foto u͢p͜ ̧

File: FOTO2560.jpg (691KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

691KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2556.jpg (306KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2576.jpg (757KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

757KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2577.jpg (712KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

712KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2578.jpg (488KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2574.jpg (634KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

634KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2579.jpg (595KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2586.jpg (599KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

599KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2588.jpg (361KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2149.jpg (359KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2175.jpg (354KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2178.jpg (579KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

579KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2229.jpg (1MB, 1050x1550px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1050x1550px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2309.jpg (285KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2310.jpg (307KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2311.jpg (487KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2345.jpg (529KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2347.jpg (272KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2348.jpg (332KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2349.jpg (273KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO1988.jpg (235KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3069262
>>3069264
>>3069266
>>3069267
>>3069268
>>3069269
>>3069271
>>3069272
>>3069275
>>3069276
>>3069279
>>3069281
>>3069288
>>3069289
>>3069291
>>3069292
>>3069294
mostly center composed snapshits, what makes you think this is ok?

File: FOTO1851.jpg (427KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

427KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO1523.jpg (392KB, 718x1050px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 718x1050px

>>3069295

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO1520.jpg (231KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO1521.jpg (386KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3069294
gelled flash?

this is p okay.

>>3069303
yeah, didn't mean to include this one in my list
>>3069295
I mean, effort counts

>>3069301
this is like ken rockwell level saturation, what are you doing?

>>3069305
it looks ok to me anon, well, at least not over saturated
>>3069300
adding this to
>>3069295
this list

File: FOTO1602.jpg (309KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO1611.jpg (520KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 717x1050px

>>3069307
all photos are technically centered, save for VR 360s.
ur move.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO1920.jpg (390KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2593.jpg (290KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2596.jpg (290KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2603.jpg (361KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2604.jpg (352KB, 1050x715px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1050x715px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2624.jpg (306KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3069310
I'm not sure you understood what I meant by center composed. Basically, to always put the subject of your photograph right in the middle even when it doesn't benefit the shot to do so shows a lack of thought in regard to planning the shot
>you found something interesting enough to photograph, but didn't take the time to consider how best to photograph it, instead opting for a simple snapshot

>>3069322
are you the one they call the Ruler of the Thirds?

>>3069323
no, arbitrarily using the rule of thirds is just as bad imo. basically, if you aren't making decisions with regard to composition for a reason, or just aren't making them period, then you aren't trying hard enough

File: FOTO2088.jpg (472KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 1050x717px

>>3069324
Lol, you still think composition in a 2D medium abstracted from a 3D perspective is contained within the 2D construct alone.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3069322
This,
all these photos are "ooo, neat, click"

>>3069325
It is, that's the whole point of photography.

>>3069325
once again I'm pretty sure you missed what I was trying to say, but whatever.
You definitely have some potential, and you live in an interesting place. I hope you keep trying to improve. Anyway, good night anon

File: ChristmasCake_1-1.jpg (118KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 600x600px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2014:11:06 20:17:41
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	600
Image Height	600

>>3069325
>don't judge my 2d art on what you can see

Kek fuck off you dickhead

>>3069283
cool hdr.

>>3069326
>It is, that's the whole point of photography.
No, see, you have a linguistic misunderstanding of what composition entails which extends throughout your own approach to photography.

The generalized nature of the critique reveals how little grounded it is on an individualistic approach to each subject, but rather evident of the adoption of an arbitrary ruleset not at all different to "thirds" or "centered compositions" either.

Composition is every bit as much where you place yourself relative to a subject, perspective, as it is the arrangement of "items" upon a 2D space.

Consistency here is largely in your mind, anyway. Only around half of these are actually centered in the strictest sense.

>>3069333
>photography is about the relationship between photographer and subject and the space in which they fall.

>ooh neat, a sign, I better focus, not recompose and click.

>ooh neat, a shed, I better focus, not recompose and click.

>>3069363
>>ooh neat, a sign, I better focus, not recompose and click.
And that's the root of the issue.
You're a DSLR-cuck that only has the center focus point truly functional, and all of your understandings of composition are abstracted from this physical limitation of your gear, owing to your being more interested than equipment and its use than photography itself.

As evidenced by the collective nature of your "critique" which, in truth, is nothing of the sort. It's mere irrelevant commentary, describing what you see and being happy with that description on face value.

>>3069372
Im a sony milc user actually.

Your gear is irrelevant though, your pictures lack thought or consideration in their composition and subject. No amount of fancy nothing sentences will change that.

>critique isn't a commentary at face value

That's exactly what it is, if you feel that your photos are being judged incorrectly, then it's your ability as a photographer to convey a message through the medium alone that is lacking.

>>3069373
Explain in detail why a centered composition is any less valid than whatever composition you would prefer.

Hardmode: do it on a shot by shot basis and finally ascend to true critique

I'm not sure you realize just how basic a hatred of centered compositions is. It's Unicorn Drink basic, baby.

>>3069373
>Im a sony milc user actually.

>That's exactly what it is, if you feel that your photos are being judged incorrectly, then it's your ability as a photographer to convey a message through the medium alone that is lacking.
>visual illiteracy confirmed

>>3069372
>>3069374
>>3069378

>when you have to samefag in your own thread so you can maintain your levels of delusion.

>>3069294
>>3069296
>>3069313
very good

>>3069379
I don't think she's pretending not to be herself there. You seem to be trapped in your own character assessment.

>>3069374
Central composition is fine, as long as it works with the shot. There needs to be an element of symmetry or at least incredibly well balanced and a lot of attention needs to be paid to the horizon. Putting it near the centre and with no sense of vertical symmetry/balance completely throws the image.
I would have thought basics of composition like this would be second nature to someone as visually literate as yourself.

>>3069382
Samefagging and talking in the 3rd person, jesus christ, you take longer to become self aware than skynet.

>>3069295
If you’ve ever taken a photography class in your life, you’ve likely heard the phrase “don’t center your subject”. If this is such an important rule of photography, why has there been a rise of deadpan photographs over the past decade?

First, let’s speak about what exactly a ‘deadpan’ photograph is. While there are a handful of different definitions, the most popular is that a deadpan photograph is devoid of emotion. It simply exists as a subject and photograph, yet it seems to be empty. There is no joy or sorrow, although some can argue that the deadpan itself is a mood of its own. Famous photographers who use this aesthetic seem to be completely detached from the subject that they are photographing, and the word ‘indifference’ seems to describe the photograph perfectly.

There are a handful of aesthetics that you should be aware of when determining whether or not a photograph is considered deadpan, or if you are planning on creating your own series of deadpan photographs. Most commonly, the subject is in the center of the image, and the photographer is looking at the subject straight-on. The photographer is not laying on the ground, or standing on a ladder to distort the subject any which way, it is simply pictured exactly as you’d see it if you walked right up to it in real life.

The deadpan photograph simply says “this is how things are”. Deadpan portraits show people in their natural state, typically not showing any sort of emotion. These subjects are not posed, are not dressed up for the occasion, and seem completely honest.

So what purpose does this type of photography have? Why would photographers want to show these people or landscapes in such a mundane light? Many famous deadpan photographers choose this aesthetic to capture changes in the world around them, to generate questions that the viewer keeps in mind, or to provide an image that allows a non-biased relationship between the viewer and the subject matter.

>>3069385
You failed to complete the challenge. You are incapable of addressing centered photos individually and explaining why they should not be centered.

Goodbye.

>>3069385
>There needs to be an element of symmetry
so...rectangular central objects aren't symmetrical?

>>3069389
Re-read my post.

>>3069388
It's not a case of just shouldn't be centred, but nothing about the image works at all. This Looks like a dpreview test shot >>3069269 defend this image.

>>3069392
>This Looks like a dpreview test shot >>3069269 (You) defend this image.
It appears to be one of a series of several images of the gravesites of infants, presented in a straight forward and unsettling manner, more about showing the condition of the burials and headstones in contrast to their saddening subject matter.

"creative" camera angles would be disrespectful to the subject matter.

re-read >>3069386

>>3069392
>This Looks like a dpreview test shot >>3069269 defend this image.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Agee
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_Us_Now_Praise_Famous_Men

isi just likes to make references to how literate she is, and you're taking the bait

File: FOTO1492.jpg (371KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 717x1050px

>>3069394
>>3069395
:thinking: :thinking: :thinking:

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO1503.jpg (330KB, 1050x715px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 1050x715px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO1493.jpg (422KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

422KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO1498.jpg (461KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3069394
>>3069395
Isi samefagging continues in the 3rd person.

>>3069403
>being this bad at finding the samefag
count the (you)s retard

>>3069404
It's only me and you in this thread, continuing to deny your self existence is bad for your mental health.

>>3069421
There are 7 posters in this thread.

>>3069424
Yup, there's me, my wifi and mcdonalds wifi, jamie, the other guy that thinks jamies shit and jamies phone and tablet.

>>3069426
So you're the samefag? Ok

>>3069429
No, mine are the continuing conversation posts that don't refer to myself in the third person.

>posts "so you're the samefag"
>poster count stays the same

Fucking kekko mate.

>>3069431
You haven't posted a thread in a long time. Why is that? Love your work, especially your skin tones.

>>3069262
>>3069264
>>3069274
>>3069283
>>3069294
>>3069296
>>3069400
>>3069402
eyyyy, these are decent. I hate OP's processing of blues and greens tho.

>>3069426
Where does Charlie fit in that? Are you lying or stealing trips?

>>3069434
>OP's processing of blues and greens tho.
Blame or thank Fujifilm for that. She's a jpeg shill.

on ya isisisisisisi
decent photos for the most part and less trolls,


good thread, bump

Am I the only one not seeing any context in these images?
This is really bothering me, it's like the images are mute, not telling anything, no sense of drama or any other feelings coming through.
If it isn't just me, maybe the photographer needs to take a break and focus on his daily life, family, friends, going to social gatherings to spark up his emotional side.

>>3069455
It's called deadpan. It's a style of documentary shooting.

When you've seen enough of her work there are obvious themes of rural depression. She's preoccupied in part with ominous religious iconography.

She shoots street and music photography too, so I don't think it's rooted in what you suspect but instead the traditions of photography she's inspired by.

This is a pretty common way of portraying the southeastern and southwestern US.

>>3069456
So it is the southeastern and southwestern US that is so dead and uninspiring. Still I can only see some dead or left behind objects and nothing else the photographer would be telling. Maybe I'm just used to better talented photographers.

>>3069298
Underrated btw. This will age well as a final portrait of long-haul trucking. Love the Hardee's ad, like an early dystopic advertising domination, seemingly an anachronism vs the old trucks and watertower.

Good shit op.

the majority of this is middling at best. it appears as if you eschew the accepted standards of photography to protect yourself from actual critique.

it is obvious that you're the sole audience of your work and that these photos are just an extension of your ego.

congrats, to a degree it works. but you once you've seen half of 'bale' they all begin to look the same, don't they? this will fool people that are first seeing your work. soon they'll realize you're a one trick pony that skirts convention because you cant compete on that level.

get over yourself, stop posting this shit. your style has never changed and you have never grown as an artist. you are just getting better at mental gymnastics.

do you have any studio work with controlled lighting?

>>3069475
>it is obvious that you're the sole audience of your work and that these photos are just an extension of your ego.
Projection

>they'll realize you're a one trick pony that skirts convention because you cant compete on that level.
One trick pony? jamiewilliams.22slides.com
No, I don't think so.

>do you have any studio work with controlled lighting?
Do you have any idea how incredibly easy and boring studio work is? Did you just find strobist for the first time?

>>3069486
i cited your work "bale" i am familiar with the work you share online and from what i've seen you wander around the countryside taking snaps of things that interest you. some of the items you photograph are interesting. but its all the same composition. you've seen it yourself , i suspect thats why you use your flash gimmick. a shallow attempt to differentiate your work from the rest of your work.

i ask about studio work because you have proved you're capable of taking snapshits but i want to see how varied your work can be.

>incredibly easy... studio work is
then show us some. i'd be far more impressed if you could conceive an original idea, create it, capture it and then communicate it. have you ever done that?

thanks for the time.

>>3069529
If all you see is centered subjects then you're not as good at reading photos as you think.

Studio is bland and boring. It's not difficult. Anyone can read strobist and ask for help on discord.

>>3069529
>portrait/studiofag doesn't understand the purpose or value of documentary work or constraints of reality
Every. SINGLE. Time.

>>3069536
What is being documented here? Genuinely asking, it is just mundane stuff without nay message. Hell not a single person is in the photos, it's like the photographer purposefully avoiding people like a sociopath. These photos only give me the creeps.

>>3069536
>i can make beans on toast really well, so therefore i'm a good cook, I don't need to know how to make anything else

>I can play chopsticks on the piano, therefore I can play piano well.

Your argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

>>3069538
>photographer purposefully avoiding people like a sociopath
Do you know what a sociopath is

>>3069538
>no photos of people walking in front of deserted rural buildings or instagram friends to stand in front of them
>photographer must be a sociopath because there have to be people in every photo

When will this meme die

>>3069544
Bruh they just trynna say the photos have no apparent intent beyond the photographer's style, which they say that in itself can be improved upon. it's no biggie and there's no need to prove yourself to anon, just take what anon gives you and assess yourself. if it isn't true, it isn't true, but no amount of defense is going to change a mind.

>>3069547
You're not talking to isi, retard

>>3069549
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ trivial point. you know well enough who it's intended for to have to write that out.

>>3069547
>no apparent intent
Yeah if you don't understand social commentary sure
Aren't you the guy that draws chalk squares?

>>3069551
yup, I enjoy what I do. you got a problem with people enjoying themselves?

>>3069554
Do you? I think this thread is more interesting than the box shape you drew in first grade. Higher concept, more composition involved.

>>3069555
Cool, man, we all have interest in different things. I hope you enjoy more travel shots in the future. Nothing wrong with various interests in the world.

>>3069557
Still not talking to op.

>>3069561
sorry about your reading comprehension m8.

>>3069563
You try too hard.

File: 10014234 2.jpg (46KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 500x500px

>>3069572
kek, go on..

>>3069573
>monofilament
get with the times nigga we using braid to ensure the catch

>>3069296
>>3069325
dint u already post this

bread's bad izzi

>>3069613
They're redos of othe snaps

>>3069646
why would someone redo something thats bad in a bad way?

all shit without exception.

File: 1475696506941.jpg (22KB, 500x447px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 500x447px

>>3069673

>>3069547
>you cant have intent without having people in the frame

no

>>3069710
Dont mind him. he's a basic art student that thinks studio snaps of chalk on walls is high intentions.
He's ultimately insecure that his painter and illustrator peers don't like his work.

>>3069710
plz don't tell me you rly think that's what i was implying? that's not at all what I was implying.

>>3069720
>petty a.f. anon

>>3069721
>it's another newfag trip tries to gain notoriety vs isi episode
I hate reruns

>>3069386
It's either this or the photographer just sucks. :thinking:

>>3069728
The hatred for center focus is literally rooted in the insecurity many photographers have over the ease and fluidity if their technology.

There's a reason it only became a common rule of thumb after 35mm film democratize photography and gave it to average joes.

If you approach critique as a set of never-do rules, it's likely you're not as visually literate as you think.

On even the op photo there is clearly intentional framing going on at the diagonal.

>>3069727

>Michigan
>newfag

kys my man

>>3069794
You first, literally. Please. Its the only thing that will save this board. Uniting around your grave with mouths full of spit.

File: 1491629527038.jpg (154KB, 707x536px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 707x536px

>>3069820
Imagine the great photo opportunity that he will have lying in the open casket with people standing around him getting their spit ready. If he would be buried with his camera in his hands, someone could activate the shutter with an ir remote and later get the shots through wifi sd card.

Reminds me of True Detective. Spooky feels.

>>3069820
>Its the only thing that will save this board.
You're mistaking sugar with moopco

>>3069917
hello moopco!

Flash stuff is interesting, the southern gothic deadpan is a nice expression of your own life slipping through your fingers. You're gonna be thirty soon, James.

>>3069949
Thirty inches deep in your boipussy.

>>3069954

gay

needs more carcosa.

>>3069955
dubble dubs confirms 30 inch feminine penis

>>3069462

>like an early dystopic advertising domination, seemingly an anachronism vs the old trucks and watertower.

>pretending not to be isi and commenting on your own photo with your regular brand of tryhard thesaurus speak.

>>3069738
>central doesn't work only became a thing after 35mm film

That's right, composition guidelines didn't exist before photography, and definitely isn't evident in art and paintings.

Fucking hell James.

>>3069921
Moopco probably isn't awake at 5am

Oh, and all of these photos are bad.

>>3069985
>being this mad isi is a better photographer than you
>being so mad about it that you dont take any photos

>>3069989
Go to bed james

>>3069990
>tranny james is a better photographer than you
>and you're mad about it

>>3069262
Serious question, are you actually proud of this set of images? I feel like this is easily your weakest thread, everything apart from >>3069274, >>3069296, >>3069298 is snapshit tier. I usually enjoy your shit but this thread a not so good

>42 pictures
>130+ replies
>21 posters

Classic isi thread

>>3069992
>reeee stop posting photos on a photography forum
>argue with me about gear instead
>reeeeeeee

>>3069995
what kind of autism is this?

>>3069995
>receives crit on the photos
>hurrrr anon, why do you only talk gear

Daily reminder, this is the level of self delusion op battles with.

Am I missing something or are all these photos just shit?

>>3070091
>Am I missing something
Yes

>>3070097
what is it?

>>3070142
Taste.

>>3070091
you clearly arent. OP has entered that point where output quality doesnt matter anymore, its just a way of delaying suicide. OP has nothing of worth to communicate, he just does the same bad photo over and over again, hoping they will magically become better. but they wont. he will kys eventually. lonely artists can stay around a lot, but talentless lonely artists just gruel in pain until the inevitable.

>>3070189
Mighty bad feels you're projecting

>>3070189
>he

So fucking new it's not even funny.

>>3070213
>anon doesn't know about isi's peen yet

>>3070217
>anon believes the rumor isi started about herself

>24 posters
jesus christ

>>3070218
>james believes other people think his 6'2 frame and giant hands are that of a female.

>>3070345
if isi is a tranny why hasnt a nigger killed him/her yet?

>>3070217

I'd suck it.

>>3070373
I'd even let her stick it in my butt as long as its shorter than my thumb.

File: 1481174838342.jpg (759KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

759KB, 720x960px

>>3070536
how big are your hands?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016-12-08T15:43:56+10:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	720
Image Height	960
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3070536
isi's dick is bigger than moopco's

>>3070573
so you're saying she actually has a vagina? Damn. I was kind of looking forward to being pegged.

>>3070576
are you suggesting that poopco has a vagina or that he is one?

>>3070600
Is there a practical difference?

>>3070601
I rather like vaginas usually but in Turdcos case I'd have to make an exception

>>3069436
>implying charlie isn't isi.

When was the last time you saw charlie make a post that wasn't just trying to stick up for isi?

>>3070636
isn't charlie the gay brit that outed her as a transistor radio

this is absolutely horrible, don't even write this off because you're some attentionseeking tripwhore, seriously this is "people that go out to take pictures the first time"-tier

>>3070654
>gay brit
but he has a hot wife.

>>3070806
post wife

>>3070816
>>3070806
he's bisexual but only pursues relationships with women because of his middle class british upbringing

He and Lain, as I understand it, have played hide-the-penis quite a bit.

>>3070972
this is plausible. these guys are such faggots. also catsby, the cocksucker sissy. eww. /p/ is full of euro homos.

>>3070983
Remember when Catsby used to like isi?
You know what changed?

He messaged her asking to suck that feminine penis, and she told him he was a gross faggot.

He's been angry ever since!

>>3070986
i want to cum all over isis big jew nose, if you catch my drift.

>>3071002
I don't know what you're talking about, as I'm pretty sure she's not Jewish.
She's white and indian, I think.

bump for my waifu

fuck off isi your work is trash

good stuff 123456

>>3069289
wihtout mirroring, its gay

>>3069397
kewl

>>3069400
good

>>3072036
>>3071632
>>3071711
>>3072039
samefag

lmao get married already you christmas cake. what are you doing taking photos of rusting machines, dont you have a boyfriend or son, or family to take care of?

File: FOTO2703.jpg (178KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1050x717px

u guys fight a lot
I hope u didnt learn that from ur parents

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2822.jpg (470KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

470KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2872.jpg (413KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

413KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2888.jpg (544KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

544KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO2889.jpg (477KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

477KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3072463
Nope, they learned it from their governments

>>3072360
not even close baby

i usually like your photos but these are pretty lazy.

Bump for actual photography

bump for being a photo thread, keep posting these are a decent set

>>3073674
>>3073792
t. totally not isi.

># of positive crit posts
0
># of (self) bumps implying the photos are good
Jamiellion

This thread cringe af

p is such a good board

My first post. I've been lurking p for about a month now. These pictures are boring. What I have noticed though as an outsider is there is constant bickering about someone named isi and someone named mooci and it all just seems so trivial. You too should just meet up and kill each other... or fuck... its hard to tell which would make you happier.

>>3074132
>b-boring
>don't you know I wish to be entertained

>>3074132
nice try poopco

File: FOTO3160.jpg (370KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO3169.jpg (393KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO3198.jpg (311KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO3252.jpg (475KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

475KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO3270.jpg (482KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

482KB, 1050x717px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: FOTO3271.jpg (511KB, 717x1050px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 717x1050px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3075177
>>3075170

The fuck is going on with your colors, looks like clown vomit. Are you shooting on a cell phone?

>>3075218
your monitor is trash and you've never realized it with near-the-edge saturation levels before

it looks beautiful on a good screen or a print, awful on a badly calibrated monitor.

>>3075243
I'm viewing them on a google pixel with calibrated screen, they also look awful on my calibrated acer xb270hu.

Op uses a laptop so old & shit it has a silvery plastic casing that's faded on the edges and has no calibration.

>>3075260
And once again you were goaded into revealing that you're moopco.
never change, welfare warrior.

>>3075262
Lol, I'm not moopco and I also think the colors are disgusting.

File: Haha+i+was+merely+pretending+to+be+retarded+_53b804479b14d7da7cca490d97cfd4ba.jpg (56KB, 1000x932px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1000x932px

>>3075262
So you admit you have a pos screen and your colors are whack?

Great job, you sure showed him.

>>3075269
how are they "whack?"
Qualify the critique

>>3075269
wew, you sure are a braindead cunt

>>3069262
Hey isi, your insta bio says Fuji X100F. Did you sell your XPro2?

Nice pics btw. You're getting way better.

>>3075270
>>3075275
lol, nice samefagging.

The colors are way over saturated, just look where the tree and sky meet, it's a crunchy bowl of clown vom.

>>3075284
Not oversaturated, just saturated.
If your monitor doesn't have a full color gamut, it looks like clown vom.
Your monitor is shit.

>>3075288
I'm on 100% srgb, 78% argb,
what are you on?

>>3075284
>all these people that think I'm a stupid cunt must be samefags!
thanks for proving my point, now kill yourself please

>>3075308
Are you implying someone else doesn't know how to use a full stop?

Stop being so angry you got called out on it bud, it will happen around here if you're as dumb as (you).

File: 1482965631624.gif (68KB, 500x293px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 500x293px

>>3075309

they all look like literal shit. hope OP gets new eyes or new monitor or whatever, this is not good.

Where do you live op?

>>3076113
Alabama

>>3075322
>t. Triggered snowflake cuck

File: 14786898174526.png (10KB, 280x336px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 280x336px

>>3076411

>>3076414
>projection; the interactive slideshow

>>3076418
>reaching peak autism and still aiming for higher

>>3076437
>being this angry because you know autistic people are usually technically correct

File: 1456373752676.png (6KB, 390x470px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 390x470px

>>3076439
>autismos genuinely believe this

>>3076446
>>3076439
>>3076437
>>3076418
>>3076414
>>3076411
>>3075322
This is a new low for samefagging, even for you james.

>>3076451
sure thing, isi

File: _98A1114.jpg (57KB, 800x540px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 800x540px

idk what this thread is about sry

File: _98A1112.jpg (67KB, 800x540px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 800x540px

>>3076962

File: no. 4 & 5.jpg (791KB, 1600x1186px) Image search: [Google]

791KB, 1600x1186px

>>3076964
im just going to spam random shit

>>3076962
>>3076964
>>3076966
>Its a butthurt anon cant do anything aside from spam random photos to hit bump/image limit to end the thread sooner so he can stop being triggered by seeing isi post on /p/ episode

File: porta075.jpg (325KB, 800x497px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 800x497px

>>3076966

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:10 23:11:12
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	497

>>3076962
>>3076964
>>3076966
better than anything posted in this thread.
>>3076967
t. cucked.

File: 18342730_1135211959917136_4617905226834712515_n2.jpg (88KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 800x600px

>>3076968

File: _98A0735.jpg (186KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 800x533px

>>3076970

File: 14859770_971012766337057_7093917997205432564_o.jpg (88KB, 543x800px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 543x800px

>>3076972

File: Untitled_124.jpg (302KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 800x533px

>>3076973

File: Untitled_105.jpg (109KB, 540x800px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 540x800px

>>3076975

File: Untitled_111.jpg (104KB, 800x538px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 800x538px

>>3076978

File: China Dancers (5 of 11).jpg (327KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 800x533px

>>3076979

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5DS
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.8 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:30 19:08:24
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: _98A9906.jpg (34KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 800x533px

>>3076981
back, had to grab water. spamming more shit

File: Untitled_109.jpg (51KB, 534x800px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 534x800px

>>3076982
cross-screen filter for those who r curious

File: _MG_8601.jpg (31KB, 800x682px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 800x682px

>>3076983

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

File: _MG_7130-Recovered.jpg (42KB, 545x800px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 545x800px

>>3076984

File: Vanessa (6 of 10).jpg (85KB, 540x800px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 540x800px

>>3076986

File: 1422358685690.png (971KB, 1308x1187px) Image search: [Google]

971KB, 1308x1187px

>>3076993

okay shit, i totally feel bad for spamming now. i was high earlier and saw OPs picture and thought this was some submission thread for a /p/ made book. i'm sorry op

>>3077040
Don't be sorry, it's nice to have some half decent shots in this thread.

>>3077051
>convoluted and purposeful samefagging to create a mask narrative to hide your true aims of spamming
Isi really got inside your head to cause this.

File: DSC00193~01.jpg (355KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 1920x1200px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	ILCE-6000 v2.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:11 18:29:33
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	1.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3077341
I will never yield to the pedophile menace that is moopco.