I’m pretty awful and I’m adjusting to a 35mm prime + old shitty 1950s film camera but a small camera is actually making me a bit bolder. I’m also becoming bolder in my shots at least. Still learning and experimenting
>>3390423Colors and kid are cool but the tilt and poor framing doesn’t help. By poor framing, I don’t mean the kid — it’s good he’s at the edge of the photo. But there’s a lot of junk around him that is basically just noise
>>3390553This could be pretty neat but it’s just too wide. People are almost always the only interesting thing in a photo, followed by the context. The context is there but the people are dwarfed by it. I would next time go closer and/or crop this one a bit if you have a higher res
>but who does't love to show their stuff?Me, i like taking photos but I don’t show 99.9% of them and the ones I show aren’t even necessarily the best ones
>>3390554Interesting concept but I think I would’ve cropped more with my camera first. Also gone with a faster shutter speed, there seems to be some shake? Also the contrast is pretty dull, try a lens hood
>>3390555The subject is interesting but I don’t think it’s interesting as a whole. The statue and his face suffer distortion from both being too far off center I guess, and the line between rooftops is compositionally very distracting.
Out of curiosity, did you approach him and ask for the photo (or gesture it) or did you just walk up and snap?
>>3390556Not to be rude as you but it’s just a statue with a fence behind it. There’s no human context so there’s virtually nothing to emotionally draw a viewer to it
