|
Taken by a friend of mine who's style I am very jealous of.
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2010 07:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:56 |
|
|
This is currently my favorite car photographer on flickr:      Looks like he has a pretty fun job. http://www.flickr.com/photos/7211625@N06/2903320591/
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2010 07:38
|
|
|
This guy has so much awesome stuff on his site it's taken me 2 days to go through it all http://www.luissanchis.com
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2010 17:57
|
|
|
brad industry posted:This guy has so much awesome stuff on his site it's taken me 2 days to go through it all gently caress
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2010 21:06
|
|
|
His color palette and lighting is so cohesive, and his command of composition and leading your eye around. Dagone that is an amazing folio.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2010 21:07
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:gently caress
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2010 22:26
|
|
|
What's always impressive to me about fashion photographers like that is that the work is really loving killer but they also have a ton of images. Those guys are constantly shooting tests all the time and making images that good, it's crazy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2010 23:59
|
|
|
brad industry posted:What's always impressive to me about fashion photographers like that is that the work is really loving killer but they also have a ton of images. Those guys are constantly shooting tests all the time and making images that good, it's crazy. Question while we're on it. The first guy photo, the one in a fur coat (I'd link to it but it's flash) he really only has light on the front of his face, the sides already fall into shadow. What kind of light source is that? Is it actually only the size of the front of his face, or is it falloff or proximity keeping it from lighting the sides of the face? Or is it post processing brightening the center of the face?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 00:23
|
|
|
Best guess it's just the edge of falloff from a beauty dish or something at a pretty severe angle over/above the camera.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 00:25
|
|
|
Maybe a strip light over head and some black cards on the side?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 03:58
|
|
|
Well that's the bar I guess... jesus
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 04:32
|
|
|
I'm not saying this just to be contrarian or because I think I'm great, but I'm not that wowed by most of the things in there. There are some shots with really great interesting lighting, but a lot of the shots look intentionally pretentious with overly contrived posing. If you took the "GUCCI" logo off that set of images, would they still be worth looking at? Maybe that's just how high fashion photography is; I guess it's just not for me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 05:47
|
|
|
Bread Zeppelin posted:I'm not saying this just to be contrarian or because I think I'm great, but I'm not that wowed by most of the things in there. There are some shots with really great interesting lighting, but a lot of the shots look intentionally pretentious with overly contrived posing. If you took the "GUCCI" logo off that set of images, would they still be worth looking at? How much lit work have you done? His control of lighting alone is awe-worthy, and I challenge anyone who's done their own lighting so say this guy isn't in the top .001% of light control.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 10:28
|
|
|
Benoit Paillé is doing more good work these days. Lately, I have been watching his candid portrait series:      Google Translate posted:Discovery Project by Benoit Paille, a young self-taught photographer of 24 years: Stranger Project is to meet the people he meets by chance in the street. Sa démarche “Interroger le monde moderne et tenter de briser l'individualisme et l'anonymat de la grande ville”. His approach "Questioning the modern world and try to break individualism and anonymity of the big city." http://www.fubiz.net/2010/01/22/stranger-project/
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 13:27
|
|
|
brad industry posted:This guy has so much awesome stuff on his site it's taken me 2 days to go through it all Great stuff. Lots and lots of it not safe for work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 13:28
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:Benoit Paillé is doing more good work these days. Lately, I have been watching his candid portrait series: brad industry posted:This guy has so much awesome stuff on his site it's taken me 2 days to go through it all Really good stuff, more ideas to steal..I mean take inspiration from.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 14:16
|
|
|
Some fantastic photos in this thread. I finally got my thumb out and scanned my grandfather's collection of late '30s postcards from the US sent him by a friend or relative who had moved there. Too bad I can't ask him. They seem to be hand colourised photos, between 1937 and 1939. They made it all the way to good old pre-war, pre-commie Czechoslovakia. Most of the cards were never sent, maybe because of ze war?    http://www.flickr.com/photos/hellcanwait/sets/72157623868186352/
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 20:11
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:Benoit Paillé is doing more good work these days. Lately, I have been watching his candid portrait series: This is way too much contrast for a girl with freckles. VVVV I get that he's trying to accentuate it, but I still think he's pulled it up too much. Look at her eyes -- they also have that oversharpened Topaz Adjust (tm) (r) look to them (yes, I know he didn't use Topaz Adjust). orange lime fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Apr 27, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 20:38
|
|
|
orange lime posted:This is way too much contrast for a girl with freckles. I get the feeling he was trying to accentuate the freckles, looks good to me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 21:02
|
|
|
less_than_one posted:postcards I'm confused.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 21:04
|
|
|
Bread Zeppelin posted:I'm not saying this just to be contrarian or because I think I'm great, but I'm not that wowed by most of the things in there. There are some shots with really great interesting lighting, but a lot of the shots look intentionally pretentious with overly contrived posing. If you took the "GUCCI" logo off that set of images, would they still be worth looking at? Think of it like the most complicated and technically challenging music you've ever heard performed as well as anyone can, just you don't like the song. That's how I feel about it anyway. VVV I was actually thinking of some annoying guitar music that is too complicated and pretentious. I don't really like the photos, but I can see he knows what he's doing with studio lighting. TomR fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Apr 27, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 21:40
|
|
|
TomR posted:Think of it like the most complicated and technically challenging music you've ever heard performed as well as anyone can, just you don't like the song. That's how I feel about it anyway. I wouldn't say those photos or the photographer are anywhere near as good as a Chopin ballade, but I see where your coming from.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 22:07
|
|
|
less_than_one posted:I finally got my thumb out and scanned my grandfather's collection of late '30s postcards from the US sent him by a friend or relative who had moved there. Too bad I can't ask him. They seem to be hand colourised photos, between 1937 and 1939. They made it all the way to good old pre-war, pre-commie Czechoslovakia. Most of the cards were never sent, maybe because of ze war? Are you sure these are photographs? There seems to be an extreme lack of detail but I guess that could come from how the artist colored them in. Edit: I should say it is most noticeable in the first one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2010 17:07
|
|
|
I dont wanna sidetrack the thread, so I'll just post a couple photographers I really like-- http://www.eugeniorecuenco.com/fichas/301.html http://www.pacoperegrin.com/main.html somnambulist fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Apr 30, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2010 21:05
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:Are you sure these are photographs? There seems to be an extreme lack of detail but I guess that could come from how the artist colored them in. I gave these a closer look and googled around some. Tthese are "C.T.Art-Colortone" linen postcards. A lot of them look like watercolours and all are pretty low-res/quality compared what's available today. The garish colours they are touched up with further add to the un-photographic quality. Still most of them are recognisable as photos rather than drawings, which I think makes them all. I know this isn't really the thread for historical photographs/postcards, but I didn't know where else to put them... Does anyone know any more about these? (see a lot of these around, but no info on how they were made, techniques used, etc).
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2010 15:05
|
|
|
They look like lithographs to me.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2010 19:47
|
|
|
Cecil Beaton.  I'm a sucker for nice B&W portraits.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2010 17:06
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:I dont wanna sidetrack the thread, so I'll just post a couple photographers I really like--  I'm not sure I 'get' the composition on this one but it's still goddamn amazing. I like shooting landscapes, and I've tried shooting models, but the idea of trying to do both at once boggles my mind. I absolutely love this guys stuff. Pompous Rhombus posted:Among many things wrong in the world, I was born too late to ever get the chance to shoot with 4x5 Kodachrome Why did you have to point this out?! It actually makes me feel like tears are welling up in my eyes knowing that Kodachrome is dead. Especially since I just got into photography half a year ago and really want to start shooting film. Moist von Lipwig fucked around with this message at 12:45 on May 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 12:33
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:Why did you have to point this out?! It actually makes me feel like tears are welling up in my eyes knowing that Kodachrome is dead. Especially since I just got into photography half a year ago and really want to start shooting film. Last week I came across a couple rolls of K64 in 120 on eBay and got kinda excited (expired in the mid nineties, but I shot some non-refrigerated K25 a few years ago that came out alright). After some Googling I realized it would be impossible to get it processed anywhere; Dwayne's can only accommodate 35mm Kodachrome  You can still shoot 35mm for the rest of the year, at least. I just got two rolls back, have two more in the fridge.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 13:09
|
|
|
brad industry posted:This guy has so much awesome stuff on his site it's taken me 2 days to go through it all This stuff is awesome, however some of it is 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 14:55
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Last week I came across a couple rolls of K64 in 120 on eBay and got kinda excited (expired in the mid nineties, but I shot some non-refrigerated K25 a few years ago that came out alright). After some Googling I realized it would be impossible to get it processed anywhere; Dwayne's can only accommodate 35mm Kodachrome This is heartbreaking  Is there anything that even approaches kodachrome in terms of colour crispness etc?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 15:08
|
|
|
This portfolio aggregator thing is cool: http://thisalso.com/
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 22:24
|
|
|
Twenties Superstar posted:haha sorry to bring up something from like 5 months ago but scrolling down this one caught my eye right away. I thought it was interesting how it caught the most flak. some work that struck me last year along the same vibe:  by Melissa Catanese
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 04:43
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Last week I came across a couple rolls of K64 in 120 on eBay and got kinda excited (expired in the mid nineties, but I shot some non-refrigerated K25 a few years ago that came out alright). After some Googling I realized it would be impossible to get it processed anywhere; Dwayne's can only accommodate 35mm Kodachrome If they can bring Polaroid film back from the dead, there's got to be someone out there who'd do the same for Kodachrome. I know that if I had millions of dollars to donate to charity I'd spend at least a couple million buying up old film production machines and recreating the Kodachrome production line/processing facility. I'd have my own little baby Kodak facility, supplying and processing Kodachrome in any size you liked. Imagine shooting it with a 20x24 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 05:18
|
|
|
orange lime posted:If they can bring Polaroid film back from the dead, there's got to be someone out there who'd do the same for Kodachrome. Are you talking about The Impossible Project? Hasn't the film been total crap so far?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 05:34
|
|
|
orange lime posted:If they can bring Polaroid film back from the dead, there's got to be someone out there who'd do the same for Kodachrome. I was talking to a photojournalist today and I think he mentioned that the problem with Kodachrome isn't just that the development process is so technical and difficult, but that the chemicals required are being clamped down on by the (insert government agency here - fda?) because they are dangerous or toxic. Quick google search shows nothing of the sort but I was sure he said that. If there's truth to that I guess it would mean even if you hand unlimited money, it would still be impossible.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 05:50
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:I was talking to a photojournalist today and I think he mentioned that the problem with Kodachrome isn't just that the development process is so technical and difficult, but that the chemicals required are being clamped down on by the (insert government agency here - fda?) because they are dangerous or toxic. Quick google search shows nothing of the sort but I was sure he said that. I dunno -- in the USA you can acquire nearly any chemical you want, right up to things like dimethylmercury and highly active radioisotopes, as long as you have the right permits and dispose of waste properly. Whatever Dwayne is currently using can't be *that* bad if places all over the country were doing Kodachrome processing for years without any bad effects. Photographic chemicals certainly aren't good for you, but you don't hear of "darkroom disease" or anything. It seems to me that Dwayne's was doing good business processing Kodachrome, so there's a market for it. The only reason it's disappeared is because the small shops didn't want to deal with the process, so consumers bought E-6 film that they could get developed locally, so Kodak couldn't sell enough film to keep the lines open.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 06:24
|
|
|
Yeah, logic says it has more to do with profitability than anything else. What's unfortunate, though, is that I think we are actually beginning to see a surge in film use and I think it could get even stronger. I'm hoping I can buy a film camera and get at least one roll of Kodachrome developed before it's too late.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 07:52
|
|
|
nonanone posted:Avedon will never stop being my ultimate inspiration I am friends with Avedon's nephew. We used to work together. He has told me some cool stories about getting his photo shot by his Uncle when he was younger. Talk about awesome.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:56 |
|
|
buyable posted:haha sorry to bring up something from like 5 months ago but scrolling down this one caught my eye right away. I thought it was interesting how it caught the most flak. some work that struck me last year along the same vibe: That photo you posted is pretty cool, though...
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2010 20:22
|
|