/p/ - Photography » Thread #2986767

>>2986768
>>2986767
>>2986771
No traces of composition whatsoever, didn't wait for the right moment to have a decent stance, eye-contact, not waiting till the head is in profile position etc...
Trash tier snapshittery, go back there and try again but this time do it right!
Also there is already a wildlife thread, learn to use the catalog!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 13:27:34 No.2986997 Report

Quoted By:

>>2986852
>>2986974
>nature thread
>not strictly wildlife thread
not that you'd know the difference because you're probably gearfags that never leave your mothers basement.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 13:58:54 No.2987020 Report

Quoted By: >>2987028

I like how you rushed to make a wildlife thread with your snapshits, OP.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 14:21:28 No.2987028 Report

Quoted By: >>2987035

>>2986852
>>2986974
>>2987020
Samefagging this hard. At least OP has snapshits. You got anything better?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 14:24:00 No.2987030 Report

Quoted By:

Looking for wildlife tips should i watch northrups videos on the subject?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 14:38:44 No.2987035 Report

Quoted By: >>2987036 >>2987076

>>2987028

I'm not samefagging, I made one comment.

They are snapshits. There is more to wildlife photography than pointing your camera at an animal and saying "GOT IT!"

It's clear that OP doesn't have a portfolio, or any skill. Just took some haphazard snaps of deer.

Settle down, OP. Give yourself time to git gud.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 14:39:49 No.2987036 Report

Quoted By: >>2987037 >>2987373

>>2987035
>There is more to wildlife photography than pointing your camera at an animal and saying "GOT IT!"
That is literally all wildlife photography is

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 14:44:25 No.2987037 Report

Quoted By: >>2987040

>>2987036

This is why you take snapshits.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 14:51:33 No.2987040 Report

Quoted By: >>2987050 >>2987052

>>2987037
You can pretend there is more to it but the animals position and pose is not controlled by the photographer. The best wildlife photos are mainly pure luck. Sure if you spend more time doing it increases your chances but you pretty much are just pointing your camera at the animal from whereever you happen to be and wherever it happens to be, hammering that camera buffer and picking the best one.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 15:06:15 No.2987050 Report

Quoted By: >>2987060 >>2987145

>>2987040

You sound exactly like a novice.

Don't worry, one day you'll look back at your foolish self and cringe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 15:29:00 No.2987052 Report

Quoted By:

>>2987040
t. street photographer

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 15:40:01 No.2987060 Report

Quoted By: >>2987072

>>2987050
So you can control where the animals will be and how they will pose? Time spent doing it is not skill.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 15:56:19 No.2987072 Report

Quoted By: >>2987075

>>2987060

If you can't position yourself without a deer spotting you, you're just plain shit. Risk losing a bad shot to get a good one.

You didn't even use the fucking frame, let alone the background. How can you not see that? You have no idea how to compose.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 15:57:46 No.2987075 Report

Quoted By: >>2987095

>>2987072
Im not even the guy who posted the pics m8. I would agree they arent keepers but lets not pretend it is much more than luck.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 16:02:22 No.2987076 Report

Quoted By:

>>2987035
Maybe OP is a beginner you dense autist.

Unfortunately you have a point. OP, go look at natgeo or any wildlife documentary and yes they get a clear photo, but there's almost always composition. It'll be shot with great light, in a downpour or whgh an amazing background.

Try emulate this op

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 16:24:20 No.2987095 Report

Quoted By:

>>2987075

Spot them early, position yourself. So what if you miss a mediocre shot trying to get a good one?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20161216110143_IMG_7486.jpg, 748KiB, 1920x1280

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 16:28:01 No.2987101 Report

Quoted By: >>2987128 >>2987131 >>2987373 >>2987987

>>2986917
There's a park about an hour away where there's a lot of deer this time of year. I find the whole "lost wallet" technique is pretty good for getting close.

Oh you want deer profile pics? I got deer profile pics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 16:52:05 No.2987128 Report

Quoted By:

>>2987101
Kek you just btfo that "muh snapshits" guy

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20161216110145_IMG_7487.jpg, 793KiB, 1920x1280

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 16:53:08 No.2987131 Report

Quoted By: >>2987149 >>2987373 >>2987416 >>2987987

>>2987101

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 17:02:36 No.2987145 Report

Quoted By:

>>2987050
PROJECTION SUCCESS

this isn't a thread to be upset in

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 17:03:40 No.2987149 Report

Quoted By:

>>2987131
now that's some fuck-ugly distracting bokeh, dylan

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 21 Dec 2016 23:29:14 No.2987373 Report

Quoted By: >>2987987

>>2987101

You're focusing on the nose, and even it is blurry.

>>2987131

Nothing is in focus, and you cut off the jaw.

This thread is terrible. Every image thus far is a snapshit. So much for this philosophy:

>>2987036

BurtGummer !!1cdp+8vuoOY

BurtGummer !!1cdp+8vuoOY Wed 21 Dec 2016 23:59:10 No.2987416 Report

Quoted By: >>2987437

>>2987131
You know you've been on 4chan too long when you're expecting this guys head to explode.

/\M8U5H !!zJbpV0948+w

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 753467.jpg, 23KiB, 533x477

/\M8U5H !!zJbpV0948+w Thu 22 Dec 2016 00:27:09 No.2987437 Report

Quoted By:

>>2987416

Hanis !B0tBPab9XY

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_0815.jpg, 583KiB, 1000x667

Hanis !B0tBPab9XY Thu 22 Dec 2016 22:12:26 No.2987956 Report

Quoted By: >>2987989

1/4

finally edited some birbs

Hanis !B0tBPab9XY

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_0712.jpg, 419KiB, 1000x667

Hanis !B0tBPab9XY Thu 22 Dec 2016 22:13:36 No.2987957 Report

Quoted By: >>2987989

2/4

Hanis !B0tBPab9XY

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_0077.jpg, 625KiB, 1000x667

Hanis !B0tBPab9XY Thu 22 Dec 2016 22:15:03 No.2987958 Report

Quoted By: >>2987989

3/4

Hanis !B0tBPab9XY

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_0026.jpg, 346KiB, 1000x667

Hanis !B0tBPab9XY Thu 22 Dec 2016 22:16:14 No.2987959 Report

Quoted By: >>2987989

4/4

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO JuncoBranch_S-2.jpg, 462KiB, 960x686

Anonymous Fri 23 Dec 2016 00:10:29 No.2987979 Report

Quoted By: >>2987989

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO threezy2.jpg, 1011KiB, 1528x1019

Anonymous Fri 23 Dec 2016 00:12:07 No.2987981 Report

Quoted By: >>2987989

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Dec 2016 00:52:56 No.2987987 Report

Quoted By: >>2987994

>>2987101
>>2987373
Focus is on the nose, but it's not blurry, needed to up the aperture a stop.

>>2987131
>>2987373
This one is in focus. Hate to break it to ya m8 but you've just got shit eyes haha

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Dec 2016 00:55:47 No.2987989 Report

Quoted By:

>>2987956
>>2987957
>>2987958
>>2987959
>>2987979
>>2987981
Great pics! But iso so high.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Dec 2016 01:18:28 No.2987994 Report

Quoted By: >>2987995

>>2987987

Neither is in focus, but the first one is much worse.

Feel free to lie to yourself, but you won't fool anyone else.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Dec 2016 01:21:25 No.2987995 Report

Quoted By: >>2987996

>>2987994
Lol you're the one making up shit to impress people on a middle eastern sand painting board. You're just forgetting that people can look at the photo dumbass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Dec 2016 01:24:59 No.2987996 Report

Quoted By: >>2988015

>>2987995

Focus was missed, and the exposure time was too long to freeze motion. These are facts.

Shit composition, as well. This is opinion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Dec 2016 02:39:25 No.2988015 Report

Quoted By: >>2988225

>>2987996
Not OP, and also not sure if you're shit posting, but 1/250 is perfectly fine for medium to large mammals who don't appear to be running away. He's not shooting birds. Stop throwing out words you don't understand. It's clear you don't know what you're talking about.

/\M8U5H !!zJbpV0948+w

/\M8U5H !!zJbpV0948+w Fri 23 Dec 2016 13:11:08 No.2988225 Report

Quoted By:

>>2988015

It also depends on the focal length, and how steady your arms and hands are. It's not just about the subject motion.

The first image has serious focus issues, and the second is mainly motion blur. In this instance, 1/250 was not enough.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Baby animals edition