get that lot done and your onto a winner there mate....
md
The people who are in the frame of mind that everything has to be technically 'correct' are also the people who don't see past the technicalities, so to speak.
I took this one in New York, and I love it, regardless of the fact that it is technically flawed in almost every aspect
(I won't steal the thread, just a diddy shot
Tis a fair comment that you would have liked to see it sharper MD, not getting at you in particular hereBut it's SUPPOSED TO BE SOFT!
Soz m8 - must be having a serious thicky moment...
What does 'From a photographers point of view they're just too generic' mean, simple English please
And, what's this all about...
It would just be nice if people could maybe appreciate the actual photography a little more; a smooth bokeh over a nice cityscape background or something like tht.
I don't get how that has much, if anything, to do with portraits and soft/sharp imaging
DD - the thick one
You gotta pay the bills I guess but I would HATE to be doing this just because its what people buy. Screw creativeness, being artistic, growing as a photographer, pushing my own boundaries and trying to better myself on a daily basis. I've made a name for myself, a real solid respected name across the world by doing what I want. I do this for myself. It just so happens that people like it. 
) is one of those similar to those foodpoison describes...
). In terms of selling pics, you've obviously got to do what sells, but it's a shame that people are often so unwilling to accept that not everyone wants to do everything in exactly the same way, and just because it's different and technically 'incorrect' doesn't mean that it's any less creative, or impressive, or even worthy because of it. I've made the choice to take the photographs that I want to take and get the results that I want to see with my eyes, rather than with my brain (if that makes sense!) but I'm sure people will tell me that they aren't right (i'm always happy to try and improve technically, but not at the expense of what I want to achieve.) I want people to see what I saw at the time, and that's what I try to capture.
What an odd thing to say. Also, they've got these things called paragraphs now
this a great thread and really interesting to me and although I'm not sure what i want to say is on topic for the OP, it's certainly sort of moved into that area - for the last 18 months or so i've been toying with photography really because a lot of the shots are not 'technically' correct or perfect, and some people look at them and go 'wuuhh?' and others go 'wow!'. This had made me really unconfident and sort of stopped me taking pictures because I was thinking they weren't right - and the ones I did take I wasn't comfortable posting. This picture I took (also in NYC
Technically it's rubbish (and you might think it's rubbish too, that's ok!) but so many people have said to me that they love it and think that it represents a real feel how busy and chaotic Grand Central station is - and that it's a bit different to the norm (also looks great on canvas
I also think that if you compare photography with old-time artists, then it wasn't always about what was in the picture, it was what the picture represents. A painting of a child painted in the same way as the photograph would have reprented a glow of goodness or something spiritual, and it's a shame that more people don't see what photographs represent rather than what they are.
Oops, that turned into a bit of a soapbox!
Hope that makes sense!
As for the shots, I agree with benneh. White background, lights in the same position and settings for every shot. Same aperture, same sync speed. Same ISO. Same as yesterday, last week, last month, last year. Same same same same same.
changed my mind i like it and it looks fine to me..
md
Hmmm... now why don't I believe you
Sarky sod
DD
it's really no big deal.
Night