Recent photo thread.

>>2756695
-88/10

also PS3 sucks

kill yourself

>>2756695
Fuck me that's bad

I guess this is bait though

>>2756695
great games

terrrible photo

>>2756695
>Can I get some legitimate critique?
Most importantly, your subject is a terrible decision. It's not something that your viewer will care about. Second, your approach to it is supremely lazy. A stack of games on a shelf with a controller in front suggests that you set the controller there when you're not playing, and you took the photo because you were sitting on the end of your bed holding a camera and wanted to take a photo.

The image is blurry and the focus is missed, which are pretty basic and important aspects of a successful still life, and if you're going to eschew that for artistic reasons, it has to be for GOOD reasons, rather than just "everyone has photos in focus, so I'm not going to"

Your composition is right-shifted for some reason, which leaves the image off balance, and adds to the overall sloppy feeling of the image. Add this to the bland color, the magnet from the cabinet, and all the cables in the background, and it really continues to come across

Next time, approach the photo with thought of your viewer in mind before taking the photo.

I think I know what you were going for, a symmetrical shot of the controller in front of the videogames, but you included all sorts of other things.

If you were to retake it you'll have to clean up your scene. Remove the cables in the background, move the subjects to the left to move the metal doohicky out of the frame, straighten everything up or get a mojo going with the boxes offset a little from each other, maybe even rotate the controller 180 degrees and pull the cord down under itself.

Another thing to consider is the lighting. If you don't have a flash, pick up a lamp. It's a perfectly fine impromptu source of light. Maybe even use both for a more enhanced look.

Perhaps the strongest light in the middle, raised a bit to get the top lit, and then another light off-axis and lowered to remove or soften shadows cast by the other light.

Then, of course, get it in focus. After it's lit up it ought to be fairly bright, so stopping the aperture down will get more things in focus as well as lower the exposure of your photograph.

It's still life, take your time. It's not going anywhere.

>>2756936
are you shiting me

you typed all that for that image?

>>2756936
the flashlight function on an iPhone is super nice for lighting. It's a bit harsh but you can bounce it off of a white wall or something to get a softer effect.

File: killyourself.png (63KB, 625x623px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 625x623px

>>2756695

File: 1427405899158.jpg (182KB, 1280x982px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1280x982px

>>2756695
>I focus on still life
You don't seem to focus at all

>>2756695
Don't listen to all the above negativity.

If you take one of a potatoe, I'll pay you a million dollars.

>>2756931
>>2756936
>taking the b8 this easily

if you were fish, you'd be dead within 5 minutes desu

File: bb-8.jpg (93KB, 500x324px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 500x324px

>>2756695
I'm in a positive mood, so I'll keep it positive. You have good taste in games... that is all.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	500
Image Height	324
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2015:12:27 12:43:02
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	500
Image Height	324

>>2756695
boring subject

terrible colors

nothing is in focus

blurry photo due to slow shutter speed

literally no redeeming qualities -10/10


still life isn't interesting if you don't have a fucking life to photograph

>>2757073
Photo isn't blurry because of a slow shutter speed if he sped it up he'd loose the remaining light. Maybe if he went up a stop it would darken the back of the image enough to not notice the cords, but (s)he'd run into more problems before it. likely it was a handheld shot.

Just wasn't steady enough.

I personally like it. If the games were better in focus it would come out better.

>>2757410
Why did you decide to put "(s)he" after saying he three times

>>2757438
Because im half asleep.

>>2757441
Go to sleep, anon.

lol at the people trying to give genuine critique on the OP pic.

super protip:

if there isnt a single redeeming quality to the shot you don't have to pretend there is. youre literally spending more time on the critique than he did producing the entire photo.

>>2757851
only one of us mad tho

>>2757983
Is it you