Are my photos shit /P/?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS Rebel T6 Lens Size 75.00 - 300.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.1 Lens Name EF75-300mm f/4-5.6 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:10:29 07:41:52 Exposure Time 0.6 sec F-Number f/5.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/5.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 200.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 5184 Image Height 3456 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Evaluative Sharpness Unknown Saturation High Contrast Unknown Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Large Focus Mode Manual Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 2 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Tungsten Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 34
>>2961053
RESIZE YOU SHITURES THEY RESEMBLE SOMEONE POSTING IN CAPITIAL TEXT
Photography is a personality cult. As long as you have some reasonable level of skill, which you do, then don't worry about the technical prowess of your pics.
I've seen the shittest pictures circle jerked over because they were taken by a well known or famous photographer.
Force your shit pictures down people's throats like they're the best. Sooner or later some weak minded people will believe you. Then lemmings will join the weak minded. Before you know it you'll be receiving praise from everyone because, surely, if so many people like your stuff it must be good.
Right?
>>2961056
this is really good
>>2961053
It's a guys back with 90% negative space, nothing interesting in here whatsoever
>>2961054
Mist/smoke looks nice but with no context and literally nothing else of interest in the photo it's also pointless.
>>2961056
Fantastic lighting and subject but the focus is fairly dogshit, especially in the background. Great photo with a few minor issues.
I get the impression you're trying to be artistic and impactful and important instead of trying to take good photos, which is a shame because you have some skill
>>2961053
I like your style OP, keep shooting
>>2961078
>RESIZE YOU SHITURES THEY RESEMBLE SOMEONE POSTING IN CAPITIAL TEXT
I think you just defined this metaphor with extreme precision.
>0.6sec exposure
>100 iso
>f5
why?
I like your pictures OP if the first one was less blurry I would've used it as my background
Where the hell is the focus lad? Also where the hell are the subjects?
Your worst please /p/
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-3000 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.5 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 82 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:11:15 14:21:14 Exposure Time 1/8 sec F-Number f/5.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 400 Lens Aperture f/5.0 Brightness 1.7 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 55.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
Post in the r p t. You faggot
>>2965623
>5000px
>motion blur
>No subject/cliche
Scaned. Trix400. AE-1
>>2961053
YES