[1ryan1]

im gonna have to try harder obviously... way harderr.

close please.

[kasper_KS]

You seem to have a really cool WB on all of them for some reason... they all have really bluish tones, unless its just my monitor?

[1ryan1]

is that a good thing in your opinion?

[Katsumoru]

Sweet noise.

[kasper_KS]

Originally Posted by 1ryan1

is that a good thing in your opinion?

Well it would say to me... something is wrong with your camera. They are pretty noisy but thats because of the ISO being set at 1000. If they went as blueish your colors would be a whole lot more vibrant. The cold tones make it lack contrast and look really shallow IMO.

[1ryan1]

ok cool. should i down the ISO to 800 or so. what other settings or problems do you see that i could adjust?

[JungleLarry]

I can't tell what you did for the "After" shots except take a **** on everything photography stands for.

[N0SEY]

I think they're really good. You clearly have a great grasp on photography and programs used to alter photos.

Keep up the good work.

[SuPrBuGmAn]

Rule #1, get the **** out your car to take a picture.

[Crises of Perception]

lol Nosey...trying out a new style?

Those arn't good, take your stuff to the wdys...

Your WB is off. All you did to the after pictures was lighten the **** out of them. You apparently have no clue how to use ISO.

And that church picture made me puke a little...I swallowed it though, so don't worry.

[N0SEY]

Oh, by the way...

[N0SEY]

You guys like how I photoshopped this?

[SuPrBuGmAn]

I die a little, everytime I see that shot.

[ScareKrow]

I died a little when I came into this thread.

[Crises of Perception]

I had a test on court cases today in my AP class. ****ing aced that ****.

Jesus christ I'm having a horrible time spelling today.

[Katsumoru]

Originally Posted by N0SEY

You guys like how I photoshopped this?

No, ask the original poster. He'll teach you. It's supposed to look like this:

[Crises of Perception]

OMG...lol that made me rofl

[JakespIMP]

you actually used photoshop on that, 1ryan1?
looks like you might have used iphoto at the most

[tonybhall]

Hey Ryan

not trying to be a smart *** but it will probably come across that way. When you look at your before and afters what do you REALLY think about the changes made? Normally, you want your afters to be better than your befores or it kind of deteats the point... just a little. ALL of your afters are worse than your befores. I would hope that would be obvious to you. And if you know your afters are worse, trash them and stick with the befores until your afters are an improvement.

Someone said that your white balance was cool. They didn't mean cool like neat. They meant cool as in tempurature wise. White balance is measured in temperatures but most cameras try to make it easy for us by translating the white balance into common temperature settings for thinks like, sunshine, clouds, shade, tungsten, florecent, flash ect... You need to set your white balance to the most appropriate setting for the condition you are in. If that's to complicated then set it to AWB (auto white balance) and leave it. It's not as good as having the right setting but it should be better than the pics you took.

Also, 1000 ISO? Really? when you used a film camera did you buy 1000 ISO film? Here is a general guideline for you. 100 ISO for outdoor great lighting with still subjects. 200 ISO for outdoor decent lighting. 400 ISO is a good all around ISO for newbs. It works for moving subjects, and decent lighting in doors. 800 ISO for indoors with poor lighting. If ISO is over your head, set it to 400 and leave it.

Oh, and "sweet noise" is not a compliment.

[shoot_squrriels_09]

Originally Posted by Katsumoru

No, ask the original poster. He'll teach you. It's supposed to look like this:

haha

[jeremy_maillet]

Originally Posted by N0SEY

You guys like how I photoshopped this?

How is that done? the background that is
Also just trying to get this thread offtopic