Photo sins

One of the worst sin would be to believe that arbitrarily following technical rules precedes artistic purpose.

>>3037783
This

>>3037769
I can't stand that backwards looking room, but I find a lot of photographers don't really have something to 'say'. they'll take a photo of something that interests them, yet beyond being visually pleasing, it doesn't do much else.

I don't like the air-brushed to shit photos I see everywhere, where post-production has created this soulless, flat image.

I'm still new, but I was really disappointed to find a lot of photographers that inspired me basically whacked a VSCO filter over top, played with the hue/contrast a tiny bit and then called it a day. Professionals too. I can replicate the exact thing.

>>3037769
>HDR rape
>selective colour in black and white photos
>photos looking through the viewfinder of a vintage camera
>Any pictures of food in a restaurant.

having sonys marketing balls deep in your ass.

>>3037769
People using film as a crutch. Yeah it looks sweet, doesn't make your shitty ass photos look any better.

I mean I love film, but I'll readily admit how much of a rank amateur hobbyist I am.

People calling Instax Polaroids.
Absolutely death penalty

>>3037824
check out my fujifilm polaroid.

>Whats the worst sin in photography?

I'll take being new and everything ever for 500, Alex

Selective coloring.

Not even once.

Black people trying to use film cameras, its like the special Olympics in slow motion

Giving photos a title.

There's only so many titles you can use if you're shooting with consistency, and eventually it turns into people using some cringy "profound" bullshit on a picture of some flowers.

-Borders
-Mirror shots
-B&W for no reason
-Selective color
-any 15yo girl with the lastest iPhone creating their own "name_photography" page on facebook
-Watermarks

>>3037783
They aren't arbitrary. The rules serve a purpose. In the case of the OP, its a complete waste of space in the frame and an incredibly uninteresting photo because of it.

True, you don't have to follow all the rules, but IF you take a good photo that breaks a rule like balance, rule of thirds, etc. You are following another rule to make up for it, otherwise, you end up with snapshits like you see in the recent photo threads.

Pretending its an artform.

Photo sin? Being new and having questions.

They way most photographers hobnob you'd think they were born taking pictures of snow leopards for National Geographic. Most of you are mediocre at best.

File: selectivecolor_42.jpg (53KB, 700x467px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 700x467px

How many sins can you break with one picture?

not maxing out saturation

File: IY0P5559.jpg (2MB, 3522x2348px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3522x2348px

>>3037769
I would say leaning on fast lenses to create interesting photos that aren't really interesting beyond being pretty to look at.

Here is a photo of part of the hand rail at my grandmother's house. It has nice lighting and has that popular piss filter over it, but there's nothing there. It's just a dumb piece of wood.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS-1D Mark II
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2017:03:08 03:32:23
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	50
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3504
Image Height	2336
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: 10339262_10155736548780296_2183186585505653194_o.jpg (238KB, 2048x1357px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 2048x1357px

>>3038018

>>3038018

Did somebody pay for this?

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-12 at 5.50.27 PM.png (489KB, 1280x1066px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 1280x1066px

>>3038080
Are you implying this is not a good photo? Google would say otherwise

>>3038018
wow that's amazing

>>3037802
These are the absolute worst

>>3038018
This is silly and gimmicky but kinda cute desu

>>3037813
>reddit: the post

Just because you're salty about having a little white m4/3 doesn't mean you have to play sour grapes over my big black full frame.

>>3037769
Buying canikon when Sony exists.

>>3037938
What is wrong with black people using film cameras? I can use one properly,. Keep your racist shit on /pol/ or /r9k/ you fucking loser.

>>3039558
Keep your fucking race in Africa, the dump where it belongs, loser.

>>3038075
>put your legs under the armchairs
>"a-are you sure?"
>yeah yeah, and cross your arms on top
>"like this?"
> no, put them under your armpits
>"okay"
>now look at me like a bad boy
>"but im not bad boy"
>okay just look at me while I figure out how to make this tripod work... actually this is kinda cool

>snap

>>3039533
you're doing it again

>>3039561
Lol we got a mad white boy. Kill yourself you worthless shit, you have accomplished nothing in you life.

>>3037955
Exactly, the problem is that newfags are told to follow those rules without any consideration for their purpose. "Anon, if want to get good pics, follow the rule of thirds?". But why should I follow the rule of thirds? What does it happen to my pic if I do that? What is even a good pic?

>>3039561
t. Guido

File: 4177232342_713bfa2f05_o.jpg (475KB, 1024x1022px) Image search: [Google]

475KB, 1024x1022px

>>3037802
>photos looking through the viewfinder of a vintage camera
kek, I'm writing a movie that's a subversion of romance tropes and there's a scene where the male is taking a picture of the female with a TLR and I have a shot planned where the audience looks at her through the finder.

That's the portion of the film that is supposed to be absolutely ridiculously over the top sappy.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2009:12:11 10:26:17
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	160
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Flash
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1024
Image Height	1022
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	High
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3038018
I don't hate it, yeah this is on the same level as pretending to hold up the tower of Pisa but big deal

I focus a lot of my /p/ autism on framing/cropping, so one thing I hate is photographers who NEVER crop, even when they very clearly should. Photography is about making choices, you have to decide what you include or not, keeping everything everytime no matter what is the wrong decision.

What I hate most from /p/ posters is all the wall shit ("hurr I'm shooting a wall, so meaningful") and the street shit, seriously 99% of what streetfags post is utter shit, just random shots, and then they try to salvage it with some ridiculous post processing. Obviously HDR shit too but it seems like the popularity of horrendous "tone mapping" has faded.

>>3037952
>Borders
>B&W for no reason
>Watermarks
holy fuck this. What triggers me the most isn't what dumb normies do but what pretentious fucks with 10 grand of gear do. B&W for no reason is definitely the worst and most pretentious of all

>>3039631
>armchairs
armrests?

>>3039988
>б & ш for no raisin

What does that even mean? Where are the guidelines for shooting in b&w and who wrote them?

>>3039996
imo, converting to B&W should only be done if there's something interesting in the lighting and contrast of the picture that doesn't come through in a color shot because colors are distracting it or something.

File: IMG_2420.png (3MB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 750x1334px

It's not exactly the worst sin but why the fuck do people take these 'environmental portraits' or whatever when it's actually just a spoiled landscape shot

>>3039998
i feel like the choice between b&w and color should not favoring any of the two a priori at all. really just figure out what works best, avoiding b&w just to not appear pretentious is pretty weak desu.

>>3040012
This. Holy shit.
So many bad copies of "The Wanderer".
Also, photos of shooter's legs sitting in high places.

>>3039998
You're an idiot. B&W should be your default for "seeing" until the color itself is complimentary enough to add.

File: polaroid.jpg (243KB, 1000x834px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1000x834px

>>3037824

Uh oh........

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro1
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	27 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:12:05 20:52:58
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	0.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	834
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Off
Macro Mode	Off
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Manual Exposure
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

File: kenwouldbeproud.jpg (70KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 960x960px

I don't know if this is the worst sin, but it irritates me

>>3039988
yeah 99.9% of street photography is utter crap. Oh whoa! The back of someones head!! WOW!!!!

>>3040012

They'll be immensely useful as cultural signifiers in about 30 years.

>>3040194
Blue orange contrast?

>>3040398
Skulls on the pictures right edge.

I tried learning my dad Photoshop and Lightroom for relative simple photo editing. It was a mistake.

Anyone know a decent easy to use old people friendly photo editor / put shitty filters on program?

>>3040012
Don't you understand? It's not a good photo if it doesn't have a skinny white hipster chick in it.

>>3040447
but it has one skinny white hipster chick in it...

>>3040025
Oh man shoe shots trigger me something awful...

>>3040442
Just show them how to add contrast and work exposure settings on their phone's native editor

>>3039967
But I guess thats in the context of a movie or whatever, I sort of mean done unironically and at first it looks cool - but it's done to death.

>>3039988
What do you even mean by B&W for no reason? What reason do you fucking need beyond having a preference

>>3040644
he means he's 18 and desperately wants to be accepted as an authority figure online

File: IMG_5164.jpg (355KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 1000x667px

>>3040644
>>3040650
I dont know if this is the norm, but i rarely go B&W unless the colors are uninteresting or muddy.

I really like B&W, but i think it is gratuitous in certain situations. The problem is, if you only see the B&W then you cant know if the colors hidden away are just shit or the tog was just being a dip.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:12 08:54:08
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	47.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3040652
>you cant know if the colors hidden away are just shit or the tog was just being a dip.
you shouldn't care unless you're caught up in your own projections and insecurities, its a fucking photograph you spergy fag

File: jh3243jg3.jpg (16KB, 320x371px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 320x371px

>>3040668

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	paint.net 4.0.9
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	96 dpi
Vertical Resolution	96 dpi

>>3040644
B&W is all about having good and interesting contrast as there are no colors to work with, not just desaturating because muh art

>>3040746
not necessarily. Contrast gives a b&w images a bit more "pop" to them, but to believe that it is the only element to b&w photographs is pretty narrow minded.

>>3039903
Its always the poor people fucking shit up for everyone,

>>3040447
I like skinny white hipster chicks