|
On November 09 2010 18:20 minus_human wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2010 11:35 alffla wrote:so pretty :D:D love your photos as always the 3rd one seems sooo ssaturated though  Yeah it is, That's because my monitor or something is fucked up, and somehow I don't see the colours bright enough. So when they look good to me they're oversaturated in for everyone else. I've been trying to get around this since forever, and I don't even know if the monitor is to blame, because if I open the pic in PS I can see it's oversaturated, but when I upload it it seems to lose half of it's colour intensity. I've tried switching browsers, to no avail 
Color profiles.
Or maybe you just didn't caliber your screen properly
btw, none is over saturated but the first one you posted gaga...
also wb seems pretty off to me but I can't tell for sure (they're too warm)
and changing browsers wont do shit 
just when converting your raws to jpgs for posting on the internets maybe you shouldu se a webcolor profile.
|
Yeah I re-uploaded the third one. I'll definitely look for that webcolor thingy next time I'm converting from RAWs, thanks for the tips
|
|
|
Nice photos!
To be honest I think some of the change is just the way of the world, we change how we look at things depending on where we're looking from. It's not all though. It can't be all -_-.
|
Beautiful photos. Man, I wish DSLRs were cheaper.
|
On November 09 2010 21:41 MinoMino wrote:
Beautiful photos. Man, I wish DSLRs were cheaper.
huge +1
|
resize is your browser's issue
awesome pics again!
|
I totally agree with you. I joined TL a few months before SC2 Beta was announced and released, and I can't even read the strategy forum, as it is full of incorrect information, whiny people, and bad grammar. All people do is get into arguments and point fingers at each other and shout "X IS IMBA". I feel sorry for the moderators.
Great pictures too! I'm not a photographer by any means but I really like your photos. It makes me want to visit Romania now hahaha.
|
This is incredible. Where did you take that second picture? I'm assuming Romania? What a great color.
|
that's coz you have no taste
|
On November 09 2010 23:56 phosphorylation wrote:that's coz you have no taste
no, that's because of YOUR emo flashy fantasy glowing landscapes fetish rather
|
Chill down guys. Boonbag, I guess in the end it's all a matter of taste - while I do appreciate B&W photography quite a lot, I could never give up shooting coloured scenery. Even if I'm bad at it and even if it's hard, it's one of the most expressive types of photography in my eyes.
Fantasy glowing landscapes - that's exactly it! To me it's a refuge, I can hide in there mentally (often times easier than with B/W). Can't you? Colours usually create a more warm and soothing feel. Also, nature is very much about colours, don't you agree? A coloured photography should be ABOUT the colours, or else it doesn't need to be in colour at all. Black and White simply does not come as naturally to me.
By removal of colours, B/W photographs concentrate on the essence, on the physical structure(s) of the subject you're shooting. I often find this hard to accomplish with scenery. I consider Ansel Adams to be an exception that really confirms this rule, as very few can claim to be as talented as he was, after all.
When I get the chance to create a Black and White, I'm really happy about it, but more often than not, by making it B/W my pic loses most of it's expressiveness. This of course is partially because of my own limited abilities, however I wouldn't want to even try and renounce coloured landscapes, no matter how much I could potentially improve in the future.
|
On November 10 2010 00:23 Boonbag wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2010 23:56 phosphorylation wrote:that's coz you have no taste no, that's because of YOUR emo flashy fantasy glowing landscapes fetish rather
how predictable and childish
i admit my photographs aren't that great (minus_human's are superior by far) but i never claimed they were
the fact stands: you still have no taste
|
I wouldn't say he has no taste, rather he's just too quick to make judgements - which, if taken with a grain of salt, can still be useful.
|
only the tasteless pass such quick (and misguided) judgement
|
youve got good b&w stuffs (i have a boner for b&w shots), but your color landscapes are always sweet
dunno why all the artsy fartsy people are shitting up a thread by being all pretentious! stop stealing his thunder
|
He asked for advices in his previous entry about his portrait. I'm merely answering.
I didn't flame nor derailed anything, that phosph thing dude showed up and started it.
Like I'd give a flying fuck.
Besides, I pray the heavens to have 0 taste. Only someone truely tasteless can produce anything out of common consent, aka something vaguely original...
|
On November 10 2010 01:54 Boonbag wrote:
Besides, I pray the heavens to have 0 taste. Only someone truely tasteless can produce anything out of common consent, aka something vaguely original...
That is misguided I think. Ignorance does not guarantee quality, and it certainly does't guarantee originality.
|
On November 10 2010 01:58 minus_human wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2010 01:54 Boonbag wrote:
Besides, I pray the heavens to have 0 taste. Only someone truely tasteless can produce anything out of common consent, aka something vaguely original... That is misguided I think. Ignorance does not guarantee quality, and it certainly does't guarantee originality.
And what exactly do you mean by quality ? Which quality ? What qualities ?
Let me ask you what are the qualities of "begotten" for instance ?
Wouldn't you qualify such thing as tasteless ?
Yet it's a very powerful thing to experience and is labeled "art".
Besides, rejection and ignorance are two different things.
|
god, you are so postmodern, you would make baby jesus cry
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
