>>3120829
lol shitty photos
I find that some of the photos on r/analog are amazing. But often I find that bad photos get 100s of upvotes rising to the top. Then when I constructively criticise these bad photos everyone gets butthurt.
more people over there means a lot more shitty photos at the top but there's also some that are fucking amazing or have some novelty. pic related
>>3120838
I agree with this too
There are also lots of posts with the most cringeworthily titles
Still better than /r/photography tho
>>3120851
Neat, too bad the frame fucked up
>>3120829
Better than here if you do end up asking for crit. A " good pic keep it up" goes a much longer way than "shit pic kys."
>>3120851
LOL
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 50 dpi Vertical Resolution 50 dpi Image Created 2017:07:26 02:45:46
>>3120897
Na I'd prefer honesty, that's why people post here.
It's pretty shit but there's occasionally a good photo here and there. I hate how pretentious it is.
/fgt/ is a way better film community.
>>3120868
>cringeworthy titles
I don't know what you mean.
/p/ is pretty much Reddit either ways
>>3120851
>fucking amazing
>>3120851
ew lad
>1 photo per thread
No.
the fact that /p/ has an understanding of whats a set, and, that it values sequencing and editing sometimes even more than the individual pics, makes it lightyears ahead of the faggots at reddit.
fuck reddit and fuck the cucked liberals.
>>3120868
/r/photography is shit. Its filled with people either:
1. Looking for a job
2. Butthurt because they picked photography as a job
at least /r/analog talks about actual photography
Wtf is with people calling film "analog".
>>3122692
What a dumb fucking question
>>3122692
>analog
luddite
>>3121121
>bringing politics into a pure art discussion
get the fuck off this board