# July Photo Thread [big pics!]



## Vintage Paw (Jul 2, 2007)

Thought we'd have a new thread 

(I have no pics yet though, so someone else needs to start)

(btw - have these threads taken the place of the 'submit your photo' thread do you think?)


----------



## Firky (Jul 2, 2007)

Dear VP,

I have lost my mojo for my camera. Again.

Please help, I blame crap weather, Glastonbury and women.

May tootle off with my camera in a bit but there's nothing I want to photograph. I hate the countryside


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 2, 2007)

Dear Firkles,

I can't find your mojo. I looked all around, under my carpet, in my wardrobe, in the fridge - nothing. 

Sorry


----------



## baffled (Jul 2, 2007)

Go on then I'll _kick_ things off.


----------



## Firky (Jul 2, 2007)

Bollocks to this, it is a lovely sunny day. I have spent the afternoon sunning myself in the garden, cutting grass and dicking about on the net (love wireless!). I will endevour to find my Mojo with the aid of Vintage Paw.

Godspeed!


----------



## hippogriff (Jul 2, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

> is a lovely sunny day



is heavy showers here  

have a cormorant


----------



## Pie 1 (Jul 2, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Go on then I'll _kick_ things off.




Ooh, I like that.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 2, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Go on then I'll _kick_ things off.



Utterly fabulous - shiny  (in a metallic way, you know what I mean).

Off you go then Firkles, I think I saw your mojo a'heading off in that direction *points over yonder hill*


----------



## baffled (Jul 2, 2007)

Thanks Pie 1 and Vintage Paw, just started a photo a day challenge thingy so I am having to find things to shoot indoors while the weather is still grim.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 2, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Thanks Pie 1 and Vintage Paw, just started a photo a day challenge thingy so I am having to find things to shoot indoors while the weather is still grim.



I did that for a while but with self-portraits. On the one hand I found it really difficult, trying to do a fresh and creative sp every single day, but on the other hand I found it really useful to force me to think hard about the act of creation.

I hope you post them all on here


----------



## Skim (Jul 2, 2007)

Firky – put on a kagoule, have a wank and get snapping, will ya?


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 2, 2007)

First couple of the month.

My other half wearing her new hat yesterday.





Sunset over Gateshead this evening.


----------



## pogofish (Jul 2, 2007)

Folk often call Aberdeen the gray city - Tonight was one of those nights when it is rather apt:


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 2, 2007)

*baffled thats*

too good.

one of mine from sunday


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 2, 2007)

*one more*

china town - sunday - not that you would know...


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 2, 2007)

*right last one..*

really should be looking for a flat not pissing around with photos - hahahah


----------



## Firky (Jul 3, 2007)

Seems I have misplaced by battery for my camera 

Think I know where it is


----------



## Dhimmi (Jul 3, 2007)

Gutted by the tiny droplet of water on the lense for this one.


----------



## Forkboy (Jul 3, 2007)

Couple of friends down Soho.. 

I'm not convinced by my crop but I think i got the colours and effect right..


----------



## baffled (Jul 3, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> I hope you post them all on here



Don't know how long I'll last but here is day 3's effort.


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 3, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Don't know how long I'll last but here is day 3's effort.


I like that, there's quite a nice contrast between the colours and depth of field.

I took this one of my bathroom window earlier:


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 4, 2007)

*bit rainy today*

weren't it.....


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 4, 2007)

*weather picked up*

a bit later though...


----------



## Firky (Jul 4, 2007)

Forkboy said:
			
		

> Couple of friends down Soho..
> 
> I'm not convinced by my crop but I think i got the colours and effect right..



Colours are great but I am not sure about the diffuse glow myself.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 4, 2007)

indigo4 said:
			
		

> weren't it.....




That is soooooooo CITY OF LONDON. I like it. I can almost smell the wet streets from here  

Going to hit the 40's here today apparently. Would like a bit of cold and wet London ATM. Still, have a swimming pool instead


----------



## zoltan (Jul 4, 2007)

Erm.....Whats the July Foto competition title ? I may be tempted to have a go for the first time!


----------



## baffled (Jul 4, 2007)

indigo4 said:
			
		

> weren't it.....



Like that a lot, got a great feel to it.

Took a lazy option today for my Photo a day thingy.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 4, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Like that a lot, got a great feel to it.
> 
> Took a lazy option today for my Photo a day thingy.



Very nice - got that lovely metallic feel again. I often prefer softer wispy black and white images to those with harsher contrast, but this works really well, and the shoes worked even better


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 4, 2007)

Dhimmi said:
			
		

> Gutted by the tiny droplet of water on the lense for this one.



Great dystopian pic - some might argue it's only a matter of time


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 4, 2007)

Say hello to my new born boy






and a picture of the mrs holding his tiny body


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 4, 2007)

and another with the mrs


----------



## Biddlybee (Jul 4, 2007)

Awww.. congrats to you both mate


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 4, 2007)

Woohoo! Congratulations  Lovely photos, lovely lady, lovely ikkle baby 8)


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 4, 2007)

Thanks VP and Biddly


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 4, 2007)

Lovely. 

You have to cut that picking the nose thing in the bud mind or, he'll never get on.


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 4, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Lovely.
> 
> You have to cut that picking the nose thing in the bud mind or, he'll never get on.



 

not bad, 1 hour old and picking his nose. christ knows what he'll be doing in 20 years time.


----------



## baffled (Jul 4, 2007)

Congratulations  

Hides July photo thread from missus


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 4, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Congratulations
> 
> Hides July photo thread from missus



*shouts*

MRS. BAFFLED - BABIES BABIES BABIES!!!!!


----------



## Firky (Jul 4, 2007)

Congrats, robster


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 5, 2007)

Congratulations Robster, and the photographs are classic.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 5, 2007)

Robster970 said:
			
		

> and another with the mrs



Congrats. Momma looks like it was some tough sledding.


----------



## Dhimmi (Jul 5, 2007)

Forkboy said:
			
		

> I think i got the colours and effect right..



Yep. Very nice. 




			
				Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> Great dystopian pic - some might argue it's only a matter of time



 

Try this one... it has the additional ingredient of authoritarian homo-erotica...


----------



## alef (Jul 5, 2007)

Congrats, Robster! Wonderful news. Can't believe I didn't notice this before, distracted by the nutters in the comp thread...


----------



## johey24 (Jul 5, 2007)

Congrats Robster. Lovely wee one. Never mind hiding these from the missus - they are even making me feel a bit broody


----------



## Skim (Jul 5, 2007)

Great news, Robster. Best wishes to you and the missus


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 5, 2007)

thanks for all the thanks folks. family are all doing well.

final one - the boy full face on


----------



## Paul Russell (Jul 5, 2007)

Hey. Congratulations!




			
				Robster970 said:
			
		

> thanks for all the thanks folks. family are all doing well.
> 
> final one - the boy full face on


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 5, 2007)

Robster970 said:
			
		

> thanks for all the thanks folks. family are all doing well.
> 
> final one - the boy full face on



Zomgz!!! (as they say). Teh cuteness! That mouth is perfect - what a little looker


----------



## baffled (Jul 5, 2007)

Not entirely happy with todays Photo a Day shot (to be known as PAD hence forth)






In my head I had planned to desaturate to a point just before black and white but it never looked quite right, so I upped the contrast and shadows before desaturating quite a bit.


----------



## disco_dave_2000 (Jul 5, 2007)

Robster970 said:
			
		

> thanks for all the thanks folks. family are all doing well.
> 
> final one - the boy full face on



hey congratulations !


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 5, 2007)

*baffled....(the tap one, the tap one)*

sorry but how is that lazy..that's the best photo i've ever seen and although some might say i am on the slight side of prone to exaggeration at times.....its fking amazing...

and congratuatulations to ...Robster...(baby + photographs)...


----------



## baffled (Jul 5, 2007)

Thanks indigo, I suppose by lazy I mean it didn't take much thought and is possibly a little cliched, wide open, fast shutter, tilt camera and shoot.

The conversion was a pain to get right.


----------



## baffled (Jul 6, 2007)

All this talk of Triptychs gave me an idea for my PAD

*Technics Triptych*






First time I have tried one of these so was pretty pleased with the result


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 6, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> All this talk of Triptychs gave me an idea for my PAD
> 
> *Technics Triptych*
> 
> ...



Works really well - pretty darned fabulous for a first ever try


----------



## baffled (Jul 6, 2007)

Cheers, I really should have had a search on google for some guides first though as it nearly broke me  

Here's a little something I rescued from the unused shots.


----------



## besgreyling (Jul 6, 2007)

Congrats (or _gefeliciteerd_ = Dutch) on the new addition to the Robster family.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2007)




----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 6, 2007)

Robster970 said:
			
		

> thanks for all the thanks folks. family are all doing well.
> 
> final one - the boy full face on


 Awww


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 6, 2007)

*baffled....*

i think you are the best photographer i have ever seen...like ever.....EVER...she screamed.......(slightly drunk but coherent nevertheless).......


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 6, 2007)

indigo4 said:
			
		

> i think you are the best photographer i have ever seen...like ever.....EVER...she screamed.......(slightly drunk but coherent nevertheless).......


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 6, 2007)

*johnny san*

as much as i appreciate pictures more than words...WHAT THE DEVIL DO YOU MEAN ?


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 6, 2007)

*messing around with fruit (oo-er)*


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 6, 2007)

indigo4 said:
			
		

> as much as i appreciate pictures more than words...WHAT THE DEVIL DO YOU MEAN ?



For christ's sake...


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 6, 2007)

*ummm Johnny I know you are trying to reach out to me*

in some form or other..but im just not getting it.... what has a man in disgusting pink jeans with a clock got the hell to do with me.. ? and they are disgusting and quite frankly could be a woman but looks more like a man,........... oh "womens health issues..."...alright it is a woman but i dont have health issues do i ??? well maybe i drink too much but i dont think that's anything to you know show to all and sundry on the ole july photo thread....


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 7, 2007)

indigo4 said:
			
		

> in some form or other..but im just not getting it.... what has a man in disgusting pink jeans with a clock got the hell to do with me.. ? and they are disgusting and quite frankly could be a woman but looks more like a man,........... oh "womens health issues..."...alright it is a woman but i dont have health issues do i ??? well maybe i drink too much but i dont think that's anything to you know show to all and sundry on the ole july photo thread....



It's a woman.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 7, 2007)

Ok, ok.... you were gushing over that cute baby picture. So I think: 'maybe her biological clock is ringing'. So I post up the dumb picture.


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 7, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Ok, ok.... you were gushing over that cute baby picture. So I think: 'maybe her biological clock is ringing'. So I post up the dumb picture.



isn't this a case of mistaken identity JC? I think VP was doing more gushing than indigo who merely said congrats to me? 

or am I too, missing something here


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 7, 2007)

Robster970 said:
			
		

> isn't this a case of mistaken identity JC? I think VP was doing more gushing than indigo who merely said congrats to me?
> 
> or am I too, missing something here


 Post 59


----------



## danski (Jul 7, 2007)

erm, post 59 is titled Baffled as in the name of the person indigo was praising


----------



## Detroit City (Jul 7, 2007)




----------



## Gromit (Jul 7, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Post 59



Check the title of that post JC. 
She was refering to 'Baffled' and not the pic immedietly before her post.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 7, 2007)

danski said:
			
		

> erm, post 59 is titled Baffled as in the name of the person indigo was praising



You're right! I didn't see that name. No wonder indigo was, er, baffled...


----------



## danski (Jul 7, 2007)

:d


jesus, was simply trying to put a big grin up and everytime i edited it went back to what id originally put (lowercase d, not capital)
i is well skilled


----------



## baffled (Jul 7, 2007)

Thanks for the kind words indigo *blushes*, though there a far better photographers here than myself, I am just ok at using lightroom 

Normally load my black and whites with contrast so thought I would try something different this time.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 7, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> Normally load my black and whites with contrast so thought I would try something different this time.
> 
> ...



Very nice again. You're far to modest - there is only so much the software can do. All of your shots here have a very early 70's graphic quality about them. A time when people were rediscovering B&W after the onslaught of colour. Similar thing is happening today as a result of digital technologies. It's much easier to play around with B&W values. I still prefer film. Just returned from the lab hoping to collect a couple of rolls of grainy, contrasty 400 B&W only to discover that they aren't opening on Saturday mornings for July and August. I'll have to wait until Monday now. The suspense!

Nice work. I particularly like the turntable triptych.


----------



## baffled (Jul 7, 2007)

Thanks Mr Edwards, I guess as I have only started out in photography in the last 6 months I sometimes feel a bit of a fraud given that the camera is doing a lot of the work and even if I mess up and can rescue the shot in PP.

Anyway, couple of shots from my macro session that didn't make into my photo a day.


----------



## Firky (Jul 7, 2007)

Baffled, can I ask what your ID is on flickr? I'd like to add you to my contacts.

This is me
http://www.flickr.com/photos/photopixel/


----------



## baffled (Jul 7, 2007)

I've added you Firky, I'm Sismastery *hangs head in shame at username*

My Photostream


----------



## Firky (Jul 7, 2007)

This is great:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sismastery/660679564/in/set-72157600550258890/


----------



## baffled (Jul 7, 2007)

My missus giving me the evils again as I stop to take yet another photograph


----------



## Firky (Jul 7, 2007)

Half the reason I left my camera


----------



## Gromit (Jul 7, 2007)

I left mine at home today and there was the funniest of streakers at the footy match


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 7, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> I'm Sismastery


I've added you too 

Here's another shot of a friend's Barn Owl that I've been looking after for the weekend.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 7, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> I've added you Firky, I'm Sismastery *hangs head in shame at username*
> 
> My Photostream



You know, I know so many people from Urb on Flickr now I keep losing track of who is who. And so I apologise if my replies to your comments have been random, or even non-existent, on there. I will carve it into my brain who you are!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jul 7, 2007)

Detroit City said:
			
		

>




Is that your gaffe Detroit?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 8, 2007)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 8, 2007)

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g33/refreshment_66/IMG_1350.jpg?t=1183854224


----------



## Detroit City (Jul 8, 2007)

Minnie_the_Minx said:
			
		

> Is that your gaffe Detroit?


nope, wish it were.  its a pic of a house in L.A. that my friend took from helicopter


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 8, 2007)

*baffled...*

you've only been taking photos for six months..sweet mother of christ...i hope you are selling your work because i'd buy it thats for sure.


----------



## Firky (Jul 8, 2007)

Meadows rock!


----------



## Firky (Jul 8, 2007)

http://junk.photopixel.co.uk/poppy.jpg


----------



## Firky (Jul 8, 2007)




----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 8, 2007)




----------



## baffled (Jul 8, 2007)

The reflection in the glasses is  

Not happy with todays PAD effort but I'm too lazy to redo it.


----------



## Firky (Jul 8, 2007)

Bernie Gunther said:
			
		

>



I know


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 8, 2007)




----------



## lighterthief (Jul 8, 2007)

Couple of pics I took yesterday at the Tour de France prologue in London.  Most of them are just an unfocused blur - anyone got any tips for taking pics of very fast moving things?


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 8, 2007)

*firky - proper happy innit is proper nice.....*

..my effort...

oh im getting told off, supposed to be getting ready to go out and im putting up photos, "on that bloody website again, " ahahahahaha


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 8, 2007)




----------



## bmd (Jul 8, 2007)




----------



## bmd (Jul 8, 2007)




----------



## Dhimmi (Jul 8, 2007)

Cor some really good stuff cropping up, I remain a snapshot merchant.


----------



## besgreyling (Jul 8, 2007)

A lovely pic and def. not uncool. I like the structure and the colours of / on the wood.


----------



## baffled (Jul 9, 2007)

Knackered after a night shift but did manage to grab this while at work.

PAD09


----------



## Firky (Jul 9, 2007)

That's a canny good shot of the tractor, BMD.


----------



## bmd (Jul 9, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

> That's a canny good shot of the tractor, BMD.



Thanks mate, it's cropped and the colours vivified (or whatever you call it) in Picasa. 

With your poppy pic did you take that on a tripod? I ask because I've done some of flowers and bugs and stuff and they sometimes come out blurred and I think it's because either they're moving so the shot is too slow (?) or I'm moving so I need a tripod?


----------



## Firky (Jul 9, 2007)

Nah, it was shot under bright light sunlight with a very fast lens


----------



## bmd (Jul 9, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

> Nah, it was shot under bright light sunlight with a very fast lens



I have no idea what that means really, I suppose I need to start learning about this stuff.

I really like all the pictures on this thread, some more than others but my faves are the flowers and wildlife and natural stuff. 

Here's a slug. I liked it because it had its horns out, maybe need to crop some more from the foreground but this way it's not too prominent in the shot.


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 9, 2007)

*hahah*

that slug looks like a fruit pastile without the sugar and with horns or something, you know what im talking about, the middle bit..no i think i mean the other side of a fruit gum. .... ????!?!?!?


----------



## danski (Jul 9, 2007)

yes, Mr. Marley, very nice pics, especially the wood 
(is it just me or can anyone else see chewbacca in there? )


----------



## bmd (Jul 10, 2007)

Thanks for the feedback, here's mine on this page's shots (I have absolutely no idea about photography, I just know what I like) - 

Baffled- great shots, my fave is the one of the where the petals seem to have a redish blush and are poking out of the shadows, I love that shot. I love the one further down the page too, I thought it was a birds wing at first. My gf and I reached out towards the screen going "oooo" with the one of the grass and the sun. 

neonwilderness - The Barn owl is a nice shot, the angle seems spot on. The church and the sky go together well. 

JC2 - I can't get on with those shots, they seem quite flat and the subject doesn't really grab me. 

firky - the poppy is a great shot imo, I love the bend in the stalk and the light reflecting off the hairs on it.

Bernie Gunther - I really like that shot, the flower looks like three hands with loads of fingers reaching out towards that purple sun. Or something. 

lighterthief - my gf and I were sat looking at your shots for a good while last night, we both love them, no idea what you did to get them but they convey the event very well imo.

Dhimmi - I like that shot, it looks like it has come from downtown Baghdad at first glance.

Fwiw I just thought I'd stick some feedback up as you've all given me some on mine.


----------



## baffled (Jul 10, 2007)

Struggled last night to get anything I was happy with (night shifts and inspiration don't really go hand in hand for me) but ended up with the following.

PAD10

*Shadowplay*






Lighterthief - those Tour De France shots are great
BMD - great colours and tones on your tractor shot
Dhimmi - the smoke really adds to that shot


----------



## Forkboy (Jul 10, 2007)

First of my shots of the Tour de France (yet to crop or correct any of them yet..)






and London Eye (shot whilst waiting for the tour to start....


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 10, 2007)

seeing as flora are popular this month - behold a pink thing.........


----------



## dlx1 (Jul 10, 2007)




----------



## bmd (Jul 10, 2007)

Love the TdF shot forkboy, looks pretty much perfect to me without any extra attention. With the London Eye shot I wanted the spokes of the wheel to be radiating out from the very corner of the shot but that's probably a little bit ocd, I love the carriages against the cloud.

robster1970, the pink of the flowers looks almost surreal against the sky, bit too much light for my taste but wtf do I know.

thedyslexic1, stunning mate, it looks like it's opening while I'm looking at it.

My bloody camera has broken.  I'm using an Olympus Trip 35 I got off eBay for a tenner atm and I took a great shot (I think) today of a Dandelion that had struggled through a pool of water. It had the sun behind a cloud reflected in the water and the yellow Dandelion head was the only colour in the whole shot.


----------



## Firky (Jul 10, 2007)

That slug scares the shit out of me 

Looks like a half sucked liquorice torpedo.


----------



## Mungy (Jul 10, 2007)

heres some food for the slug


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 10, 2007)

*dont give it more for god's sake*

spends most of it ugly life in my kitchen eating tha cat food....grrrrrrrfrrrrr


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 10, 2007)

*Bmd*

pls put up that shot of the struggling dandelion....


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 11, 2007)

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g33/refreshment_66/IMG_1341.jpg?t=1184123521

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g33/refreshment_66/IMG_1322a.jpg?t=1184123558


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 11, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g33/refreshment_66/IMG_1341.jpg?t=1184123521
> 
> That is very funny including 'Thank you for loitering'.  I do hope that the makers of _The Simpsons _got lots of money from this company for allowing them to copy the idea.  Do they also charge ridiculous amounts of money like in the original?


----------



## baffled (Jul 11, 2007)

Being on nights has been a bit of a hindrance this week so have gone back to the macro as it takes less effort.

PAD11







Nearly used the shot below for my PAD but the out of focus stamen is distracting.


----------



## dlx1 (Jul 11, 2007)

>



thinks it good out of focus, like it


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 11, 2007)

Hocus Eye. said:
			
		

> Johnny Canuck2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## besgreyling (Jul 11, 2007)

Bob Marleys Dad said:
			
		

> I have no idea what that means really, I suppose I need to start learning about this stuff.
> 
> I really like all the pictures on this thread, some more than others but my faves are the flowers and wildlife and natural stuff.
> 
> Here's a slug. I liked it because it had its horns out, maybe need to crop some more from the foreground but this way it's not too prominent in the shot.



Excellent photo!!!


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 11, 2007)

A possible entry for this months competition.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jul 11, 2007)

Guess where this picture was taken this month?


----------



## Dhimmi (Jul 11, 2007)




----------



## baffled (Jul 12, 2007)

neonwilderness said:
			
		

> A possible entry for this months competition.




Like that, great light.


----------



## baffled (Jul 12, 2007)

Thought I'd try something a bit different today

PAD12

*Flaming Orange*






Don't try this at home kids.......


----------



## tom_craggs (Jul 12, 2007)

Thats wicked Baffled!


----------



## tom_craggs (Jul 12, 2007)

Somewhere in Oxfordshire.


----------



## baffled (Jul 12, 2007)

And if I may return the compliment, thats excellent.
Superb definition in the clouds and the contrast between the sky and grass is great.
Did you use a polarizer?


----------



## tom_craggs (Jul 12, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> And if I may return the compliment, thats excellent.
> Superb definition in the clouds and the contrast between the sky and grass is great.
> Did you use a polarizer?



Thank you, no I brought a new lens recently and still can't afford a polarizer to fit a 77mm thread  I just used a cokin grey grad, metered for, and fractionally overexposed the field. 

Only problem with it is the grad slightly darkens the tree, looks a bit odd given the bright colours everywhere else. I always have this problem a bit when using a grad (which is why I slightly overexposed the field - to try to balance the exposure a bit)


----------



## baffled (Jul 12, 2007)

Thought I'd invert my Flaming Orange.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 12, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Thought I'd invert my Flaming Orange.



I like that one. Very sculptural.


----------



## dlx1 (Jul 12, 2007)

>


----------



## danski (Jul 12, 2007)

Margates answer to the Flat Iron building 
when was that taken? i might have been sitting just to the clowns right over the railings!


----------



## Dhimmi (Jul 12, 2007)

danski said:
			
		

> Margates answer to the Flat Iron building
> when was that taken? i might have been sitting just to the clowns right over the railings!



That was Monday, during the run home for the taxi charity day out. 

cheers,


----------



## danski (Jul 12, 2007)

ah, was there saturday


----------



## big eejit (Jul 12, 2007)

Some brilliant pics on this thread this month.


----------



## danski (Jul 12, 2007)

yeah, ditto
baffled doing some very nice things among others


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 12, 2007)

I gotta admit, baffled is putting up some excellent stuff, I'm well impressed with it, great work. Some excellent stuff from others too.


----------



## Forkboy (Jul 12, 2007)

Pidgin...


----------



## tom_craggs (Jul 13, 2007)

Another bloody cycling shot.


----------



## tom_craggs (Jul 13, 2007)

Forkboy said:
			
		

> Pidgin...



Love the jaunty composition. The low angle looks like it was pretty hard to achieve. Nice.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 13, 2007)

Peacock portrait... I love the look on his face


----------



## baffled (Jul 13, 2007)

This next one is me sayng thanks to the organiser of the photo a day pool at Flickr.

*For Boink!*


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 13, 2007)

Retro shooting street photography. 1957 Yashica 35mm RF with no meter. Kodak CN400. This retro shooting makes you realise just how much technical skill has become redundant. It's not easy taking photographs this way. You start to appreciate just how difficult it was for Henri Cartier-Bresson et al.

Still HUGELY fun mind


----------



## baffled (Jul 13, 2007)

That is very good, tons of mood.


----------



## Madusa (Jul 13, 2007)

Ah, the pics this month are excellent!!


----------



## baffled (Jul 14, 2007)

Not entirely happy with this but after a long night shift I started losing patience with it, I will return to it and hopefully improve it.

*Red Pencil, White Pencil*







I am now off to bed for a well earned rest.


----------



## Firky (Jul 14, 2007)

IMO it should be red and black


----------



## baffled (Jul 14, 2007)

I would have used black but Woolworths didn't have any black paper or card when I was buying my props this morning though I did get a pack of multi coloured paper and pencils so there is scope to try other combinations.

It was more the shadows I wasn't happy with, I don't have any additional lighting equipment yet so I placed the pencils on a piece of glass and suspended  it about 6 inches above the red and white paper in order to try and eliminate any shadows, it has worked to a degree but I may need to raise the glass a bit more.


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 14, 2007)

*baffled... glass suspension  woolworths....!*

christ you don't do things by halves do ya..no wonder your photos are so good....!!!


----------



## danski (Jul 14, 2007)

use some other white card at the sides for reflection maybe???
dunno what im talking about really but when ive done anything similar you can get rid of some shadows this way..trial and error basically
good work so far though 



edit....obviously it depends where your light source is of course


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 14, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> ...I don't have any additional lighting equipment yet so I placed the pencils on a piece of glass and suspended  it about 6 inches above the red and white paper in order to try and eliminate any shadows, it has worked to a degree but I may need to raise the glass a bit more.



You could try diffusing the flash a little with a Rizla paper or, similar. You seem keen on your sharp textures mind, diffusing would soften the punch a little as well as softening the shadows.

I do like your hard graphic style. I'm sure it has good potential as stock imagery. 

What are you shooting with?


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 14, 2007)

I'm obviously a bit family oriented at the moment and whilst arsing about this morning, took this cliched picture of my daughter with a sunflower....


----------



## Nina (Jul 14, 2007)

My Brick Lane


----------



## Nina (Jul 14, 2007)

oops!


----------



## Nina (Jul 14, 2007)

Hey Robster, great minds and all that... 






my desk


----------



## baffled (Jul 14, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> What are you shooting with?



Canon 400d and usually either 30mm f/1.4 or 85mm f/1.8 though for the above I used my 90mm macro.

I may try your Rizla paper suggestion actually as the paper I have used before has been to thick.


----------



## dlx1 (Jul 15, 2007)

wow Robster970 how tall your daughter  
_
nice image_


----------



## hiccup (Jul 15, 2007)

A butterfly that landed on my finger the other day. Took the photo with my phone, left-handed, whilst balancing a wheelbarrow full of grass clippings on the edge of a skip, so was quite pleased with how it came out.


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 15, 2007)

thedyslexic1 said:
			
		

> wow Robster970 how tall your daughter
> _
> nice image_



she's 3' 2" and stood on a set of steps LOL

sunflowers are de rigeur Nina


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 15, 2007)

hiccup said:
			
		

> Took the photo with my phone


What phone did you use?  It came out pretty well!


Here's a couple I took at Chopwell Forsest Festival yesteday:


----------



## hiccup (Jul 15, 2007)

It's a Sony Ericsson w810i. Was in macro mode.


----------



## baffled (Jul 15, 2007)

Went for a walk today intending to try some landscape stuff but as it's something I'm not particularly good at I soon went back to my comfort zone.

*July Was Just A Blur*


----------



## alef (Jul 15, 2007)

*English summer*

Taken earlier today in the rain at Rise in Finsbury Park.


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 15, 2007)

*inspired by baffled here is my crap attempt at a nature shot*

hahahha i think i shall stick to streets and urban decay.


----------



## pogofish (Jul 16, 2007)

I seem to have been beset by women who party this week.  Not good for the photography, or the liver!


----------



## besgreyling (Jul 16, 2007)

Baffeled, R U an artist by profession? If not, do you also do other arty things besides making  (meaning 5 star)  photo's?


----------



## bmd (Jul 16, 2007)

Robster970 said:
			
		

> I'm obviously a bit family oriented at the moment and whilst arsing about this morning, took this cliched picture of my daughter with a sunflower....



Love that shot, your daughter has a great expression in it. The sunflower looks almost triffidy.

There is so much technical skill on this thread, can anyone recommend a good website or book to get me started? I would love to learn how to use my Olympus Trip 35mm better and my little Ricoh R4.


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 16, 2007)

Bob Marleys Dad said:
			
		

> Love that shot, your daughter has a great expression in it. The sunflower looks almost triffidy.
> 
> There is so much technical skill on this thread, can anyone recommend a good website or book to get me started? I would love to learn how to use my Olympus Trip 35mm better and my little Ricoh R4.



Ta BMD. Composition do's and don'ts is probably where you should start. There are some 'rules' you can apply to make significant improvements to pics but like most rules, they can also be broken and still get good results. Firky might know some places to look at on the web. TBH, most of it is practise and getting feedback. You're in a safe place here so why don't you post some stuff up and then we'll tell you what we think?


----------



## bmd (Jul 16, 2007)

Robster970 said:
			
		

> Ta BMD. Composition do's and don'ts is probably where you should start. There are some 'rules' you can apply to make significant improvements to pics but like most rules, they can also be broken and still get good results. Firky might know some places to look at on the web. TBH, most of it is practise and getting feedback. You're in a safe place here so why don't you post some stuff up and then we'll tell you what we think?



I have posted some shots on this thread and got some nice comments but I think I'd like more constructive criticism. I think you're right about the practice and feedback thing, which is why I like digital more than film.


----------



## baffled (Jul 16, 2007)

besgreyling said:
			
		

> Baffeled, R U an artist by profession? If not, do you also do other arty things besides making  (meaning 5 star)  photo's?



Edited to expand on answer

No and I am about as cack handed as is possible when it comes to "arty things" though I did have aspirations of being a DJ at one point (even played out once, whohoo) but the decks now gather dust in the attic.

I have always enjoyed looking at other peoples photographs and thought I'd like to have a go at it and found it was something I took to and enjoyed, luckily modern cameras take a lot of the hard work away from you leaving amateurs like me to get on with taking pictures.

I will have to miss todays photo a day as I have managed to leave my bag with all my gear in it on a train.













Luckily I got a message through to the driver/guard and had it dropped of at the next station but I am unable to pick it up until tomorrow.

Got lucky this time *phew*


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 16, 2007)

Bob Marleys Dad said:
			
		

> I have posted some shots on this thread and got some nice comments but I think I'd like more constructive criticism. I think you're right about the practice and feedback thing, which is why I like digital more than film.



I think this thread is more a general 'this is what i've done' thing rather than a critique thread. You could either post in the criticism thread which is a sticky, or start your own thread with some stuff on and then we'll go through it.


----------



## besgreyling (Jul 16, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Edited to expand on answer
> 
> No and I am about as cack handed as is possible when it comes to "arty things" though I did have aspirations of being a DJ at one point (even played out once, whohoo) but the decks now gather dust in the attic.
> 
> ...



Oooh, you're so lucky there are some honest people in this world still.

But coming back to 'arty-things'. You def. have the arty-streak in your work - the way you look at things. Who knows where you are going...


----------



## baffled (Jul 16, 2007)

There's nothing original in most of my stuff though, I have probably absorbed a lot of ideas through looking at other peoples work and now that I have a camera I get the chance to do it myself.


----------



## dlx1 (Jul 16, 2007)

_ July Photo Thread [big pics!]_

To many words going on in here more Photos...


----------



## besgreyling (Jul 16, 2007)

ok then, but not as good as the above...
 
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=811991910&size=l


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 16, 2007)

taken on cameraphone


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 16, 2007)




----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 16, 2007)

Robster970 said:
			
		

> taken on cameraphone
> ...



Very nice, sterile, urban grunge 2007. Spot on


----------



## baffled (Jul 16, 2007)

I wasn't going to bother with todays PAD after misplacing my bag but after seeing Robsters superb shot above I thought why not use the cameraphone.

*Boy Do I Need This*






Not as good as Robster up there but it keeps my daily challenge going.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 16, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> I wasn't going to bother with todays PAD...but it keeps my daily challenge going.




Nice effort, but you lose points for your taste in booze. Overpriced crap


----------



## baffled (Jul 16, 2007)

Ahhh but they are this weeks special at the local garage and for 3.99 a pack I'll drink any old piss


----------



## Sweet FA (Jul 17, 2007)




----------



## Biddlybee (Jul 17, 2007)

where's her hat?


----------



## Sweet FA (Jul 17, 2007)

BiddlyBee said:
			
		

> where's her hat?


lol; managed to prise it off with the promise of fairy wings


----------



## dlx1 (Jul 17, 2007)

_images from phone_




ran out off space on card. steam train on side of Dutch lorry 





Yum Yum  





I remember when it didn't rain

---------
underpass.jpg like that


----------



## Biddlybee (Jul 17, 2007)

Sweet FA said:
			
		

> lol; managed to prise it off with the promise of fairy wings


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 17, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Not as good as Robster up there but it keeps my daily challenge going.



I only post stuff up a couple of times a month (this month has been odd). You're constantly posting up good stuff so I take my hat off to you my friend.


----------



## Firky (Jul 17, 2007)

thedyslexic1 said:
			
		

> Yum Yum



wtf is THAT?


----------



## Mungy (Jul 17, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

> wtf is THAT?



exactly what i was thinking


----------



## Mungy (Jul 17, 2007)




----------



## baffled (Jul 17, 2007)

Got my bag back today so I'm able to continue my Photo A Day as originally intended.

*Contrasty Lines*


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 17, 2007)

Bob Marleys Dad said:
			
		

> I have posted some shots on this thread and got some nice comments but I think I'd like more constructive criticism. I think you're right about the practice and feedback thing, which is why I like digital more than film.



If you want more criticism, you could post to the 'Urban 75 critics' thread. I think that these threads are more just for getting your pics out there, and not so much for a jury discussion of the technical merits etc.


----------



## brittananany (Jul 18, 2007)

took these shots while out at my boyfriend's house.  


*RUSTED DRIVE*





*WHERE ARE WE?*


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 18, 2007)

Hello brittananany

Welcome to the boards.  Very brave of you to jump straight into the photography forums.  Tell us something about yourself.  Are you a nanny? Do you know anyone else on here?  I found your pictures a bit orangey for my taste.  Have you got any more you are prepared to let us see?


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 18, 2007)

Actually not taken in July, but I've only just got the roll developed this afternoon.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 18, 2007)

brittananany said:
			
		

> took these shots while out at my boyfriend's house.
> 
> 
> 
> *WHERE ARE WE?*



Your in a car  Sat on your lazy. Your boyfriend lives in a car?


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 18, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> Actually not taken in July, but I've only just got the roll developed this afternoon.




Very, very nice. I like that lots. Not your usual style.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 18, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Very, very nice. I like that lots. Not your usual style.



Thanks Stanley. I think I have a few different styles actually. There is other stuff like that I've done. I suppose the 'textured' stuff or the polaroids just seem to end up on here more often 

(you'll be proud - it's film too)


----------



## Skim (Jul 18, 2007)

I don't often feel drawn to still life, but we were given these crayons in a restaurant this afternoon and I loved their colours:


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 18, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> ...I think I have a few different styles actually...



In all your work I notice (and I mean this in the nicest way) a contrived 'style' that says stuff about you. Generally, your photographs portray a very feminine, self-conscious sensitivity. This shot doesn't. It's more considered than contrived and spontaneous even though the composition is very solid.

I like the way the splits in the iron railings both mirror and contradict the birds wings. It's actually quite macho - that's why it's so different to your usual style. But, it is still obviously a VP photograph. That's a very good thing IMO.


----------



## brittananany (Jul 18, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Your in a car  Sat on your lazy. Your boyfriend lives in a car?


no.. it ment to say on the way to my boyfriends house. haha


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 18, 2007)

Skim said:
			
		

> I don't often feel drawn to still life, but we were given these crayons in a restaurant this afternoon and I loved their colours:



nice - like that.


----------



## baffled (Jul 18, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> Actually not taken in July, but I've only just got the roll developed this afternoon.



Lovely colour you've got there.

decided to change my mind and converted the tower to b&w which is now my pad18 entry.






edit: changed my mind and have used a different image.


----------



## baffled (Jul 19, 2007)

I was originally going to use this but thought the image was very flat, I have since reprocessed it and I'm happier with it now.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 19, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> edit: changed my mind and have used a different image.




You have a very graphic eye. More very strong images. Good stuff. I'd like to see you open up and put a bit more of yourself and a bit more emotion into your photography mind.

You seem to be set in your ways (ways that work in a graphic way). How about putting more feeling into your PAD's? More you.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 19, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> In all your work I notice (and I mean this in the nicest way) a contrived 'style' that says stuff about you. Generally, your photographs portray a very feminine, self-conscious sensitivity. This shot doesn't. It's more considered than contrived and spontaneous even though the composition is very solid.
> 
> I like the way the splits in the iron railings both mirror and contradict the birds wings. It's actually quite macho - that's why it's so different to your usual style. But, it is still obviously a VP photograph. That's a very good thing IMO.



I see totally what you mean. The strength of the lines is something that isn't seen in much of my stuff. I think they scare me.

A friend, who used to be into photography in his younger days and is slowly regaining his interest, and who, a bit like you Stanley  , has a strong opinion on most things, was having a bit of a drunken chat with me a little while ago about my photography.

It was just after I'd sold my first piece, and he was bigging me up to everyone else who was there with us. Anyway, we got into a bit of a discussion about reasons for photographing, what I photograph etc. I forget how it went (the drink  ) but he ended up saying "oooh, so it's all about you" in a rather accusatory tone. 

I didn't really have my wits about me to reply in a thoughtful manner - but I've thought quite a bit about it since, and surely all photography is about the photographer? I keep saying I can't really see one cohesive style in my pictures, and yet you're not the first person to say something is a VP (or catherine buca) image. There is obviously something I'm missing, because I clearly can't look at them objectively. 

The style, method, subjects a photographer chooses has as much, if not more, to do with them than their external surroundings. How is it possible for a photographer to be objective? 

I'm not that hot on photographic theory, so I'm sure there's loads of stuff out there on this sort of thing - but it strikes me that my friend's comment was rather erroneous (I love that word). 

Er, so yeah. Got my morning hat on, no coffee, still sleepy - make no sense!


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 19, 2007)

Photographers cannot be objective about their work. You can try to understand it but you'll never be able to come up with a truly objective view. You have a very strong signature, mainly through use of colour and content. Your stuff is as easy to recognise here as Baffled's is for graphic, precise composition, as firky's is for humour, pathos and use of B&W, as Cybertects is for use of colour, subject and clinically clean execution, etc,etc

Your style will develop as you become more influenced by stuff inside and outside of photography. I wouldn't worry about one developing, it already has.

Your friends comment wasn't erroneous. It was accurate, although he clearly had no way of elaborating why he was correct because he was battered


----------



## dlx1 (Jul 19, 2007)




----------



## baffled (Jul 19, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> You have a very graphic eye. More very strong images. Good stuff. I'd like to see you open up and put a bit more of yourself and a bit more emotion into your photography mind.
> 
> You seem to be set in your ways (ways that work in a graphic way). How about putting more feeling into your PAD's? More you.



See, at this time in my photography I don't think I'd even know where to begin putting more emotion and feeling into my shots.

I have always judged photographs on whether they are aesthetically pleasing and when creating images I try to do the same, hopefully as I progress I will start to see more in an image than just whether it looks good.


----------



## Skim (Jul 19, 2007)

I'm in the mood for texture today:


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 19, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> ...hopefully as I progress I will start to see more in an image than just whether it looks good.



I'm sure you will. It's not something you really need to think about. I was playing the drunk art critic last night


----------



## Robster970 (Jul 19, 2007)

Skim said:
			
		

> I'm in the mood for texture today:



yummy


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 19, 2007)

Robster970 said:
			
		

> Your friends comment wasn't erroneous. It was accurate, although he clearly had no way of elaborating why he was correct because he was battered



This is why I shouldn't type before coffee  

I didn't mean his comment was erroneous, even though that's what I wrote. What I meant was his following argument, that photography should be all about the subject and not have anything to do with the photographer, was. Of course, you didn't know about that conversation because I didn't tell you. No coffee you see.

Basically, I think he has this impression of some worthy person doggedly going from place to place documenting what they see totally objectively. The way in which he said "so it's all about you", which was a philosophically accurate statement, was as if I was doing something wrong, that there is a higher form of art out there that has nothing to do with the artist. Which I think is wrong. That's the part I find erroneous.

Just had coffee - hopefully that makes sense now!  

Love the paper towel Skim - I love it when people see past the everyday and find amazing patterns and often beauty. Something I often miss myself.

thedyslexic1 - you know, I ought to be put off by whatever is in the bottom corner, but I think it actually adds to it  Maybe I'm just in a weird mood. Reminds me of one of mine.

baffled - the texture on that wall is amazing. Glad you kept working on it. Very moody.

Mungy - I like the expression in that portrait. Did you go for the high key look intentionally? I'm not sure whether I like that or not tbh. I must say though, it really brings out her eyes - great detail.

Robster - I love your cameraphone image from that tunnel


----------



## baffled (Jul 19, 2007)

I didn't really have the correct lens on me for this shot but I thought I'd have a go at it anyway, quite pleased with how it turned out in the end and it's only the sky dishes, imho, that takes away from the old feeling the shot has.

*Repetition*


----------



## baffled (Jul 19, 2007)

And one that didn't make it into my PAD but I like anyway.






Split toned in Lightroom.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 19, 2007)

They're both shit today, but I'll still be looking forward to tomorrows PAD.


----------



## baffled (Jul 19, 2007)

Well I've had a good run so far  and was due an off day sooner or later.

Will try harder tomorrow


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 19, 2007)

I found another decent one from that roll:





Obviously a tough one contrast wise because of shooting into the sun, but I like the rays shooting out from behind the cloud.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 19, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> I found another decent one from that roll:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeah whatever


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 19, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Yeah whatever



I'm not sure what you mean (tone is always lost in translation for me on the interwebs).


----------



## Mungy (Jul 19, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> Mungy - I like the expression in that portrait. Did you go for the high key look intentionally? I'm not sure whether I like that or not tbh. I must say though, it really brings out her eyes - great detail.



yeah I went for the high key look, I'm just getting into the idea of post processing rather than just straight from the camera. This is a bit difficult as I use linux and gimp is too frustrating for me right now. I use lightzone which is free for linux, but can only use and older version cos my computer is getting old.

Though I have had my Nikon a couple of years now, it's only now since becoming bankrupt that I have the time to learn how to take better pictures.


----------



## baffled (Jul 20, 2007)

Had a few to choose from in the end today but since I have had such a shit day at work this shot kinda sums up my mood.

Pad20

*I Want To Break Free*


----------



## baffled (Jul 20, 2007)

Dear Daisy you have served me well but alas time has not been kind to you, so one last hurrah.

*Better Days Long Since Passed*






Blown the exposure, overdone the contrast and Stanley probably thinks it's shit but fuck it, I like it


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 20, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> Blown the exposure, overdone the contrast and Stanley probably thinks it's shit but fuck it, I like it




I don't think it's shit at all. My personal tastes in photography look for something very different to your own style, but I do recognise that you have a good eye and are very good at doing what you do. No reason why you shouldn't be able to make a living from this. Have you tried submitting to stock libraries?


----------



## baffled (Jul 20, 2007)

I was just being bolshi Stanley, I do this for fun and am very lucky than I earn a decent wage in a job that also affords me enough free time to pretend to be a photographer.

I wouldn't want the pressure of trying to make money from this


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 20, 2007)

Counting my change earlier this evening.


----------



## baffled (Jul 21, 2007)

This may change by the end of the day but as I have a stinking hangover I seriously doubt it.

*Death Becomes Her*






Think this my laziest shot so far.

edit: added noise as the image was to clean.

edit again: the shot below is now my PAD


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 21, 2007)

*baffled...*

you wouldn't need to do much to your pictures to sell them though - they are pretty amazing exactly how they are.. you are denying people the joy of having your photography to look at because you are being lazy! I SAY DO IT.


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 21, 2007)

*i went dragon boat racing thursday*

but there was a free bar got totally wrecked, made a twat of myself running around after the photographer and nearly missed my race....

oh well....


----------



## baffled (Jul 21, 2007)

That's a pretty darn good picture indigo, very nice.

Good stuff.


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 21, 2007)

*baffled whilst thats very nice of you*

no matter how many photos i take im never going to get as good as you.

SELL THEM...(promise to be your first customer)!!!!!


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 21, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> I wouldn't want the pressure of trying to make money from this




Submitting to a few stock libraries and hoping for an occasional cash boost is hardly pressure and you never know, your shots might be what the buyers are currently looking for.

I'd give it a go if I was you. I only know of two agencies that would suit my own style. Sent a selection off to one and they asked to see more at a time when all my stock and CD's were in unaccessible storage. May try again myself now.


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 21, 2007)

*baffled - i'd defo buy that tap one of yours*

and actually i love them all, well apart from that wall one...i'd buy any of them


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 21, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Submitting to a few stock libraries and hoping for an occasional cash boost is hardly pressure and you never know, your shots might be what the buyers are currently looking for.


Do you have any recommendations for stock libraries to use?  Someone randomly bought one of my photos last year and I've been thinking about submitting a few to some libraries to see if they'd sell.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 21, 2007)

neonwilderness said:
			
		

> Do you have any recommendations for stock libraries to use?  Someone randomly bought one of my photos last year and I've been thinking about submitting a few to some libraries to see if they'd sell.



Try looking at a few sites to see which would most suit your work. Then check that you can supply image files in the format/size requested. Can't really make any recommendations. I've not worked with stock libraries as a buyer for over Three years now. Even longer since I submitted work to agencies of any kind.


----------



## baffled (Jul 21, 2007)

My hangover lifted long enough for the following image to be shot which I will now be using for PAD21


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 21, 2007)

*for some reason your shot reminded me of*

my bathroom shot....well not my bathroom the bathroom at my work


----------



## baffled (Jul 21, 2007)

Great lighting in your shot, strong lines too.

Nice


----------



## baffled (Jul 21, 2007)

I don't if anyone is really interested or not but between us there is 30 or so of  taking part in PAD, some good and some not so good images at the link below.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/433939@N22/pool/


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 21, 2007)

*i wondered what this PAD malaky was*

kept getting it mixed up with PADI the diving certification though...so what happens, is it a competition, do we get to vote for a winner. what is it , what is it ?


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 21, 2007)

*Cats eyes*


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 22, 2007)

*Neon...*

that is fking stunning......


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 22, 2007)

*my friends photo*

doing the Hamburg humble....


----------



## baffled (Jul 22, 2007)

indigo4 said:
			
		

> kept getting it mixed up with PADI the diving certification though...so what happens, is it a competition, do we get to vote for a winner. what is it , what is it ?



It's just a group of people taking a photo a day through July and adding them to the group, I have used it as something to make me pick up the camera again as I had stopped taking pictures for a while.


----------



## Forkboy (Jul 22, 2007)

Detail of one of my falcon shots taken at the country fair, albeit after too much cider...


----------



## dlx1 (Jul 22, 2007)

^

to add lovely colours


----------



## baffled (Jul 22, 2007)

Thats superb, the detail is great and so sharp.

What lens?


----------



## Forkboy (Jul 22, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Thats superb, the detail is great and so sharp.
> 
> What lens?




Shot on a Canon EOS 30D with a 70-200 F4 L IS USM at f/8 and 1/100

i'm just more annoyed at the weather making the bird's feathers stick together as such..    as that would have given even more detail..


----------



## Forkboy (Jul 22, 2007)

and work in progress of a slightly different crop..


----------



## big eejit (Jul 22, 2007)

Death of a rockstar


----------



## bmd (Jul 22, 2007)

Forkboy said:
			
		

> Detail of one of my falcon shots taken at the country fair, albeit after too much cider...



The drinking clearly does your photography no damage. That's a great shot, the detail is amazing. I want one of those cameras. Did the lens come with it? What does the original image look like?


----------



## pogofish (Jul 22, 2007)

Foghorn anyone?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 23, 2007)

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g33/refreshment_66/IMG_1465.jpg?t=1185148414


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 23, 2007)

Had a bit of a play with the mouse trip.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 23, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Had a bit of a play with the mouse trip.



Ooh, very swish. Works well  

Johnny - what on earth is that KFC bag sat on? Is it a sofa? My eyes, my eyes


----------



## Forkboy (Jul 23, 2007)

Bob Marleys Dad said:
			
		

> The drinking clearly does your photography no damage. That's a great shot, the detail is amazing. I want one of those cameras. Did the lens come with it? What does the original image look like?




The original image is something like this






Though as I'm shooting in RAW (+JPEG at the same time), the actual original is larger 

the JPEG file as shot is here and gives an idea of the sizes involved:

http://xs117.xs.to/xs117/07301/Falconoriginal214124.JPG


As for the camera and lens, the lens is a pro lens (Canon EF 70-200 F/4 L) and the sharpness is pretty much what I'd expect from it especially with the camera I'm using - the Canon EOS 30D, though using a DSLR body you can still get some very good results using primes, but with those you're obviously stuck with one focal length..  I'm starting photograpghy at college in September so I've pretty much invested in a kit that I hope will last me the next four to five years, in terms of lenses, I expect to change body in a couple of years time..

normally for wildlife you'd probably be better off with a 400 lens to get a greater distance between yourself and the subject.. the shots I did at the weekend were of animals that were tied down, so I had a captive audience you could say... just got to work throgh the rest of the shots now..


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 23, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> Johnny - what on earth is that KFC bag sat on? Is it a sofa? My eyes, my eyes



Yes, in a secondhand store.


----------



## baffled (Jul 23, 2007)

Pretty much dislike both these shots but, and I'm making excuses now, I haven't  been in the mood for photography the last couple of days.

Sundays

*mating season and the lesser spotted plug begins the search for a partner.*






Todays

*pipes need a good cleaning*






some pretty bad barrelling on the last one but I'm going to keep it, need to leave the vignetting alone too.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 23, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> Ooh, very swish. Works well



Cheers... I was originally thinking of entering it like this for the photo comp but there's quite a lot of clone work done on it and at what point does it stop being a photograph and become a montage, a collage or even a painting?


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 23, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Cheers... I was originally thinking of entering it like this for the photo comp but there's quite a lot of clone work done on it and at what point does it stop being a photograph and become a montage, a collage or even a painting?



It wouldn't ever become a painting, I don't think.

I don't see any problem with any of the other two though - montage or collage. Each is a piece of art created with a photograph, or three, as its base starting point.

But I'm sure there are many who would disagree.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 23, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> It wouldn't ever become a painting, I don't think.
> 
> I don't see any problem with any of the other two though - montage or collage. Each is a piece of art created with a photograph, or three, as its base starting point.
> 
> But I'm sure there are many who would disagree.



That's the way I feel. Photography is supposed to be the art of making art with a camera (IMHO) no matter how you achieve the end result.

So here's me breaking another golden rule... never work with children or animals


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 23, 2007)

Secret garden


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 23, 2007)

And another...

Blue Rose


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 23, 2007)

Terminal boredom has set in so I've poured myself a brandy, rolled one and opened photoshop.

Clothes pegs


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 23, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Secret garden


Nice shot.  I was messing around with the same effect on one of my photos earlier on, not sure if I like the result or not though.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 23, 2007)

neonwilderness said:
			
		

> Nice shot.  I was messing around with the same effect on one of my photos earlier on, not sure if I like the result or not though.



Thank you... I'm not too keen on this effect, I think it's over used but there was too much green in the shot and I wanted the gate to stand out.

I don't really like to comment on other people's pictures because I'm no expert but I think your cat shot would have worked better with a slightly tighter crop, maybe just touching the left of the whiskers. I think this might put more emphasis on the eyes but that's just my opinion and like I say, I'm no expert so please don't take it as a criticism.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 23, 2007)

Forkboy said:
			
		

> Detail of one of my falcon shots taken at the country fair, albeit after too much cider...



What's that weird thing sticking out of its nosehole?


----------



## mauvais (Jul 23, 2007)

Some inspiring stuff on this thread!

I needed to get out with the camera more, so this weekend I decided to head to Swanage in Dorset, if only because the photo of it on the Bournemouth OS map cover looked pretty good - but of course I hoped to beat it!

Should have got out of bed earlier as the sun was in the wrong place for the real winning shot, but got some assorted stuff, as seen here:


























More somewhere but I suspect that'll more than do for now!


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 23, 2007)

*ohhi love them...*

and i love selective colouring even though most people frown at it and mutter horrible things under their breath ....but i darn well love it.

baffled...again your first one... lovely, id buy that...christ im gonna be poor at this rate when you ever find time to sell your work! By the way don't stop taking photos you wierdo...you are my favourite photograher on here...


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> What's that weird thing sticking out of its nosehole?


It's a locating dowel for a parasol


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 23, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> It's a locating dowel for a parasol



I hate birds.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I hate birds.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jul 23, 2007)

Taken in Trafalgar Square, last weekend.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 23, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

>


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 24, 2007)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 24, 2007)

I like you too.


----------



## Mungy (Jul 24, 2007)




----------



## baffled (Jul 24, 2007)

Dr Herbz - Like the colthes peg shot a lot, great colour.

Mauvais - Great shots with the last 2 in particular being favourites

Tricky Skills - Nice candid shot, something I am absolutely rubbish at.


----------



## Forkboy (Jul 24, 2007)




----------



## Sweet FA (Jul 24, 2007)




----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 24, 2007)

Out for a walk with my furry friend.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 24, 2007)

I was messing here to see what how it would look whilst panning with a relatively long exposure of 1/40


----------



## baffled (Jul 24, 2007)

Edit; Have gone with the fence.

*Urban Free Climbing*






Dedicated to Stanley, hope the head don't hurt too much


----------



## baffled (Jul 24, 2007)

Sweet FA said:
			
		

>



Like that, good stuff


----------



## Sweet FA (Jul 24, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Like that, good stuff


Wow; thanks  

I need to get a camera really - mucking about with a mobile's getting a bit tedious...


----------



## Dhimmi (Jul 24, 2007)




----------



## Mungy (Jul 24, 2007)




----------



## big eejit (Jul 24, 2007)

Forkboy said:
			
		

>



Good shot forky. What exactly is going on?


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 24, 2007)

One of my chilling spots.


----------



## bmd (Jul 24, 2007)

It looks better when it's bigger, plus I'm getting pissed off with this camera for macro shots, it's not very good on focus.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 24, 2007)

And another...


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jul 24, 2007)

'Candid shots...'

I shoot around twenty, one of which will hopefully be half decent  

I saw this chap a mile off and just knew he would make for an interesting subject matter. Kinda stalked him. Felt guitly, but he was easy prey, being a little slow on his feet.

It's quite easy to get away with this type of photography in a crowded place such as Trafalgar Square - EVERYONE is taking photos


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 24, 2007)

I'm only posting these to see if they're clichéd  

Brown things with a bit of green


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jul 24, 2007)

Another picture from Trafalgar Square on Sunday.


----------



## bmd (Jul 24, 2007)

Dr Herbz, enough with the clichéd shots already! I love the trees one and the river.

Great shot of a moody teenager in action, Tricky Skills.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 24, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> I'm only posting these to see if they're clichéd
> 
> Brown things with a bit of green




Badly executed more than clichéd. Dull light. Bad focus. Just a shot of dull trees really. Unexceptional and very, very dull.


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 24, 2007)

Railway line at the back of my house.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 24, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Badly executed more than clichéd. Dull light. Bad focus. Just a shot of dull trees really. Unexceptional and very, very dull.



You see, Stanley, nothing happens without a reason...

I deliberately cropped an inch off the bottom of my photo to ruin the composition and messed with the colours to make it worse... but, and this is a big BUT... This is a photograph taken from your site, one that you're obviously proud of...






How many 'rolleyes' icons can I add?


----------



## Tankus (Jul 24, 2007)

Holiday's in Spain.. few years back ...  Sunrise cliché award ..methinks

But its strictly amateur hour in my case... Guv..!


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 24, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> You see, Stanley, nothing happens without a reason...
> 
> I deliberately cropped an inch off the bottom of my photo to ruin the composition and messed with the colours to make it worse... but, and this is a big BUT... This is a photograph taken from your site, one that you're obviously proud of...
> 
> ...






e2a; You can see the difference though?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 24, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> You see, Stanley, nothing happens without a reason...
> 
> I deliberately cropped an inch off the bottom of my photo to ruin the composition and messed with the colours to make it worse... but, and this is a big BUT... This is a photograph taken from your site, one that you're obviously proud of...
> 
> ...


No focus, dully monochromatic, totally uninteresting and uninspired. Imo.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 24, 2007)

Tankus said:
			
		

> Holiday's in Spain.. few years back ...  Sunrise cliché award ..methinks
> 
> But its strictly amateur hour in my case... Guv..!




A full set of clichés.

Yay!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 24, 2007)

I prefer the out of focus pine trees, me.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 24, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> No focus, dully monochromatic, totally uninteresting and uninspired. Imo.




Thank fuck for that. I'm glad I don't live in the same world as you. Very, very glad.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 24, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Thank fuck for that. I'm glad I don't live in the same world as you. Very, very glad.



We actually do live in the same world; we just see it differently.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 24, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> We actually do live in the same world; we just see it differently.



Yes little Johnny. Yes.

Good night.


----------



## Tankus (Jul 24, 2007)

heh  ...Ive got albums full of 'em .....arf ... 4meg pocketcasio in one hand ...beer in ta' other  

I could so bore the lot of you
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidently... Forkboys eagle eye reflection has insipred me


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 24, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Yes little Johnny. Yes.
> 
> Good night.



Please don't go yet: stay and dispense some more wisdom about photography to us! We have so much to learn.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 24, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> No focus, dully monochromatic, totally uninteresting and uninspired. Imo.



This wasn't my photograph, this was Stanley's. I went out today with the camera and took some dull, uninteresting shots of nothing great. 
I remembered seeing Stanley's picture of the trees and thought 'WTF' so I took my shot and ruined it as much as I possibly could but as hard as I tried to 'kill it', I can't seem to make it as 'dull' as Stanley's picture


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 24, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> This wasn't my photograph, this was Stanley's. ID



I knew that.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 24, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> This wasn't my photograph, this was Stanley's. I went out today with the camera and took some dull, uninteresting shots of nothing great.
> I remembered seeing Stanley's picture of the trees and thought 'WTF' so I took my shot and ruined it as much as I possibly could but as hard as I tried to 'kill it', I can't seem to make it as 'dull' as Stanley's picture




You're making a right idiot of yourself now  

Your shot is shit by anyone's measure. My shot was nominated for awards. Why is that? 

Anyway, I'm off to bed now.

Cliché number 55 - zoomed shots of zooed animals.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

What was the award, Stanley... the worst photograph of the century?

e2a... Stanley, where's the focal point, what is the subject and where is the composition?!?!?!... Your path is leading nowhere and IMHO, this is nothing better than a poor snapshot!


----------



## Tankus (Jul 25, 2007)

tried decay too ...'cause everyone does


----------



## lighterthief (Jul 25, 2007)




----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

I realise that this has become a bit tedious and I do apologise for dragging it out  but I'd like to thank everyone for their honesty, especially JC2 and I'd also like to thank everyone for putting up with my little game.

I'd also like to extend a HUGE 'thank you' to Sir Stanley for being such a good sport and for giving me the opportunity to make him look an even bigger fool than he makes himself look.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

Lighterthief... I really like that last shot, do you have a version without the dark edges?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 25, 2007)

You're welcome; now lay off the fucking birds!


----------



## Tankus (Jul 25, 2007)

I had that problem with my Kodak ,  with a multiplier on the end with no zoom


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> You're welcome; now lay off the fucking birds!



I hate birds, the little feathered, fluttering fucks!


----------



## pogofish (Jul 25, 2007)

Stanley, Herbz - How about taking it elsewhere please?

I'm kind of liking the idea of a thread where you can just post a photo, be it great or utter crap.  I get enough of the high art/skill/composition stuff in the day-job thanks & appreciate somewhere I can just stick-up/look at a snap of any sort without worrying about the competitive/critical angle.  

Here, stroke a kitten!  Shot today on full auto during a fag-break from a bloody exacting job for the BBC.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

Pogofish, I was doing nothing more than defending myself... is that wrong?


----------



## Tankus (Jul 25, 2007)

innit .......... sooty's a cutie .... but arnt they all


----------



## brittananany (Jul 25, 2007)

*peace*

hello.


----------



## brittananany (Jul 25, 2007)

*peace*

just a photograph i did.
alot of people seemed to enjoy it on deviant art.
hope you all do.


----------



## pogofish (Jul 25, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Pogofish, I was doing nothing more than defending myself... is that wrong?



Of course not.  Just thought it this thread was not really the place for it.  Can't say I was really following the argument.

Might put other folk off & I like the variety of images being posted.  


Here's another blurry kitten - in shadow


----------



## pogofish (Jul 25, 2007)

brittananany said:
			
		

> hello.



Hi there - have a Hob-Nob


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

pogofish said:
			
		

> Of course not.  Just thought it this thread was not really the place for it.  Can't say I was really following the argument.



It seems I was at the receiving end (for a very short time) of one of Sir Stanley's rants, I merely defended myself (ok, I retaliated) and was happy with the outcome  

Nice pussy


----------



## pogofish (Jul 25, 2007)

OK, please de-rant yourself Stanley!   

This one has a litter of kittens as well & they are if anything even cuter.  Younger too & today was the first time she brought them anywhere near us - Wait till you see them.  






Think that is about enough of the gratuituous kitty pics for today!


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

Here's one from my father's house. The mother brings live rats to the kittens to teach them to kill their own... Don't you just love nature!


----------



## brittananany (Jul 25, 2007)

pogofish said:
			
		

> Hi there - have a Hob-Nob



haha thank you thank you!
hows it goin'?


----------



## lighterthief (Jul 25, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Lighterthief... I really like that last shot, do you have a version without the dark edges?



Thanks Dr_Herbz and no: it's practically a feature of the Diana family of cameras (along with light leaks, blurring, odd colours...!)


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

No worries, I thought you might have added it later in Photoshop.. cheers.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 25, 2007)

lighterthief said:
			
		

> Thanks Dr_Herbz and no: it's practically a feature of the Diana family of cameras (along with light leaks, blurring, odd colours...!)



Everytime I remember to go on ebay to look for a Diana/clone I get hideously outbid.

Lucky you  I wants one!


----------



## Forkboy (Jul 25, 2007)

big eejit said:
			
		

> Good shot forky. What exactly is going on?




My thoughts exactly..

No, it was someone dressed in a pig mask and silver cape (well you do get these types at the Lambeth fair), walking behind a WPC..

I think it needs a bit of a crop though as the stuff on the right hand third of the picture is slightly distracting IMO./.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

*Windows XP*


----------



## cybertect (Jul 25, 2007)

Bought myself a 15mm fisheye at the beginning of the month, so I've been having fun with it:











While taking a little trip down the Thames on a boat, caught these nice atmospherics over London








These last couple, of a Polo G40, I took last December, but it's been kept private till this month, when my first paid feature shoot was published over 4 pages of _VW Power_ magazine in France. [Woo! and Yay!]


----------



## baffled (Jul 25, 2007)

Great set of shots Cybertect.

yet more Lomo style of shooting, gonna have to start trying something else as people will soon tire of it.

*Lost Mine*


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 25, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> Great set of shots Cybertect.
> 
> yet more Lomo style of shooting, gonna have to start trying something else as people will soon tire of it.
> 
> *Lost Mine*



I like that a lot.

People will only get tired of it if you stick to the same subjects. Keep it fresh and all will be fine.

Stick to what you enjoy doing


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

Is off camera lighting clichéd yet?


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 25, 2007)

Another from my clichéd music phase.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jul 25, 2007)

Three more out and about pics from this month:


----------



## cybertect (Jul 25, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Is off camera lighting clichéd yet?



Maybe.

Off-mic lighting is a genuine innovation, though


----------



## cybertect (Jul 25, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> *Lost Mine*



I was so mesmerised by the image that I just got the title.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 25, 2007)

*the problem with faddy eating (only tall food need apply)*









(yup, been messing with the polaroids again)


----------



## Mungy (Jul 26, 2007)




----------



## baffled (Jul 26, 2007)

Vintage Paw - Lovely lighting yet again
Mungy - I like that though I don't know why or if I even should, love the way the colours blend into each other.

I have a couple to choose from today.

*Dynamite*






or

*Kerb Crawling*






Erring towards Dynamite atm as I'm not sure the toning works on Kerb Crawling and it is also a little busy in the foreground, may even shoot something else yet.

eta: gone with Kerb Crawling, while the toning may not be to everyones taste I do like what I originally saw, nature survivng where it can (Stanley touched on it below)


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 26, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> Erring towards Dynamite atm as I'm not sure the toning works on Kerb Crawling and it is also a little busy in the foreground, may even shoot something else yet.



I prefer Kerb Crawling. I like the strong, dynamic, graphic quality of Dynamite, but it's the signage that makes it work (somebody else's art). The aesthetic balance and physical contrast in Kerb Crawling is purely an accidental piece coming from the nature fighting to survive in the man made environment. It's a subject I much prefer. Both very good again mind. Really don't understand why you're not persuing some additional income from your hobby. Fully understand why you enjoy it as a hobby only, but these days it's very easy for anyone to make a bit of extra cash from good photographs and I think your shots would sell very well as stock.


----------



## baffled (Jul 26, 2007)

Cheers Stanley, well never say never but for now it's a hobby (missus always said I lacked self confidence)

Something I rescued from yesterday but now wish I had used it.






Obviously very similar but there is more movement and I kinda like the muted colours.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jul 26, 2007)

A few pics taken around SW8 yesterday:


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 26, 2007)

Tricky Skills said:
			
		

> A few pics taken around SW8 yesterday:




Erm... Shyte!

They are though aren't they?


----------



## Dhimmi (Jul 26, 2007)




----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 26, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Erm... Shyte!
> 
> They are though aren't they?



Thing is though Stan, this isn't the "fine art photography for July" thread, this is the "taken any photos in July? Pop 'em in 'ere then" thread. It shouldn't be assumed people are only going to post up what they consider to be worthy of your esteemed eye. They'll post up photos they took that they like - from a snap of a cat and her kittens from work, to some interesting chimneys they saw whilst out and about, to a hackneyed stack of apples on a silly sheet of wrapping paper. 

The "submit a photo" thread - fine. People will post photos to that to get an honest critique, and therefore it can be assumed they are more serious about that specific image as art etc. 

In here, it's just a free for all. Your comment above suggests, to me at least, that you are assuming everyone is posting up pictures they think are arty, or 'worthy', whatever that means. 

I'm not explaining what I mean properly. I've had a pretty horrendous day of travelling and am thoroughly knackered and my mind isn't working as it should. In my head I know what I mean, I just don't think I can type it adequately so I'll shut up. Only, no doubt, to be told "ffs!!! Can nobody take my amazing insights!!! Grrrrrrr!!!!" or some such thing.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 26, 2007)

Dhimmi said:
			
		

>



Not bad!

And they look like those old Adamant urinals...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 26, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> Thing is though Stan, this isn't the "fine art photography for July" thread, this is the "taken any photos in July? Pop 'em in 'ere then" thread. It shouldn't be assumed people are only going to post up what they consider to be worthy of your esteemed eye. They'll post up photos they took that they like - from a snap of a cat and her kittens from work, to some interesting chimneys they saw whilst out and about, to a hackneyed stack of apples on a silly sheet of wrapping paper.
> 
> The "submit a photo" thread - fine. People will post photos to that to get an honest critique, and therefore it can be assumed they are more serious about that specific image as art etc.
> 
> ...



Ha a long day? Not explaining yourself succinctly? Let me paraphrase...

"Fuck off, Stan"


----------



## lighterthief (Jul 26, 2007)

I agree, and take your tedious criticism with you.  This is not what this thread is about.

Anyhoo: another one just digitised...


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 26, 2007)

This is where we went boating.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 26, 2007)

Nice.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 27, 2007)

Not bad is it?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 27, 2007)

Makes me want to go there.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 27, 2007)

Norfolk Broads, the north bit (there's even a north/south divide in the south of England).


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 27, 2007)

Tankus said:
			
		

>



Apparently, this cannot 'count' as photographic art because essentially, all it is is a photo of grafitti. No matter that Hackney is built on transient art, apparently some artistic experts would have it that this is cliche.

fucking arrogant wankers. which isn't the name of this piece btw. it's on Dalston Lane, Hackney, E8


----------



## Firky (Jul 27, 2007)

oxford, yesterday


----------



## Dhimmi (Jul 27, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> And they look like those old Adamant urinals...



Well spotted they are indeed Twyford Adamants.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 27, 2007)

Chilli Dog


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 27, 2007)

Stackin' Z'z


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 27, 2007)

Paulie Tandoori said:
			
		

> Apparently, this cannot 'count' as photographic art because essentially, all it is is a photo of grafitti. No matter that Hackney is built on transient art, apparently some artistic experts would have it that this is cliche.
> 
> fucking arrogant wankers. which isn't the name of this piece btw. it's on Dalston Lane, Hackney, E8



You thick idiot. It isn't graffiti, it's a commissioned mural. A mural that the artist was paid to paint. 

And, before VP or, anyone else damns me for interacting on an interactive web forum, I'm only replying to a dumb as fucking fuck post that was obviously intended to provoke me.

It is not photographic art - it's a photograph of a painting. Obviously.

It is not a cliché photograph of graffiti - there isn't any graffiti.


Why doesn't anyone ever criticise me for saying a photograph is good? I'll stop now. No more good comments. No more bad comments. I think someone posted quite early on the original June thread that it may have replaced the critique thread. Who was that I wonder?

You accuse me of being an egotistical, cynical old git, yet you lot seem to be the one's who get most offended when your egos take a dent!


----------



## cybertect (Jul 27, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

> oxford, yesterday



I really like that. 

Though if you'll forgive me for messing with your photo, I think there's a better crop.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 27, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> You thick idiot. It isn't graffiti, it's a commissioned mural. A mural that the artist was paid to paint.
> 
> And, before VP or, anyone else damns me for interacting on an interactive web forum, I'm only replying to a dumb as fucking fuck post that was obviously intended to provoke me.
> 
> ...



Calm down love. If you want to be contentious, then you can't throw your rattle of your pram because you're taken to task for it. 

And you'll notice that no names were actually named in my post (unlike your cliche thread which began with an implicit criticism of a named poster's photo), yet you both assume i that i'm talking about you as well as resorting to pejoratives automatically.

So in that spirit, I say....You really are a bit of a egotistical prick aren't you Stan? Isn't time you had another flounce darling?


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 27, 2007)

Paulie Tandoori said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> So in that spirit, I say....You really are a bit of a egotistical prick aren't you Stan? Isn't time you had another flounce darling?



It was the cliché remark that got my attention and well you know it. You're incredibly thick aren't you.

Not flouncing and I'm no egotist. The egotists are the one's who can't take the criticism. However, I am growing increasingly bored of the number of stupid people here. They're beginning to drown out the quality.

I still don't understand why everyone was so upset when I used Dr Hebrz's photo as an example of a photographic cliché. It's all very childish.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 27, 2007)

Stan, I'm well aware at the beginning of this thread I asked if it had taken over the submit a photo thread because that one hadn't been posted to hardly at all since the inception of these monthly threads. At no point did I say people were now coming here for their artistic critiques instead of there, or that that is what this thread should be used for. I was asking if people saw the submit a photo thread as redundant. I didn't want it to be. I got no answer, so I gave it no more thought. The submit a photo thread has been active since, so clearly the two fulfil different goals. 

There are lots of people who wouldn't dream of posting a photo in the submit a photo thread who are quite happy to in here because of the more relaxed atmosphere. I think it would be nice to keep it that way.

Please Stanley, and everyone involved in the arguments, I really think a lot of this silliness would be avoided if we were all a little more measured in how we reply to people. No one wants to deny anyone their opinions, but good manners and respect dictate we should be a little more careful before typing in a way we know is inflammatory. That should be for everyone, not just Stanley. If you do have a critique, how's about not just jumping in and saying "that's shit", when you are fully aware the reaction it will garner from some. The only possible reason I can see for saying things in that way is precisely to provoke a reaction, to start an argument. 


Seriously not cool.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 27, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> Seriously not cool.



Personally I prefer a no holds barred, full on debate to the sterile world of false niceties and politeness. When I say I think something is shit I mean it's shit. Sometimes I do keep my fingers off the keyboard mind. If I think a photograph is complete and utter shyte I sometimes say so.

I think anyone who posts images on any thread here is showing their work. By it's very nature the internet is an interactive medium. If you don't expect people to comment and say if they do or, don't like it then you're probably very stupid. If you only expect people to say nice things then you're even more stupid.

Absolutely nothing wrong with healthy negative feedback. Sorry, but I'm not going to help you turn this place into a sanitised pit of boredom.


----------



## Gromit (Jul 27, 2007)

Its all relative. A lot of cliche shit sells really well. Athena made a fortune out of it.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 27, 2007)

Thing is though Stanley, you say "showing their work" as if people are all trying to be artists or something. In this thread they are not. There are plenty of snapshots of things people just took because they wanted to remember the moment, or document it the way people have been doing with their throw-away cameras for decades. They want somewhere nice and happy they can show other people to say 'look what cool thing I saw today'. 

I'd also say, maybe you need to examine why you feel the need to make someone feel like crap when you have the power not to. Just because 'the world is a nasty place' and the art-world in particular is a cut-and-thrust bloodbath doesn't mean you have to bring that in here, unless, as I implied above, there is a deeper reason you feel the need to exert some sort of sadistic power over people.

I wouldn't say I am stupid for wanting people to be respectful of each other. For a long time that was just the way things were on here. People were honest if they thought something didn't work in an image on the submit a photo thread, but in a useful way, rather than an inflammatory way. It's easy to do. Maybe your life and relationships are full of conflict, but that doesn't mean everyone else's are. 

I'm seriously considering a childish flounce, I really am. There is no need for the atmosphere of this board to degenerate into such egotistical nonsense. I'm not happy here while this is going on. That makes me sad, because I have, up until recently, really enjoyed being amongst others with similar passions to mine.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 27, 2007)

Apologies for my part in stirring things up. Here's nice bit of fruit to calm it all down.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 27, 2007)

Paulie Tandoori said:
			
		

> Here's nice bit of fruit to calm it all down.



I like fruit.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 27, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> I'm seriously considering a childish flounce, I really am. There is no need for the atmosphere of this board to degenerate into such egotistical nonsense. I'm not happy here while this is going on. That makes me sad, because I have, up until recently, really enjoyed being amongst others with similar passions to mine.




I'd hate to see you or, anyone flounce. 



> there is a deeper reason you feel the need to exert some sort of sadistic power over people.



  What sadistic power? I have no more or, less 'power' than anyone else here. I take my fair share of abuse. I think I've always been a bit erm... outspoken here. I'm surprised you haven't noticed before. I also take the time to give considered opinions when a photograph merits it (IMO). Whether people choose to take any notice of what I say is entirely up to them.

Anyway, I'm all argued out for today. I'm off out into the sunshine to meet up with friends for a laugh. We'll no doubt tell each other to fuck off at times and take the piss out of each others artistic talents. It'll be a laugh.

Oh, one last mention: I think anyone who posts an image for public viewing is saying it goes beyond a personal snap. Not necessarily fine art, but more than a snap nonetheless. And, they're looking for feedback. I mean, a thread full of shit photos and no words would be very dull indeed


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 27, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> I mean, a thread full of shit photos and no words would be very dull indeed



It would. But a thread full of considered and respectful comments would be better than throw-away denigration.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 27, 2007)

My first attempt at portraiture.


----------



## Mungy (Jul 27, 2007)

i personally don't mind if people like or dislike my photo's. i'd rather they liked them of course, the ego likes its strokes. whether liked or hated, i would like peoples honest opinion why they did. i am developing "an eye" for photographs that i never had 2 years ago when i bought my nikon and feedback does help me look at my photos from another perspective.

peace dudes.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 27, 2007)

There's a big difference between "I don't like that because..." and "That's fuckin' shyte"
Art is subjective so the most anyone should ever offer is their opinion as to why  a piece doesn't appeal to them but it seems Stanley has become the self appointed judge and jury and if a photograph doesn't appeal to him, it's automatically dismissed as 'shyte'.

Constructive criticism is fine by me but there's absolutely nothing constructive in the way Stanley has been criticising people's work of late.


----------



## Firky (Jul 27, 2007)

Bonny lass.

Could do with more tonal range and shadows, i reckon

vintage paw, don't go


----------



## Firky (Jul 27, 2007)

cybertect said:
			
		

> I really like that.
> 
> Though if you'll forgive me for messing with your photo, I think there's a better crop.



Cheers 

I think I prefer your crop but I did like the submerged yellow lines!


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 27, 2007)

Cheers, firky. I deliberately left the face slightly out of focus (a little too much, I think) and added a bit of sharpening in photoshop but apart from that, it's as it came from the camera. 
I was hoping the evening sun was going to do the hard work for me but you're right, it could still do with a bit of work.

It is amazing how a 'bonny lass' can make an otherwise dull photo a lot more interesting innit 

VP, don't go anywhere, you're an inspiration to a lot of people here.


----------



## Mungy (Jul 27, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> There's a big difference between "I don't like that because..." and "That's fuckin' shyte"
> Art is subjective so the most anyone should ever offer is their opinion as to why  a piece doesn't appeal to them but it seems Stanley has become the self appointed judge and jury and if a photograph doesn't appeal to him, it's automatically dismissed as 'shyte'.
> 
> Constructive criticism is fine by me but there's absolutely nothing constructive in the way Stanley has been criticising people's work of late.



Yeah, there is a difference. I'm from a school of thought that for anyone to bother to comment on it, even to tell me its shite, means at least they looked at it and it got a reaction from them.

eta: If someone tells me a pic is good, I want to do better next time. If they tell me its shit, I want to do better next time. For me it is a win/win situation


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 27, 2007)

Gah - I didn't say I might flounce to get anyone saying "oh please don't". That makes me feel uncomfortable, so stop it  

I wanted to get across how shitty the silliness makes me feel. 

It made me cry. I don't like being around it. There's no need for it.  

I'm not flouncing. Not completely. I'm just disappearing when the shit starts. I'm fed up of it pervading every single thread on here. I don't know about anyone else, but that's not what I love this place for. I love this place for the friendly banter, the feeling of camaraderie from being around other like-minded people, the inspiration. Piss-taking is great, personal attacks and unnecessary 'bluntness' makes me unhappy. It's that I don't want to be around.


----------



## cybertect (Jul 27, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

> think I prefer your crop but I did like the submerged yellow lines!



I know what you mean, it's a nice detail.

You can keep them in, but still lose the distracting garage and windows.







I think it balances better and puts a little more emphasis on the human side without, though. Leaves a little uncertainty about how deep the water really is close to the camera, too


----------



## cybertect (Jul 27, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> It made me cry. I don't like being around it. There's no need for it.



(((((Vintage Paw)))))


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 27, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> It made me cry. I don't like being around it. There's no need for it.
> ...



I certainly didn't want to make anyone cry. Sorry.

This forum has always had posters who voice their opinions a little bluntly. I assumed everyone here was aware of that. I do miss the days of Bosky's and Tribal's invaluable input  

I don't want to run the risk of upsetting you in the future either. I suggest you put me on ignore because I'm unlikely to enforce self-censorship beyond what I enforce already.


----------



## baffled (Jul 27, 2007)

Wasn't really in the mood today so took the processing to extremes as a way of venting 


*Grate Invertion*






Inverted in PS then messed with the colours, slight blown exposure in the very centre 

Edit;

I have changed my mind and gone with the original shot I had planned before messing about in PS.

*Grate in Black and White*






While neither shot has any artistic merit the first one gives me a headache.


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 27, 2007)

*baffled*

umm do you ever take a bad photo ?


----------



## mauvais (Jul 27, 2007)

Second one works just fine


----------



## baffled (Jul 27, 2007)

indigo4 said:
			
		

> umm do you ever take a bad photo ?



Yes, but I quickly sort the good/bad when I get home and only spend time processing those with potential.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 27, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Personally I prefer a no holds barred, full on debate to the sterile world of false niceties and politeness. When I say I think something is shit I mean it's shit. Sometimes I do keep my fingers off the keyboard mind. If I think a photograph is complete and utter shyte I sometimes say so.
> 
> I think anyone who posts images on any thread here is showing their work. By it's very nature the internet is an interactive medium. If you don't expect people to comment and say if they do or, don't like it then you're probably very stupid. If you only expect people to say nice things then you're even more stupid.
> 
> Absolutely nothing wrong with healthy negative feedback. Sorry, but I'm not going to help you turn this place into a sanitised pit of boredom.



I liked this thread better when it was mostly photos, with less talking.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 27, 2007)

Vintage Paw said:
			
		

> I'm seriously considering a childish flounce, I really am. There is no need for the atmosphere of this board to degenerate into such egotistical nonsense. I'm not happy here while this is going on. That makes me sad, because I have, up until recently, really enjoyed being amongst others with similar passions to mine.



No, don't do that because of Stanley's comments - it would be childish.


----------



## baffled (Jul 27, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I liked this thread better when it was mostly photos, with less talking.



Stanley has a point but he unfortunately goes about it the wrong way, this forum would quickly become very sterile if you weren't allowed to offer an opinion on someones photo for fear of offending them but critique should be constructive, especially in these threads.

Theres ways and means and just saying somethings shit isn't a good way of doing things, Stanley can still critique me in that fashion cos I have a thick skin


----------



## alef (Jul 27, 2007)

Stan, I think it's fair to say that the general vibe of this forum is towards positive encouragement for amateur/newbie photographers. I specifically started the critique thread a few years ago to a give a place for more blunt opinions.

Generally I find reading your threads and comments tedious and tiresome, so I just ignore them, but it does leave me less inclined to bother with this forum. _Please_ try to thread more carefully here. If you really want a brutal criticism type photography forum then find one, there are plenty of them already in existence. One of the main reasons I have stuck with u75's little photo forum is that it is relatively free of unpleasantness.




			
				Tricky Skills said:
			
		

> A few pics taken around SW8 yesterday:



Tricky Skills, this one stands out for me, like it a lot, the spikey things in particular.


----------



## boskysquelch (Jul 27, 2007)




----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 27, 2007)




----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 27, 2007)

boskysquelch said:
			
		

>




Yay!

Thank fuck for the quality.


----------



## Mungy (Jul 28, 2007)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 28, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Yay!
> 
> Thank fuck for the quality.



But it's all blurry-like.


----------



## boskysquelch (Jul 28, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> But it's all blurry-like.



Jus fer you Johnny...mobilecamera phones(or mobilephonecameras come to that) for ya ....ha!...not the best of but I'm jus in between Chan's Myth & Myth 2 so I'll do another another time.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 28, 2007)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 28, 2007)

boskysquelch said:
			
		

> Jus fer you Johnny...mobilecamera phones(or mobilephonecameras come to that) for ya ....ha!...not the best of but I'm jus in between Chan's Myth & Myth 2 so I'll do another another time.



I like that better.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 28, 2007)

Available light, hand-held at 1/13 second.


----------



## baffled (Jul 28, 2007)

PAD 28, I'll be sad to see this month end but at the same time I'll be quite happy, 3 more after today and then I can sit down and actually appreciate what have done this month.

*Not Big, Not Clever, But Oh So Fucking Cool.*






Have a couple that never made it into pad today but will post those shortly.


----------



## baffled (Jul 28, 2007)

Gonna have to loiter around this underpass again as this grabbed shot wasn't as good as I was hoping.

*Walking Away*






Also had this which I quite like but the original is soft, as in a panic to not be seen I rushed it, 30mm meant I was quite close.

*A Bike, A Man, Two Friends*


----------



## baffled (Jul 28, 2007)

ETA: ended up hating the b&w version so heres a muted colour one.

*Legs*


----------



## indigo4 (Jul 28, 2007)

*walking away*

= stunning


----------



## baffled (Jul 28, 2007)

Sorry for spamming this thread but this will be my very last shot today, honest.

Wife beater anyone??

*Stella*






I am now going to enjoy the remnants of the above case


----------



## Firky (Jul 28, 2007)




----------



## Firky (Jul 28, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> ETA: ended up hating the b&w version so heres a muted colour one.
> 
> *Legs*
> [/img]


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 28, 2007)




----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 28, 2007)




----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 28, 2007)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 28, 2007)

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g33/refreshment_66/IMG_1531.jpg?t=1185657218


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 28, 2007)




----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 28, 2007)

Now and Then






The first bike I ever rode... and the last one


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 29, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Now and Then
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Nice


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 29, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> PAD 28, I'll be sad to see this month end but at the same time I'll be quite happy, 3 more after today and then I can sit down and actually appreciate what have done this month.
> 
> *Not Big, Not Clever, But Oh So Fucking Cool.*
> 
> ...





Absolute graphic shyte. Piss poor.

You may as well have sketched that.


----------



## Mungy (Jul 29, 2007)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 29, 2007)

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g33/refreshment_66/IMG_1572.jpg?t=1185689122


----------



## big eejit (Jul 29, 2007)

My daughter hula-hooping with a hoop that's far too big for her. Lomo-fied.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 29, 2007)




----------



## boskysquelch (Jul 29, 2007)

*dontcha jus lurve wot Kids do with there hands when concentrating on something...*

two of my favourite subjects in a row...children at play & birds! 

personally I would knock the levels/saturation/contrast back a tad on the former(and prolly give the benches a clone out  ) and up'em on the latter...but only to My Own taste...and even that may be down to monitors...yooouz's end or mine.



*I lived with 50plus peacocks for 9 years and never took a single shot of them..for all sorts of reasons... I was thinking about this earlier...and by strange co-incidence this is the type of shot I would have looked to get... and bwoi do I know they are hard to get, since then, having tried it with pheasants, chickens, guinea fowl, swans, duck and more besides...and never got one....as good!


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 29, 2007)

boskysquelch said:
			
		

> ...*I lived with 50plus peacocks for 9 years and never took a single shot of them..for all sorts of reasons... I was thinking about this earlier...and by strange co-incidence this is the type of shot I would have looked to get... and bwoi do I know they are hard to get, since then, having tried it with pheasants, chickens, guinea fowl, swans, duck and more besides...and never got one....as good!



Thank you and I know exactly what you mean. It's nice to see that someone recognises how hard it is to get a decent shot of them, I had to lie still on the floor for nearly an hour to get this one. They really don't like you taking photos of them or being close to them, especially when they're protecting a chick. They never stop moving either and peacocks are a nightmare when they're in 'posing' mode, they always turn their arse to you and keep shaking their thang.

Thanks for the comment, it gives me the incentive to take more peacock pictures 

e2a: I should have messed with the colours a little, this is 'straight from the camera' and I didn't think it looked too bad so posted it 'as-is'.
I'll have a mess with it later before I put it in my 'Prints for sale' section


----------



## og ogilby (Jul 29, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> They really don't like you taking photos of them or being close to them, especially when they're protecting a chick.


Fuck em. 

Don't they understand, this is art.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 29, 2007)

og ogilby said:
			
		

> Fuck em.
> 
> Don't they understand, this is art.



Peacocks don't understand very much, in fact, they're about as thick as it gets... inconsiderate twats!


----------



## cesare (Jul 29, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Peacocks don't understand very much, in fact, they're about as thick as it gets... inconsiderate twats!



It's a lovely shot. You've no idea how much difficulty I had finding decent peacock pics to lolcats earlier


----------



## big eejit (Jul 29, 2007)

boskysquelch said:
			
		

> two of my favourite subjects in a row...children at play & birds!
> 
> personally I would knock the levels/saturation/contrast back a tad on the former(and prolly give the benches a clone out  ) and up'em on the latter...but only to My Own taste...and even that may be down to monitors...yooouz's end or mine.



Cheers bosky. The saturation/levels/contrast etc are all the result of a nifty lomo filter for PS. But it does keep the different layers that make up the filter so you can adjust each one to taste - I just left 'as is' in this case but it could probably stand a bit of toning down. I didn't really notice the benches but now you mention it... I can't be arsed taking them out tho!


----------



## Firky (Jul 29, 2007)




----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 29, 2007)




----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 29, 2007)




----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 29, 2007)




----------



## Firky (Jul 29, 2007)




----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 29, 2007)

Spot metered?

Nice anyhow.


----------



## Firky (Jul 29, 2007)

Yep


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 29, 2007)

Hmm, I'm thinking the white balance is screwed up on that second picture of mine above. Might fix it.

eta: done. Sun must have gone behind a cloud for a moment.


----------



## baffled (Jul 29, 2007)

Was stuck at work again today so I quickly grabbed a few shots in my break, will be using the flower shot for pad even though it is very similar to a shot I have already used and tbh there wasn't a whole lot to choose from.






and


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 29, 2007)

Not sure I don't like the colour one better firky.


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 29, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

> Yep


You'd better watch it, last time I tried taking photos at the station I got accused of being a terrorist by the police


----------



## Firky (Jul 29, 2007)

That has happened to me too, but in London. Also happened at Canary Wharf.

Yeah I think I like the colour one better.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 29, 2007)

Spot is very useful sometimes. I kept trying to take pictures of Crocosmia var "Lucifer" in front of some purple clematis and totally frying the red channel today, so in the end I started using spot metering, which helped quite a bit.


----------



## Firky (Jul 29, 2007)

I love spot metering, its usually what i am set on!


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 29, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

> I love spot metering, its usually what i am set on!
> 
> ...



How was spot metering any more useful than average centre weighted in this example


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 29, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

> That has happened to me too, but in London. Also happened at Canary Wharf.


It's never happened to me in London.  I knew I was asking for trouble taking photos of the new no smoking signs 

Had to dig out my anorak (and stand on a big pile of horse shit) for this one  





The field at the end of my street tonight.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 29, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> ...It's nice to see that someone recognises how hard it is to get a decent shot of them, I had to lie still on the floor for nearly an hour to get this one...



Fuck. That must have been hard. They're fucking domestic peacocks FFS. Boring as fuck and dead easy to snap.

It's a nice snap BTW.


----------



## og ogilby (Jul 29, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> They're fucking domestic peacocks FFS. Boring as fuck and dead easy to snap.


They might only be domestic peacocks and easy to snap to you, but the last one I snapped carried on running round for a few minutes after I'd snapped it, and no fucker could eat their christmas dinner.


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 29, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> Fuck. That must have been hard. They're fucking domestic peacocks FFS. Boring as fuck and dead easy to snap.
> 
> It's a nice snap BTW.



Yeah, they're much easier to shoot than landscapes that don't stop moving 

e2a: I gave up trying to shoot landscapes because the mountains kept moving... I didn't have a fast enough lens...


----------



## mauvais (Jul 29, 2007)

neonwilderness said:
			
		

> Had to dig out my anorak (and stand on a big pile of horse shit) for this one


That's ace. Where?


----------



## mauvais (Jul 29, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Yeah, they're much easier to shoot than landscapes that don't stop moving


They don't when you have enough Rioja!


----------



## og ogilby (Jul 29, 2007)

Dr_Herbz said:
			
		

> Yeah, they're much easier to shoot than landscapes that don't stop moving


And much more fun too.


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 29, 2007)

mauvais said:
			
		

> That's ace. Where?


Ta   It's Fourstones, near Hexham on the Tyne Valley.  Between the two crossings on this map.


----------



## mauvais (Jul 29, 2007)

Gah, all the good photos are Northumberland


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 29, 2007)

og ogilby said:
			
		

> And much more fun too.




You don't know how to appreciate being. It will come with time (if you're lucky).


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 29, 2007)

firky said:
			
		

>



That's pretty


----------



## baffled (Jul 30, 2007)

Went back to the macro for todays pad

*Nature's Creases*






Struggled the last few days if I am honest but the end is near


----------



## Skim (Jul 30, 2007)

Don't feel like photographing anything but small details. Just want to keep it clean and simple...


----------



## boskysquelch (Jul 30, 2007)

now that is a _vignette_... a larger story encapsulated into a single scene that every modern parent will recognise and identify with.


----------



## baffled (Jul 30, 2007)

Revisted the shot below as it was always meant to be b&w, I still can't quite get it right 






Think I'll need to go and read up on dodge and burning as I think thats whats missing.


----------



## Firky (Jul 30, 2007)

Stanley Edwards said:
			
		

> How was spot metering any more useful than average centre weighted in this example



Just made the difference between light and dark shadows more intense.


----------



## baffled (Jul 30, 2007)

considering using this for pad now, quicky grabbed on my way to get more beer.

Mmmmmmm Beer.

*Connected*






This will now be my pad and not the macro above, I should consider my options more carefully in future.


----------



## Firky (Jul 30, 2007)

mmm beer

quite

*goes to pub*


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Jul 31, 2007)

Mmmmmm


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> considering using this for pad now, quicky grabbed on my way to get more beer.
> 
> Mmmmmmm Beer.
> 
> ...



You really like that vignetting?


----------



## baffled (Jul 31, 2007)

yup, it's my attempt at creating a lomo-esque shot using digital.


----------



## baffled (Jul 31, 2007)

Got three to choose from today though they are all very similar so either of them will be ok.

*Lime Bubbly*






The next is the same as above but with a touch of vignette.

*Vignette and Lime*






And finally the one I am erring towards as I like the centre bubble trying to escape.

*Limes and a Lemon*


----------



## Gromit (Jul 31, 2007)

They'd look nice say on a kitchen wall with the right colour scheme.


----------



## Firky (Jul 31, 2007)

I have taken a picture of someone and I love it, but they'll kill me if I post it up on the internet


----------



## baffled (Jul 31, 2007)

Marius said:
			
		

> They'd look nice say on a kitchen wall with the right colour scheme.



Thanks, it was a very productive session and I had actually earmarked 2 or 3 for framing  






*Zesty Bubbles* PAD31


----------



## baffled (Jul 31, 2007)

Went with the second shot from above as the bubbles bottom right get me each time I look at them.

I would also like to say that this past month has been a real inspiration and while there were one or two days I struggled, for the most part I have really enjoyed it.

I'll keep shooting but will probably give it a rest for a week or two, thanks for putting up with me and thanks Stanley for the harsh but honest critique.


----------



## Firky (Jul 31, 2007)

I didn't take this one (crustychick did) but I quite like it:


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jul 31, 2007)

baffled said:
			
		

> ...thanks Stanley for the harsh but honest critique.



I was winding you up   I actually thought the cigarette shot was one of your stronger graphic style shots.

If you want a harsh but honest critique I'll willingly give one


----------



## baffled (Jul 31, 2007)

Water off a ducks back Stan  hence I never rose to it, I'll not ask to be rubbished/critiqued but if you ever feel a shot needs it then go ahead and be honest.

Thats not retrospective btw 

eta: added "critiqued" as it was unfair to suggest I'd be rubbished.


----------



## neonwilderness (Jul 31, 2007)




----------



## Tankus (Aug 23, 2007)

Marius said:
			
		

> Its all relative. A lot of cliche shit sells really well. Athena made a fortune out of it.



yep 

lurve the lime shots


----------



## Tankus (Aug 23, 2007)




----------



## Tankus (Aug 23, 2007)




----------

