Catsby's February/March thread: Not Quite Wintery edition

File: not_quite-2.jpg (471KB, 689x1000px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 689x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-3.jpg (597KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

597KB, 1000x800px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-4.jpg (649KB, 1000x792px) Image search: [Google]

649KB, 1000x792px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-5.jpg (657KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

657KB, 996x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-6.jpg (647KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

647KB, 996x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-7.jpg (643KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

643KB, 996x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-8.jpg (625KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

625KB, 996x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-9.jpg (537KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

537KB, 996x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-10.jpg (412KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

412KB, 996x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>all dem wasted opportunities
>all that zero composition skills
>all dem garbage colors and pp

Worse than Sugar confirmed.

There was a reason you were at the top of the photography iceberg meme.

File: not_quite-11.jpg (432KB, 1000x790px) Image search: [Google]

432KB, 1000x790px

>>3037430
Thanks

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: schizo.jpg (189KB, 727x351px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 727x351px

sage for samefags

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand

File: not_quite-12.jpg (375KB, 1000x789px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 1000x789px

>>3037459
Fuck off Mirari.
I used to think you were a massive retard, it seems I overestimated you.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3037587
For how long have you been looking for an excuse to use that one after reading it on reddit?

The pics are shit and don't belong on a photography board, but you knew that already. You take pride in being shit I guess. Maybe you think it's "provocative" and "controversial" which are words you have heard other hipster fags use about art they like.
It's just shit, though. A lot of the pics you post look like the camera just went off by accident. It's pathetic that someone would have such low standards for himself.

>>3037587
So you basically started posting regular threads because isi posted regular threads, and now you've started samefagging because your argument was always that everyone is isi

Are you isi now, catsby?

>>3037587

it isn't even me who posted this screencap, m8

but ok, the voices inside your head are telling you what to do, like, start new threads.

>>3037411
boring
>>3037412
decent
>>3037414
town on the left ruins this
>>3037415
town on the left ruins this, colours are nice
>>3037416
eh
>>3037417
shit
>>3037418
crop the shit on the right and its decent
>>3037419
boring
>>3037420
boring
>>3037421
meh
>>3037436
first photo but """B&w"""
>>3037587
dumb black and white conversion again

You are good at taking boring pictures.
Instead of snapshitting the first pretty looking field or tree, why not stew on it a while. Take in the atmosphere, and find the best subject to photograph inside the place.

File: irony,-the-post.jpg (5KB, 204x98px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 204x98px

>>3037594
I guess he grew tired of assuming every post he doesn't like is mine then?
Maybe we should start a club for people wrongly accused, by name, of shitposting by catsby.

>>3037646
Fuck off isi
Catsby is 3 times the photographer you are

File: DSC_6836.jpg (297KB, 1546x1024px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1546x1024px

>>3037648
I'm not isi.
I guess you didn't learn the lesson just now about not assuming you can guess the name of every anon you don't like. Idiot.

File: not_quite-13.jpg (588KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

588KB, 1000x667px

>>3037590
It's a Mel Brooks joke

>>3037592
sure

>>3037594
ok

>>3037623
Thanks, it's not conversion, it was shot on RPX 400

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-14.jpg (500KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 1000x667px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-15.jpg (540KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

540KB, 1000x667px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

You don't need two fucking threads up at once you self entitled cunt, keep your trash in one containment thread

File: not_quite-16.jpg (507KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 1000x667px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-17.jpg (349KB, 1000x628px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 1000x628px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-18.jpg (614KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

614KB, 996x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-19.jpg (813KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

813KB, 996x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

how can you render a beautiful place so boring?
do you suffer from depression?

>>3037459
lolll sad sad sad

File: not_quite-20.jpg (531KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 996x1000px

>>3037790
I don't think so, I'm a pretty happy guy.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-21.jpg (470KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

470KB, 996x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: 1446087087495.png (82KB, 217x250px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 217x250px

>>3037793
Do happy people have to attempt a trip drop to bump their own thread?

how do you manage to kill the tonality on every photo you upload?

is it because of this "dehaze" thing youre using?

they all look like digital crap, and bad digital, like 2005 cellphone digital.

>>3037416
god, if youd had a longer lens, and cut out that sky, with just fog, pole, trees and grass, it wouldve been great, or just less sky and more ground.

>>3037841
I like this one. Seems like a cool place.

File: not_quite-22.jpg (508KB, 996x1000px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 996x1000px

>>3037862
seems so

>>3037928
probably

>>3038010
I thought the same thing yesterday when I exported this one.
Admittedly I rushed it because the fog was disappearing fast, so it ended up way more shit than it could have been.

>>3038012
Thanks

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3038028
>staggering your shit photos to keep your thread bumped

File: not_quite-23.jpg (527KB, 706x1000px) Image search: [Google]

527KB, 706x1000px

>>3038035
I like to get my money's worth of shitposting

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3038039
all that money wasted on you...

>>3038010
Don't forget talent. He'd need some of that as well.
Or at least enough of an interest in photography to put in some real effort instead of just snapping away like a teen girl on IG.

these are all shit

Meh comfy photo bred, you still suck but bump for individual photo bred. 7/10 for trolling tho, anon will lose their shit over these if you make them a monthly thing.

still beats a fucking gear thread and most of the RPToilet

>>3038065
>Sugar wants to hang out with the cool kids but they all know he's retarded and reject him
Sad!

film has never looked this bad.

>>3038081

>Implying I need validation from a bunch of fucking aspies on a Portugese post card exchange forum

>>3038065
kys my famalam

>>3038102
>implying you don't fucking crave it, which is why you post with a trip

Jesus Christ, Sugar, can you be any more transparent?

File: not_quite-24.jpg (497KB, 1000x705px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 1000x705px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-25.jpg (528KB, 1000x681px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 1000x681px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>by popular demand
I fucking doubt it. Your shitty threads are worse than gear threads. You clearly put zero thought and effort into these snapshits and they don't belong on a photography board.

You have no standards

>>3037411
>By popular demand
your suicide has been requested by popular demand, we're looking forward to you following through with it

File: not_quite-26.jpg (560KB, 1000x709px) Image search: [Google]

560KB, 1000x709px

>>3038280
autists in charge of getting jokes

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-27.jpg (463KB, 1000x726px) Image search: [Google]

463KB, 1000x726px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-28.jpg (449KB, 1000x754px) Image search: [Google]

449KB, 1000x754px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-29.jpg (624KB, 1000x710px) Image search: [Google]

624KB, 1000x710px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

Social suicide

the thread.

File: not_quite-30.jpg (413KB, 1000x657px) Image search: [Google]

413KB, 1000x657px

>>3038346
Anonymous is not a very nice guy, I think I can live without his love

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-31.jpg (519KB, 758x1000px) Image search: [Google]

519KB, 758x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3038354
And that really is what you're here for, isn't it? Nice guys.
You don't want critique and honesty, you just want your dick sucked. You should have stayed on facebook.

File: not_quite-32.jpg (492KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 1000x750px

>>3038362
Somehow I doubt you have ever given anyone an ounce of useful critique

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

What are you scanning these with?

File: not_quite-33.jpg (462KB, 1000x734px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 1000x734px

>>3038369
All of these are scanned on a DKS 1770 minilab. Any photos I want to have proper scans of I rescan on a Nikon 9000

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

Thanks for posting m8. This thread is full of retards somehow.

Anyway most your landscape shots have a nasty colour pallette this time.
They don't peak any special interest, not even the usual single factor of film colours.

I think you're much better when shooting people but I see what you're trying to pull and there are a few that are nice.

File: not_quite-34.jpg (492KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 1000x667px

Thanks for the feedback.

I think part of it is down to shitty winter light, but mostly it's me trying to see how poor I can get it without it getting too poor. I have an exhibition I'm trying to put together a decent set of half frame landscapes for, but I don't think many or any of these will make the cut.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-35.jpg (491KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 1000x667px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3038376
>dude your colors look like shit and every photo is terrible
>i-its the shitty winter light ok?

lol

>>3038436
whats the point of photographing that 3/10 so much?

>>3037412
This is good desu

>>3038376
>mostly it's me trying to see how poor I can get it without it getting too poor.
what does this mean?

>>3038447
t. a 1/10

>>3038482
t. a -2/10 whiteknight

>>3038495
t. Catsby or another filmfag with tragically bad photos

>>3037459
Nice shoop

itt: isi and kurwa learn to use vpn to boost pic counter while shitposting

File: not_quite-36.jpg (378KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 1000x667px

>>3038527
It's not a shop, it's someone on the spectrum who doesn't recognize a poor joke.

If you look at the timestamps, you'll see they were posted as close together as the cooldown period would allow.

>>3038481
It means I'm trying to make landscape photos which still look pleasing with shit IQ, kind of neo-impressionism in a way.
Just getting the color and shapes to inform the view, not pixel peeping madness.

Thats why I use a fixed focus half frame and fuck with the dehaze slider.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-37.jpg (424KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 1000x667px

>>3038459
Thanks. It's a nice scene, but I don't think that exposure is very good. I made a B/W of it that I posted in my last thread that I think is better.

I've tried to go back to make the same shot, only better, but I've never had the proper foggy conditions, it looks absolute shit there without it.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

wow, not a single good photo. kys faggot.

File: not_quite-38.jpg (442KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 1000x667px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3038585
>neo-impressionism
no you just suck
you cant do better so you try to drag the definition of quality down

>>3038585
>It means I'm trying to make landscape photos which still look pleasing with shit IQ, kind of neo-impressionism in a way.
>Just getting the color and shapes to inform the view, not pixel peeping madness.
You should study isi's threads then. she actually achieves this shooting small basic jpegs. you create nothing but wasted space.

File: not_quite-39.jpg (374KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 1000x667px

>>3038610
ok
>>3038611
I'm not keen to study her threads, I glance at them sometimes.
I thought she was still trying to squeeze out as much IQ as possible from her tiny sensor.
I'll give her newest thread a closer look.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3038612
>I thought she was still trying to squeeze out as much IQ
http://jamiewilliams.22slides.com/half-light
is she?

>tiny sensor
an APS-C camera has a half-frame sensor with the performance of 35mm film.

File: not_quite-40.jpg (378KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 667x1000px

>>3038622
Maybe she got bored of it
I never disputed that it rivals most 35mm film, not many shoot it for its superior IQ I think.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3038625
>Maybe she got bored of it
I think it's probable that she just knows how to do more than one thing, Horseface.

>>3038622
only isi links to isi threads

>>3038585
>It's not a shop, it's someone on the spectrum who doesn't recognize a poor joke.
>ha ha guys I was only pretending to be a cancerous cunt
No, you fucked up and got caught samefagging your abysmal trash, then tried to pass it off as intentional.

>>3038373
of course it's full of retards. Catsby just made his own popular demand and created another thread because the voices inside his head told him to do so.

you both are terrible photographers. I don't know how you both manage to get the worst photos on /p/, but your circle jerk is so strong that both of you think you own this place.

You cancer should be removed.

File: not_quite-41.jpg (323KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 1000x667px

>>3038803
I'm sure you possibly believe that

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-42.jpg (471KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 667x1000px

Another one of this on a different camera and film.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-43.jpg (512KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

512KB, 1000x667px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

File: not_quite-44.jpg (471KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1000x667px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3039268
why do you stagger your posts instead of just posting your dump
do you stagger your shit literally too?

File: not_quite-46.jpg (541KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

541KB, 1000x667px

>>3039308
I like to bump the threads intermittently, and I don't like doing too many captchas in a row.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

I really enjoy your threads m8, can you make another one?
I can't get enough.

>>3039319
Thanks, sure

This excellent thread deserves a bump.

>>3041043
You saying you like them is probably the harshest diss these snapshits have received so far.

>>3041490
(you)

saged

I genuinely enjoy most of these. /p/ gets off on being mean. Where are they taken? Reminds me of Scotland

>>3042721
Thanks.
They're all taken on the west coast of Norway.

>>3042721
>/p/ gets off on being mean.
We also get off on being right