams, Anne Geddes, Robert Wood, or Margaret Bourke-white first showed there stuff
> ​


either "Wow, your camera takes nice pictures"
or
"Wow, you must be using Darkroom CS4, the two car garage edition."
Of course from what I've seen most of Ansel Adams and Anne Geddes work is in focus, and either black and white or natural colors. Just sayin.


----------



## sleist (May 19, 2010)

I often see people use PP to try and disguise a bad photo.  I see people take a soft, out of focus, or poorly composed image and make it B&W to try and cover up that they didn't quite get the shot.

But, even excessive PP benefits from a quality starting point.  I don't get the impression that any of the shots i've seen from the OP started from a quality image that displayed an underlying understanding of composition or technique.

Until the OP starts taking better photos to start with, his artistic post processing will continue to fall short.


----------



## burstintoflame81 (May 19, 2010)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Yeah, run with that.


:lmao:




The problem the OP has is that he apparently is incapable of using any constructive advice given to him. People show up on his posts defending him, not realizing that he has posted garbage like this over and over and over again with the same advice given.  "STOP OVER PROCESSING YOUR IMAGES AND WORK ON TAKING SOME DECENT SHOTS THAT ARE COMPOSED PROPERLY." It doesn't matter how many times you tell him though. A few days down the road he will post another thread with a bunch of hacked up images on it pretending to be the poor newbie looking for advice. Its beginning to get irritating to put it mildly.


----------



## reznap (May 19, 2010)

I was only teasing about the lens flare, for the record.  This thread really took an unfortunate turn..  I can understand brutal honesty, etc... but 5 pages of crap.. cmon


----------



## tdz16 (May 19, 2010)

I've been lurking on this dude's posts for a few weeks now.  How is it in any way possible for people to be defending him at this point?

He has been told over and over and over that he needs to stop the post processing and show us his work straight out of the camera.  This would allow the best of us here to give him TRUE C&C on the ACTUAL photo.  The thread turns to BS because until he posts something that shows he is at least trying to improve his photos thats all the thread is.

I posted for C&C on a few of my first shots with an off-camera flash a couple weeks ago.  Am I still posting photos that show I took what everyone spent time detailing out for me and threw it out the window?  No, I'm waiting until I can get some shots together that at LEAST take a step in the right direction.

What I don't understand is how we are not even getting any feedback from the OP on why he doesn't take this advice, why he won't tell us at minimum what he was going for when he took his shots or why he refused to show the original shot.

To end this little rant I will say when I see a straight out of camera shot from the OP, I'd personally be glad to add my positive 2 cents worth of criticism on the photo.

~Tom


----------



## Sbuxo (May 19, 2010)

reznap said:


> I was only teasing about the lens flare, for the record.  This thread really took an unfortunate turn..  I can understand brutal honesty, etc... but 5 pages of crap.. cmon


there's only 2 pages.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

DRoberts said:


> My question is, why did this thread have to turn into another BS thread? The OP asked for simple C&C and it has turned into 4 pages of immature babble.
> Yes there are specifics of the photos that would fall outside of "standardized correctness"...so state your opinion and move on. All we can do is state our opinion...no need to keep badgering. For every aspect that has been stated as being "wrong" with these photos, I can find several photographers who specialize in that very aspect of being "wrong"
> "tilted and to soft"... maybe not tilted or soft enough.
> " the wreaths seem to 3D, they pop out to much"...3 words..._*nuetral density filter*_. These are used all the time to lessen the brightness of one area of a photo to make another area (or subject) "pop out". Usually in outdoor settings to lessen the sky.
> My point is getting on here with critiques that are nothing more than some generic recital of some rules that you have read or repeating what you have seen on here are in no way helpful to the people who are asking. If you are all knowledgable enough to tell the OP his work "sucks", then impress us and tell us how to make it better. Or do you know how to yourself?


So, you came here to critique the critiquers? No constructive comments from you on the images? I'd like to hear your fresh perspective.


----------



## Derrel (May 19, 2010)

reznap said:


> I was only teasing about the lens flare, for the record.  This thread really took an unfortunate turn..  I can understand brutal honesty, etc... but 5 pages of crap.. cmon



Five pages of crap, For The Win!!!


----------



## Sbuxo (May 19, 2010)

DRoberts needs to stop badgering the badgers.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 19, 2010)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIyixC9NsLI[/ame]


----------



## Sbuxo (May 19, 2010)

Lmaoooo :lmao::lmao:
i watched the whole video like an idiot.
and somehow i knew actual badgers would come up once I said my previous post.


----------



## reznap (May 19, 2010)

Oh god I remember badgerbadgerbadger.com from like... 10 years ago at least.  Jesusswimming.com was better.


----------



## Raizels (May 20, 2010)

People have said it, and I've said it, but I'll say it again... leave the kid alone.

No one is forcing you to look at his pics.
Yes, he asked for C&C - but no one is obligated to give any.
No one is responsible for this young man or his photography.
You gave him C&C before.... he ignored it. Is your ego hurting a bit?
So he has potential and is not realizing it. Boo frickin' hoo.

You know what to expect when you see a thread by the OP! If you absolutely MUST comment, why not just write a concise "too much PP as usual" and move on?


----------



## rusty9 (May 20, 2010)

er1111111111a, i hate you a little bit more each time you post an over processed picture


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

hmmmm hate is such a harsh word, and burstintoflames excuse me but garbage?


----------



## rusty9 (May 20, 2010)

er111a said:


> hmmmm hate is such a harsh word, and burstintoflames excuse me but garbage?



well your PP is pretty harsh so...


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

touche rusty,however is your stuff all that great?


----------



## FattyMcJ (May 20, 2010)

er111a said:


> touche rusty,however is your stuff all that great?



Oh snap!


----------



## reznap (May 20, 2010)

Rusty just got told


----------



## vtf (May 20, 2010)

er111a, post the orginals and let them play with them awhile, I think we did a pretty good job in the last thread of creating good shots from the originals.


----------



## FattyMcJ (May 20, 2010)

vtf said:


> creating good shots from the originals.



Therein lies the problem...


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

I will post the originals when I go back to my room right now I am not on my computer


----------



## FattyMcJ (May 20, 2010)

er111a said:


> I will post the originals when I go back to my room right now I am not on my computer



You're posting with your MIND!!!?!?!?

That, sir, is a trick I MUST learn :lmao:







edit: that was lame, I need more sleep...


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

I know right I am that skilled  no lol I am on a school computer in art class curently


----------



## Noonz (May 20, 2010)

FattyMcJ said:


> edit: that was lame, I need more sleep...


Yeah.. Fatty whats the deal champ? :raisedbrow:


















Hahahaha :lmao::greenpbl:


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

I dont really get fatty lol


----------



## o hey tyler (May 20, 2010)

If you're going to ask for critique on your work... LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING AND UNINSTALL PHOTOSHOP. 

Or at the very least, stop using it so heavily. It makes you look like an amateur that has no respect for what people are telling you. 

Otherwise, you're going to keep getting the same comments on your extremely over processed images.


----------



## Geaux (May 20, 2010)

er111a said:


> I dont really get fatty lol





She's calling you FAT!!! 















But seriously, Fatty is just a shortened version of the sn she was speaking to ...... :hugs:


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 20, 2010)

o hey tyler said:


> If you're going to ask for critique on your work... LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING AND UNINSTALL PHOTOSHOP.
> 
> Or at the very least, stop using it so heavily. It makes you look like an amateur that has no respect for what people are telling you.
> 
> Otherwise, you're going to keep getting the same comments on your extremely over processed images.


 We were instructed by others to just not comment anymore. :meh:


----------



## tsaraleksi (May 20, 2010)

erose86 said:


> DRoberts said:
> 
> 
> > " the wreaths seem to 3D, they pop out to much"...3 words..._*nuetral density filter*_. These are used all the time to lessen the brightness of one area of a photo to make another area (or subject) "pop out". Usually in outdoor settings to lessen the sky.
> ...



A ND filter *cannot* achieve something like that. I have no idea what he's on about.


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

Geaux said:


> er111a said:
> 
> 
> > I dont really get fatty lol
> ...


did you really just call me a SHE?!


----------



## o hey tyler (May 20, 2010)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> We were instructed by others to just not comment anymore. :meh:



...and so the voices of people with valid points are silenced. It's a sad day, Bitter.


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

originals  no edits at all
1)





2)


----------



## ababysean (May 20, 2010)

1.  did you want the subject out of focus?  If that was the look you were going for, I like the picture, it seems like the focus is on the grass right where it meets the drive....

2.  off center.  if you could crop out BOTH lights, it would look better, because one light it totally cut off, there is no hope to keep either light... unless you totally crop one light out and have the door off center.  However, the "horizon" is still off. bad picture, I'd just call this one a wash..... try again on a better day.


----------



## vtf (May 20, 2010)

TY for posting the originals. I appreciate it when you do, but my suggestion is to post them along with the edited versions and let people play with them awhile to give you different perspectives on PP. Im sorry but these photos are best retakes. #1 subject is oof but do like the composition, just try to get focus, it appears you shot downward from a hill and #2 has alot of distractions.


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

grasias  haha I just came from my spanish exam


----------



## Geaux (May 20, 2010)

er111a said:


> Geaux said:
> 
> 
> > er111a said:
> ...




smh.  "She's calling you fat" = "She is calling you Fat."

Time for you to start paying attention in English class, rather than goofing off on this site.


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

I thought she was saying i was calling her fat lol


----------



## SwissJ (May 20, 2010)

*100!*


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

sorry swiss mine is 100


----------



## Sbuxo (May 20, 2010)

rusty9 said:


> er1111111111a, i hate you a little bit more each time you post an over processed picture


THISSSSS!!:hug::


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

you cant say this and then give me a hug lol


----------



## Sbuxo (May 20, 2010)

i see you're slow.
it wasn't for you, it was for who said that. get it? :er:


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

lol you just called a person with a 3.8 slow congrats


----------



## Sbuxo (May 20, 2010)

:lmao: are you expecting me to take it back? 
who cares about your GPA (if it's high school, even more reason not to care), but I know plenty of slow 4.2's.
too bad your gpa can't take photos. 
[: 
:thumbup:goodshxtson


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

haha thanks Sbuxo


----------



## burstintoflame81 (May 20, 2010)

Glad to see you post some originals ( not that I am completely opposed to some tasteful PP ) Even WITH their problems, these are MUCH better than what you originally posted. I think the main problem with the first one is  lighting/exposure. Given the crappy lighting in this scene, there was probably not much you could do without blowing out part of the pic, unless you used some fill flash or something. Don't be so quick to shoot. If you have this situation, be more patient and wait for a better shot. Wait until she walks into even light, or zoom in tighter. I think this might have made the over all scene better as well. As it was shot, its just kinda boring. With the telecom boxes in the background and all. The second one needs to be leveled as others said, but I am not sure about the lighting here either. Maybe some fill flash or even very subtle HDR would have been nice to bring out the stuff on the railings more. ( Also center the shot to get both sides of the railings. Maybe a wider lens? )

The reason why I used strong wording like "Garbage" is because it doesn't seem that the advice is sinking in.  Some people need tough love and need to be told straight up when they just can't get it any other way. It seems like Photoshop has become a crutch to you in such a way that you are ignoring the need to shoot better. As long as you have been posting here, I haven't really seen any noticeable improvement. I don't say that to be mean, I just think you haven't really changed much in terms of shooting or how you approach a shot, just maybe learned a few new nifty tricks to add in photoshop.


----------



## burstintoflame81 (May 20, 2010)

Sbuxo said:


> too bad your gpa can't take photos.


 

This is true. That 3.8 comment was lame. Where I went to school, kids like you got punched in the face several times a day for that type of attitude. High school is a joke. I had a 3.8 in college and I was S**t-faced drunk 6 nights out of the week.


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

haha hey I go to a college prep school school, its not bad to be smart


----------



## burstintoflame81 (May 20, 2010)

er111a said:


> haha hey I go to a college prep school school, its not bad to be smart


 
Nope, its not bad to be smart. It is bad to be pompous though.


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

haha I was stating I was not slow all I was doing


----------



## rusty9 (May 20, 2010)

you might have a 4.0 once you figure out that your PP sucks and is overdone


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

haha idk I have a 107 in digital media/photography oh btw we need to beat 321 to have the most replies on this fourm lol right now we are at #7 lol


----------



## rusty9 (May 20, 2010)

that's the other thing that get's on my nerve...all your threads get 10 pages when my thread gets 0 after i had bumped it twice today

shameless self-promotion ftw
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...rum-photo-gallery/203691-natchez-trace-2.html


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 20, 2010)

Maybe you should do more photoshopping on your pictures, rusty.


----------



## er111a (May 20, 2010)

not all of em silly


----------



## o hey tyler (May 20, 2010)

er111a said:


> grasias  haha I just came from my spanish exam



Wow kid. You are braging about your GPA, but you can't spell one of the most commonly used spanish words? Did you fail your spanish exam? 

Boast all you want on the internet. It's pretty obvious from the way you spell/sentence structure/lack of punctuation etc. that you are not this '3.8' student you claim to be.


----------



## rusty9 (May 20, 2010)

Spanish exam fail
grasias ftl
gracias ftw


----------



## Sbuxo (May 20, 2010)

o hey tyler said:


> er111a said:
> 
> 
> > grasias  haha I just came from my spanish exam
> ...


i love youuuu :lmao:


----------



## Geaux (May 20, 2010)

"Book Smart", but not smart enough to get a hint .....


----------



## Sbuxo (May 20, 2010)

er111a said:


> haha idk I have a 107 in digital media/photography oh btw we need to beat 321 to have the most replies on this fourm lol right now we are at #7 lol


107 out of how much? 500? :er: Your teacher must be on some other shxt, or one of those "EVERYTHING IS ART" mentalities. There's a couple at my ACCREDITED 4.0 STATE OF THE ART MIAMI college. Do you like that? Do you see what I did there, kid? Nobody likes a pompous little bxtch. Especially one who *can't* spell, lies, *and *take advice. :thumbup: 

And yea, annoying attracts more attention than anything. (Especially for people who like to breathe fire ;D) Oh shiiiiit, alliteration and a metaphor. I'm on a roll. No pun intended. ->:lmao:


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 20, 2010)

:roll:






ababysean said:


> 2. off center. if you could crop out BOTH lights, it would look better, because one light it totally cut off, there is no hope to keep either light... unless you totally crop one light out and have the door off center. However, the "horizon" is still off. bad picture, I'd just call this one a wash..... try again on a better day.


 



The shot as _intended_.


----------



## FattyMcJ (May 21, 2010)

Noonz said:


> FattyMcJ said:
> 
> 
> > edit: that was lame, I need more sleep...
> ...



3 hours of sleep = limited wit 



er111a said:


> I dont really get fatty lol



It's ok, not many do.



Geaux said:


> She's calling you FAT!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You called him a her... 



er111a said:


> did you really just call me a SHE?!



That's how I read it, ma'am !


----------



## misskrys (May 21, 2010)

o hey tyler said:


> er111a said:
> 
> 
> > grasias  haha I just came from my spanish exam
> ...



lol, I was going to say the same thing.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 21, 2010)

*____________________________________________*


FFS


----------



## er111a (May 21, 2010)

haha yall are a little mean, however ty bitter for the edit on my photo


----------



## jeff_scott (May 21, 2010)

I guess older people forget they were once young, naive, and stupid once too.

As has already been said, your pictures would benefit from less PP. You've seemed to have past the point of ridiculous with the PP in the two original photos. Do take the people's *constructive *advice, ignore the people's *irrelevant* babbling.


----------



## er111a (May 21, 2010)

will do jeff


----------



## JeffieLove (May 21, 2010)

PerfectlyFlawed said:


> Oh my...
> What were trying achieve with the Pp?   :raisedbrow:
> :waiting:  I dont think I'm gonna PP on these.. I'm curious to see what Happens.



I would hope you wouldn't PP on his pictures  *lol*

ETA: I posted this before I realized there were 9 pages of replies... This quote was from the first page. holy crap lol


----------

