>>2997645>halosdo you mean the kinda white outline to dark objects? not sure how to fix this.. is it a jpg deficit?
>portraityeah, it's basically a candid, so it was never going to be perfect. it'd definitely look better if it was sharper, I agree. not sure about eye contact though, I don't think it's always appropriate - even detrimental to illustrating character. I liked how removed he seemed from the action behind him.
>WByeah I only started to figure that out quite recently
>headlight picyeah, I thought it was underexposed when I took it- but then liked the purple tones of the sky. I think for me the main problem is the white cars on the left; they're a bit distracting, and I don't want people to see too much of the houses. The darkness is supposed to frame it, really.
>f13ah yeah, this is cos I was zoomed in, was f/8 originally. should have bumped up the aperture but there wasn't time
>>2997654>symmetryhmm, I deliberately chose a less symmetrical angle, guess I have to work on the choice there. it's just that a nice symmetrical shot of lamp posts going into the distance is too easy to think of. I reckon cropping could solve it, so the congregation of lamp posts on the right is the same distance from the midground car as the foreground car
>>2997670wtf is the point of rpt if not for feedback?
>underexposedi dunno, I like the colour, and I wish the foreground was darker
>clichewhat in particular is the cliche?
>bluryeah, agreed
