LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI took these with a phone camera. A PHONE CAMERA. all yall photographers jelly because my camera cost 20 bucks and my pictures look way better than whatever shit you take
Results 1 to 8 of 8
- 15 Apr. 2013 08:49am #1
LOOK AT MY STUPID ASS PHOTOGRAPHS GO FUCK YOURSELF
- 15 Apr. 2013 11:29am #2Fancy-Shmancy
- Age
- 30
- Join Date
- Mar. 2011
- Location
- Kentucky.
- Posts
- 490
- Reputation
- 23
- LCash
- 0.25
- Awards
If you're trying your best attempt at trolling, this isn't the forum to do so. Head on over to the Junkyard forum.
If you're serious though, yay for taking photos of normal things in a cliche turned-sideways manner and adding poo-stains.
The first photo's composition is horrible and looks like it has been used as toilet paper a few times.
The second photo isn't too bad, however it is not interesting and does not have enough contrast nor saturation. It is overexposed. Not to mention the sky is blown out.
Third photo, all you did was take a snapshot of the ground (In a bland, non-aesthetic way I might add ) and add a poo-stain filter.
Photographers can use any type of camera to create amazing images. Even those stupid Walmart disposables. Saying that your photos are better than those with the higher end DSLR's is completely bogus though. The higher-end DSLR's have much more pixels and image quality in general than a cell phone. Plus those with DSLR's have the ability to completely control their camera and interchange lenses. We love being able to have full control and play with our equipment. (That's what she said) Maybe if you keep practicing and stop taking snapshots of things made for instagram you can create some great photos. However these photos hold no emotion for the viewer, nor aesthetic purpose.Last edited by SpornyTheAlien; 15 Apr. 2013 at 11:55am.
- 15 Apr. 2013 02:33pm #3Stunning
- Age
- 34
- Join Date
- Nov. 2009
- Location
- Everywhere. I have the internet
- Posts
- 4,100
- Reputation
- 440
- LCash
- 0.25
..they look like you took them with a phone.
The last one's not too bad with the filters though.
[Edit: Highlighted so hopefully nobody misses the response. How do they look? Well they look like you took them with a phone. I know it's obvious, but what else do you want me to say? They're not shit, they're not good, they just look like regular phone pictures. Which they are. So you pretty much answered your own question]Last edited by Raivu; 15 Apr. 2013 at 09:37pm.
☜(* x *)☞FOOL ON COOL GENERATION
Originally Posted by C0FF1NCASE
- 15 Apr. 2013 07:53pm #4 NO SHIT? Originally Posted by Raivu
..they look like you took them with a phone.
The last one's not too bad with the filters though.
- 15 Apr. 2013 07:55pm #5Stunning
- Age
- 34
- Join Date
- Nov. 2009
- Location
- Everywhere. I have the internet
- Posts
- 4,100
- Reputation
- 440
- LCash
- 1.50
Total Shit! Originally Posted by minora_kitty
I'm really glad you cared enough to take the time to go out and hack on photographers though.
You're either butthurt or a really dedicated photographer.
To both of which, I congratulate you and wish you the best.
You've got my support <3☜(* x *)☞FOOL ON COOL GENERATION
Originally Posted by C0FF1NCASE
- 15 Apr. 2013 08:03pm #6
Maybe because.... they were?!!! Originally Posted by Raivu
- 15 Apr. 2013 09:39pm #7Stunning
- Age
- 34
- Join Date
- Nov. 2009
- Location
- Everywhere. I have the internet
- Posts
- 4,100
- Reputation
- 440
- LCash
- 1.66
Fix'd my post. Originally Posted by Nevik
I'm surprised you didn't really get it.
Being a photographer, and this being the art forum, Minora posted photographs so it's my job to critique it.
My critique is:
It looks like it was taken from a phone.
It's not good
It's not bad
It's just phone quality.
so what?☜(* x *)☞FOOL ON COOL GENERATION
Originally Posted by C0FF1NCASE
- 02 Dec. 2013 02:15pm #8
lol
Reply With Quote
