Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Any pic's make you say OMG!

Options
«134

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    joeKel73
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,689 ✭✭✭joeKel73


    Not seeing any photo?


  • Options
    #3
    oshead
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,131 ✭✭✭oshead


    Here it is..... That's scary. :eek:
    picture.php?albumid=1133&pictureid=6093


  • Options
    #4
    RichieO
    Registered Users Posts: 320 ✭✭RichieO


    foto joe wrote: »
    Not seeing any photo?

    Me neither and I put it up, always have problems putting up pic's....
    RichieO


  • Options
    #5
    Thecageyone
    Registered Users Posts: 6,756 ✭✭✭Thecageyone


    Lol, that guy would deserve to get a Darwin award if it were to collapse.


  • Options
    #6
    dazftw
    Registered Users Posts: 5,728 ✭✭✭dazftw


    Most recently. In a photographic way

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/nfl-fan/4507589276/

    This one in a proper OMG way

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/t-o-r-d/3798143486/

    Network with your people: https://www.builtinireland.ie/



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Thecageyone
    Registered Users Posts: 6,756 ✭✭✭Thecageyone


    Any ones lately that initially make me think "WOW!" usually end up merely being over processed HDRs or overly manipulated images, upon closer inspection.


  • Options
    #8
    PCPhoto
    Registered Users Posts: 6,584 ✭✭✭PCPhoto


    Thecageyone wrote: »
    Any ones lately that initially make me think "WOW!" usually end up merely being over processed HDRs or overly manipulated images, upon closer inspection.

    the art of capturing an image is dying and being replaced with the art of creating an image.

    havent really had the "WoW" factor from pics - more of ...thats looks cool, how did they do that....some people put a lot of work into creating an image which they then photograph.

    I admire a lot of landscape stuff and light-painting stuff - mainly because I dont know how to do it and probably dont have the patience/dedication to do it properly.....of course its always great to look at a pic of your own and say... yup - this is nice and evenly exposed - I'm rarely happy with my own work as I NEVER take the time to set up/create a pic....most/all of my pics are spur of the moment.


  • Options
    #9
    DaireQuinlan
    Registered Users Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭DaireQuinlan


    dazftw wrote: »

    This one in a proper OMG way

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/t-o-r-d/3798143486/

    oh man, I actually can't spend any significant length of time looking at that picture. It makes me want to back slowly away from my computer :D


  • Options
    #10
    joeKel73
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,689 ✭✭✭joeKel73


    dazftw wrote: »
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/t-o-r-d/3798143486/

    Haha I've sat on that ledge - amazing place! Good photo of it here.

    They do base jumping off that rock, see this video, it will give you that OMG moment!! :eek: :eek: :eek: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1724639/single_base_jump/


  • Options
    #11
    dazftw
    Registered Users Posts: 5,728 ✭✭✭dazftw


    PCPhoto wrote: »
    the art of capturing an image is dying and being replaced with the art of creating an image.

    This is very true. Photography is becoming more easily available to anyone who wants to try it, and with technically astute people nowadays its also very easy for them to create something with a "wow" "cool" look. You don't need to be very smart to get good at digital photography. It's just too easy!

    If you really want to see the "art" of capturing an image you really need to go back to film photography. Go back to when little johnny didn't have a 5000000 GB Xtreme 6 million memory card to make as many mistakes as he likes. He had his little box brownie back in the 1900's and he had to actually put a lot of effort in if he wanted something out of it.

    Not saying digital is bad its just Iv'e found a photograph produced from film will be nearly always better than a digital photograph. In a photographic way that is.l

    Im starting to ramble now so im going to stop :rolleyes:

    Network with your people: https://www.builtinireland.ie/



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    sunny2004
    Registered Users Posts: 2,538 ✭✭✭sunny2004


    I say "OMG" after each time I push the shutter, did I really take that crap ;)


  • Options
    #13
    cnocbui
    Registered Users Posts: 19,860 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Picture5-1.png

    From this Flickr Photographer: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisemai/4341612154/

    I don't think I have seen a better self portrait. The whole photostream is impressive.


  • Options
    #14
    hi_im_fil
    Registered Users Posts: 889 ✭✭✭hi_im_fil


    This taken by http://www.flickr.com/photos/slinky2000/
    I really like all his car shots.

    2290381583_cec0ab327e_o.jpg


  • Options
    #15
    Ghost Train
    Registered Users Posts: 30,069 ✭✭✭✭Ghost Train


    another cliff shot
    http://i.imgur.com/ft77r.jpg


  • Options
    #16
    sineadw
    Registered Users Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭sineadw


    dazftw wrote: »
    This is very true. Photography is becoming more easily available to anyone who wants to try it, and with technically astute people nowadays its also very easy for them to create something with a "wow" "cool" look. You don't need to be very smart to get good at digital photography. It's just too easy!

    If you really want to see the "art" of capturing an image you really need to go back to film photography. Go back to when little johnny didn't have a 5000000 GB Xtreme 6 million memory card to make as many mistakes as he likes. He had his little box brownie back in the 1900's and he had to actually put a lot of effort in if he wanted something out of it.

    Not saying digital is bad its just Iv'e found a photograph produced from film will be nearly always better than a digital photograph. In a photographic way that is.l

    Im starting to ramble now so im going to stop :rolleyes:

    I want to cut this quote to respond to it but I just don't know where. So if I take a shot in film and scan digitally does it make it so so?

    And more importantly - does it matter? A good shot is a good shot. Now taking a ****e shot and making it better in LR or whatever is yawn. But that's not to do with the medium. And you can do the same in lightroom or darkroom for the most part.


  • Options
    #17
    Barname
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭Barname


    carterimage.jpg

    there's a story behind the above image.....


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter

    .


  • Options
    #18
    Barname
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭Barname


    dazftw wrote: »
    This is very true. Photography is becoming more easily available to anyone who wants to try it, and with technically astute people nowadays its also very easy for them to create something with a "wow" "cool" look. You don't need to be very smart to get good at digital photography. It's just too easy!

    If you really want to see the "art" of capturing an image you really need to go back to film photography. Go back to when little johnny didn't have a 5000000 GB Xtreme 6 million memory card to make as many mistakes as he likes. He had his little box brownie back in the 1900's and he had to actually put a lot of effort in if he wanted something out of it.

    Not saying digital is bad its just Iv'e found a photograph produced from film will be nearly always better than a digital photograph. In a photographic way that is.l

    Im starting to ramble now so im going to stop :rolleyes:

    Dont blame the latest technology...

    http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/


  • Options
    #19
    joeKel73
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,689 ✭✭✭joeKel73


    Barname wrote: »
    http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/

    Interesting! *Bookmarks link for post-processing defense in the future...* :p


  • Options
    #20
    dazftw
    Registered Users Posts: 5,728 ✭✭✭dazftw


    sineadw wrote: »
    I want to cut this quote to respond to it but I just don't know where. So if I take a shot in film and scan digitally does it make it so so?

    And more importantly - does it matter? A good shot is a good shot. Now taking a ****e shot and making it better in LR or whatever is yawn. But that's not to do with the medium. And you can do the same in lightroom or darkroom for the most part.

    There's more thought that goes into it with film before any shot is taken. You have whatever 12, 24 or 36 shots to get it right. Compared to digital which is a lot more.

    It doesn't matter really I just find film better there's more thought put into it. Once you scan film in you can do whatever you like but I like to keep to what would would be possible in the real darkroom instead of going nuts in photoshop.

    I don't have the time atm for a longer reply so ill come back to this. I think its a good discussion to have.

    Network with your people: https://www.builtinireland.ie/



  • Options
    #21
    melekalikimaka
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,686 Mod ✭✭✭✭melekalikimaka


    http://www.flickr.com/photos/2switlightgraff/4459346670/in/faves-melekalikimaka/

    i love it, no ps


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Fenster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,763 ✭✭✭Fenster


    dazftw wrote: »
    This is very true. Photography is becoming more easily available to anyone who wants to try it, and with technically astute people nowadays its also very easy for them to create something with a "wow" "cool" look. You don't need to be very smart to get good at digital photography. It's just too easy!

    If you really want to see the "art" of capturing an image you really need to go back to film photography. Go back to when little johnny didn't have a 5000000 GB Xtreme 6 million memory card to make as many mistakes as he likes. He had his little box brownie back in the 1900's and he had to actually put a lot of effort in if he wanted something out of it.

    Not saying digital is bad its just Iv'e found a photograph produced from film will be nearly always better than a digital photograph. In a photographic way that is.l

    Im starting to ramble now so im going to stop :rolleyes:

    Oh noes, photography is dead. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #23
    cnocbui
    Registered Users Posts: 19,860 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    I happen to shoot film, but I don't think choice of equipment/medium has much to do with good photography. Ingredients that go into making a great photograph (IMO), in order of importance:

    1) Being in the right place at the right time.

    2) Having the imagination - 'eye' - for the photographic potential in the time and place.

    3) Technical understanding of the equipment and how parameters can be adjusted/contrived to achieve the intended result.

    4) Equipment

    5) Luck ;)


  • Options
    #24
    melekalikimaka
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,686 Mod ✭✭✭✭melekalikimaka


    cnocbui wrote: »
    I happen to shoot film, but I don't think choice of equipment/medium has much to do with good photography. Ingredients that go into making a great photograph (IMO), in order of importance:

    but there is 'something' bout film thats a little bit special


  • Options
    #25
    cnocbui
    Registered Users Posts: 19,860 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    melekalikimaka wrote: »
    but there is 'something' bout film thats a little bit special

    Sure is; it's expensive and you have to wait a while to see the results. ;)


  • Options
    #26
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    sineadw wrote: »
    And more importantly - does it matter? A good shot is a good shot.

    Agree 100%. Is this not how ALL technologies evolved? And improved. Photography was once the plaything of a privileged few. Not any more. And if that brings out the really great photographers ()who may never have gotten the chance years go) then I'm all for it.

    I know it's a personal preference, but I don't like images that are over-manipulated in PS, LR, etc. There was a thread with an exhibition on it the other day, and there was an image of Dublin, with the entire sky darkened, lightning, etc.

    I know people love them, but it just doesn't do it for me. But that is the beauty of digital - people are free to let their artistic talents run wild. And I think it's great that EVERYONE can do so if they wish - and if they have the talent.

    For me, this type of image is an OMG!

    4232454990_e5e1a3af45.jpg

    And it's in Ireland.


  • Options
    #27
    melekalikimaka
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,686 Mod ✭✭✭✭melekalikimaka


    cnocbui wrote: »
    Sure is; it's expensive and you have to wait a while to see the results. ;)

    darkroom in college makes its nice and cheap hehe, and half to beauty is in the dev imo :)


  • Options
    #28
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,545 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    I know it's a personal preference, but I don't like images that are over-manipulated in PS, LR, etc. There was a thread with an exhibition on it the other day, and there was an image of Dublin, with the entire sky darkened, lightning, etc.

    I know people love them, but it just doesn't do it for me. But that is the beauty of digital - people are free to let their artistic talents run wild. And I think it's great that EVERYONE can do so if they wish - and if they have the talent.
    i think (badly processed) photography suffers from the uncanny valley - with a painting, your reaction is not one of 'that looks unnatural', because you are not expecting it to. with photography, that expectation is there, and the brain seems to have an inbuilt reaction to something which looks fake.

    anyway, photography is not like most other artforms, in that it has split into two disciplines - the photography itself, and the post-processing. but people usually conflate them, and assume that skill in one means skill in the other, which is not the case.

    but i do think that you can become lazy with digital. i'm speaking as someone who grew up on film, and still prefers shooting on it, so i'm biased (which is no bad thing), but when i started i didn't have the option of curves and levels, etc., so you had to learn from your mistakes. digital gives you a greater margin of error.


  • Options
    #29
    dazftw
    Registered Users Posts: 5,728 ✭✭✭dazftw


    Fenster wrote: »
    Oh noes, photography is dead. :rolleyes:

    I never said it was dead. I said the opposite in fact! Its easier now so a lot more people are trying it!

    I think people are misunderstanding me.. I'm not saying digital is bad i'm just saying it makes it easier for everybody to try which in my opinion isn't always good thing.

    Prime example! That wedding photographer on judge brown. "Its cheap its easy hey maybe I can make some money even though i'm not as good as other photographers"

    Your right its got nothing to do with what format its taken with. Just IMHO digital makes it easier for the cowboys which I don't like.

    If you take a look at the "big picture" article that's on boston.com they always have amazing photos on there that are probably 99% digital.

    At the end of the day my opinion is a photograph taken with film will be nearly always better.

    I dunno...

    Network with your people: https://www.builtinireland.ie/



  • Options
    #30
    sineadw
    Registered Users Posts: 3,319 ✭✭✭sineadw


    dazftw wrote: »

    At the end of the day my opinion is a photograph taken with film will be nearly always better.

    Whilst I agree wholeheartedly about the cowboys, I just don't get the above sentiment. I shoot film at lot, but when I'm shooting digital for personal stuff I take just as few shots. Having a DSLR doesn't mean you're automatically going to go into machine gun mode.

    Or is it that you mean if you shoot film you're probably a better class of photographer?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Andrew33
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭Andrew33


    cnocbui wrote: »
    Picture5-1.png

    From this Flickr Photographer: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisemai/4341612154/

    I don't think I have seen a better self portrait. The whole photostream is impressive.

    Beautiful but NOT an OMG pic! missing the point of this thread completely.


Advertisement