Just got back from a trip. Critique my stuff. no holds bared.

File: ladistrict 6.jpg (1002KB, 1500x1002px) Image search: [Google]

1002KB, 1500x1002px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7SM2
Camera Software	Capture One 9 Macintosh
Photographer	Ethan C Merbaum
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	16 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:06 02:22:47
Image Created	2017:01:06 02:22:47
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/18.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/18.0
Brightness	8.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory, Return Not Detected
Focal Length	16.00 mm
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1002
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: ladistrict 7.jpg (1MB, 1002x1500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1002x1500px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7SM2
Camera Software	Capture One 9 Macintosh
Photographer	Ethan C Merbaum
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	18 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:06 03:21:24
Image Created	2017:01:06 03:21:24
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	8.4 EV
Exposure Bias	2 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Image Width	1002
Image Height	1500
Exposure Mode	Auto Bracket
White Balance	Auto
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: ladistrict 8.jpg (2MB, 1500x1002px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x1002px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7SM2
Camera Software	Capture One 9 Macintosh
Photographer	Ethan C Merbaum
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	16 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:01 03:39:31
Image Created	2017:01:01 03:39:31
Exposure Time	1/4000 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Lens Aperture	f/10.0
Brightness	8.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	16.00 mm
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1002
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	High
Sharpness	Hard

File: ladistrict 9.jpg (2MB, 1500x1002px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x1002px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7SM2
Camera Software	Capture One 9 Macintosh
Photographer	Ethan C Merbaum
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	35 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:05 03:53:51
Image Created	2017:01:05 03:53:51
Exposure Time	1/800 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	2000
Lens Aperture	f/10.0
Brightness	6.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1002
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: ladistrict 10.jpg (888KB, 1500x668px) Image search: [Google]

888KB, 1500x668px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7SM2
Camera Software	Capture One 9 Macintosh
Photographer	Ethan C Merbaum
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	35 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:06 00:54:24
Image Created	2017:01:06 00:54:24
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/16.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Lens Aperture	f/16.0
Brightness	6.7 EV
Exposure Bias	2 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Image Width	1500
Image Height	668
Exposure Mode	Auto Bracket
White Balance	Auto
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3008665
does your friend have a giant arm or a tiny head?

>>3008665
Its me, 16mm on a selftimer.

>>3008690
see
>>3008701

>>3008665
The ultra-wide angle makes this look weird. Also, did you use a polarizing filter?

>>3008674
>>3008673
>ISO 2000, 1/800"
>ISO 1600, 1/4000"

What the hell, m8?
You can really see the high ISO in the sky, espacially in the picture overlooking the valley. Go down to ISO 200 and lower the shutter speed. I'm gonna assume you can hold your hand still for 1/500" or even 1/100".
That being said, I like the scenes you photographed; that's a beautiful waterfall.

>>3008665
lmao wtf is this hahahah

>>3008712
fisheye

lol at that f18

File: slampiggy.jpg (218KB, 1326x1005px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1326x1005px

>>3008664

>0 imagination
>letting nature do 100% of the work
>wrong settings
>BLANDSCAPES
>watermarks

These pictures are garbage. They are not engaging in any way, meaningful or aesthetic.

Have some respect for yourself and delete this thread.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	144 dpi
Vertical Resolution	144 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:24 12:02:45
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1326
Image Height	1005

What lens/es and filters did you use for these photos?

Your sensor/lens is really dirty - every single photo has spots all over it which you should remove in post at the very least. If you're gonna watermark then make its spacing consistent in all your photos and make the gap from the text to both edges the same.

>>3008664
>Solar eclipse
Foreground looks nice but the dark patch in the left half of the sky and blobs in the right half are really distracting. Also, is that a reflection on the very far left above the horizon?

>>3008665
Not sure what to look at desu. Also your body and the handrail is distracting the view from what is otherwise a nice looking landscape.

>>3008670
Need to crop out the random grass and rocks in the foreground. You also fucked up your watermark.

>>3008673
Blobs are distracting, photo is noisier than it should be for a day time photo. Horizon seems to be crooked. Trees in foreground are distracting - was it possible to reframe it in any way? Maybe crop to an interesting part of the landscape. Also, you have a bit too much sky in the frame.

>>3008674
Meh. Sky's a bit noisy again

>>3008677
It's crooked but looks pretty good otherwise.

Here's my tip:

Clean your lens/sensor
Learn about exposure and stop shooting in Manual mode if you have no idea what you are doing
Read a book or two about Composition
Look at other photographers' work (ideally not on /p/)
Learn 2 PP

>>3008729
>muh opinion
>muh butthurt
>says wrong settings when it's subjective not objective
>has issue with watermarks because won't watermark own work so no one knows who took the shitty pictures

These points are garbage. They are not engaging in any way, meaningful or insightful.

Have some respect for yourself and delete yourself.

>>3008763
well f16 was always going to be a recipe for disaster with all that gunk on the sensor, before we even get into diffraction and sharpness related optimum aperture settings for that lens.

Composition - the rules are the visual equivalent of grammar. Pretty hard to express yourself coherently without using a subject, verb and object.

>>3008763
>using ISO 1600 and a shutter speed of 1/4000" in broad daylight is a matter of personal preference

You can't be serious.

>>3008763

>Just got back from a trip.
>Critique my stuff.
>no holds bared.

>no holds bared

>bared

Baby's first rejection.

>>3008767
>>3008769
>>3008770
>Assuming I'm op

>>3008775
I didn't.

>>3008767
Not inaccurate.

clean your fucking sensor you disgusting pig

>>3008665
looking good, OP.

you are a fat faggot with no talent. and i say this not as a 4chan user, but as a photographer.

also your sensor is full of cheetos debris.

>>3008665
T H I C C

>>3008665
what did he mean by this?
all kidding aside OP, you should distort that watermark to match

hahahahaha

What bothers me is that the first photo is actually really good, so you create a certain standard that isn't yours. All the subsequent photos are just plain and boring, and the set itself is just disappointing.
2/10.

>>3008664
Better scrub that sensor, Ethan.

>>3008664
sony users kek
>nothing personal kid
>unsheathes new model

>>3008664
>>3008665
>>3008670
>>3008673
>>3008674
>>3008677
You have an A7S II and are using 1/4000 with ISO 1600.. 1/4000 at a 16mm focal length with 5 axis image stabilization, even 1/5 is enough to stabilize an image with such a wide focal length on that camera. You should be at no more than 100 ISO. I would tell you how bad everything else is but it would take multiple paragraphs there's that much. Sell your camera, buy a D3200 and a gym membership and start from the basics.

>>3008962
>the first photo is actually really good
lmao that made me laugh more than this >>3008665 abomination

File: thotpatrol.jpg (132KB, 1390x924px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1390x924px

did you fuck this spherical bacon outrage OP?

>sell your gear for other gear
>gear is the problem
>learn how to shoot on other gear

Gaymen Faglords being this basic, thinking gear makes a bit of difference in learning photography basics and practicing to become better.

>>3009430
he owns a $2700 camera and hasn't even learnt what you learn from a two minute google search and has the sensor covered in shit. it's dumb to walk around with a $2700 camera and not even know how to take a photo an iphone 4 would produce

>>3009438
>it's dumb to walk around with a $2700 camera and not even know how to take a photo
He's a Sony user what do you expect

File: image.jpg (28KB, 410x274px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 410x274px

>>3009403
Was this on purpose or what?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	410
Image Height	274
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3009403
>spherical bacon

ahahahahaha
never change, /p/. never change.

>>3009403
that poor woman
I only hope she didn't pay for the privilege

>>3009504
Yes

>>3008664
>No holds bared
>bared
Firstly, learn to spell, you dunce.
Your settings are dumb and your sensor is filthy.
What filter did you use to fuck up all your skies like that?
Are you new here?
Also if you're going to be a faggot and watermark, at least have a not shit one.

>>3009403
>>3009504
Costanza did it better

I don't know how long you've been doing this for 'nor do I care. The intent of this post isn't to detract you but just from my point of view.

I'll mainly talk about technical details because that's what I do.
The processing on a lot of these is kind of flat and uninteresting and so are some of the subjects.
The Wide angle shots with the polariser are really distracting, the lack of compensation really draws my eyes to the dark blob in the corner, if you're going to shoot digital and wide angle, you'll need to learn how to process to avoid that.
>>3008673
This one bugs my autism a little. As far as I can see there is no reason at all for a 1/4000 shutter speed. You were shooting wide angle again the subject isn't moving.
>>3008674
This is much the same, another high shutter speed/ISO for no real reason.
>>3008677
This is where I'm going to step in and be a total bully for a minute because my autism when it comes to panorama shots just can't contain itself. Compositionally, it just doesn't work. The horizon is tilted it makes me feel like I'm falling off the side of a cliff. There's so much orange negative space in the sky that I'm not really sure if it's needed, not when I look at the bottom and see people in the shot who have no feet.
Don't be scared to change your perspective to get a shot, It'll make a world of difference. Also the nuclear aftermath processing just isn't my cup of tea.


All that aside, the bully's a little bit strong in the thread and a little unjustified. Learn how to use the exposure triangle and in bright light avoid using high ISO. Look up the reciprocal shutter speed rule and you'll learn the acceptable limits for handholding your shot. If you're going to shoot stopped down stuff and digital, try paying attention to things like sensor dust and how you're changing your lenses.

These are fine for a casual photo trip, but I'd put in some effort to learn the exposure triangle before doing the same again.

File: 342344323434234.png (238KB, 472x298px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 472x298px

nice one ethan

>>3008664
>>3008665
>>3008670
>>3008673
>>3008674
>>3008677

And you fagtrons have the brass balls to say my work is atrocious.

Either this is a master troll thread or OP sucks 50 bleeding black dicks in an alleyway

>>3011384
fuck off isi

Sensor to dirty
Horizon line is crooked
learn about composition
practice practice practice

>>3011492
No, you still suck. Objectively.

>>3008664
>>3008665
>>3008673
I can tell you don't know what to do with that circular polarizer that Best Buy up sold you into.

>>3011492
>And you fagtrons have the brass balls to say my work is atrocious
Because it is. The only difference distinguishing you two is the fact that OP is clearly a beginner, where as you've been doing this for fucking years with zero improvement.

I'm alright with /p/haggots thrashing his photos, but the personal attacks were unnecessary and unlike /p/. No one gave a shit about doxxing back then.

Yeah, your photos are shit and you need to improve big time. Clean your sensor, or at least clone them out. Find a subject or a vibe before you shoot, you're lacking the two.

>>3016971
>but the personal attacks were unnecessary
i felt personally attacked by these photos. specially OP photo, which is one of the most disgusting images i have ever seen on this whole site.

File: 1454709837692.png (1MB, 1382x715px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1382x715px

>>3008664
All I can say is that they're really bad and bland. The technique, subject matter, and composition aren't at a level where they can even be critiqued, besides just "learn the basics."

Don't worry, it's not the end of the world. Everyone sucks when they start.

Look at good landscapes, and try to figure out what makes them good. Get your technique down too.

When you're sharing a picture, you have to clear your mind of the memory you might have behind the photo, the effort it might have took, and the context. You might be thinking "I hiked really hard and took this from the top of a mountain, it looked really cool when I took it" or something, but all the viewer sees is the picture itself, with none of your memories attached to it.

Go read the fucking sticky.

>>3008729
Did you vote for Trump? Just wondering. You look like you voted Trump.