going to post some photoseries

rest of my files are too big for the imageboard and i dont really care to file manage right now

>>4440815
>>4440810
Kino. Thank you for being a photoposter

Orange set is my favorite. Looks like it's on Mars

great stuff
make a photobook, call it four seasons
>>4440814
I want this on my wall

>>4440795
>>4440806
spectacular.

and all of the snow ones are crazy good

>rest of my files too big
please you gotta post more

just really shows that good photography is an activity of privilege and all that "find interesting things in your backyard/hometown" is weapons grade copium. You aren't getting kino like >>4440803 in your burger suburb. you just aren't.

>>4440942
It's not cope you are a bad photographer

good
>>4440810
>>4440813


>>4440808
wider

first 3 from the orange set are good too

For the orange set, I like these a lot.

>>4440792
>>4440798
>>4440799

I'm not a fan of the ones with vehicles or with lighter sky. It sort of exposes how baked the pictures are having a white sky with neon orange sand.

>>4440793

This one almost looks like an early 00's Oakley ad or something, like I can imagine a guy with spiky hair and wrap around shades driving it. IDK its kind of neat, but they sort of go from mysterious and ominous to extremely edited late 90s early 00s edgy print ad look when you add the vehicles and light sky, they give the pictures too much context. Its not for me.

No real comments on the other sets other than you got some really great moments, especially this one. Its so good it almost looks fake.
>>4440810

>>4441003

And one more thing, this one is your best.

>>4440791

Love it.

>posting photos on /p/
Sounds like you didn't get the memo

>>4440928
>I want this on my wall
Send me an email to lightwerks.contact @ gmail.com if youre serious
also more shit on my website lightwerks.studio

>>4440941
you guys are weirdly really nice so i exported some more shit for you

>>4440942
You're not wrong but i dont think youre right either. This photo is literally of Carson City Nevada and after we climbed and skied this peak we went to get shitty fast food and twiddled our thumbs in a strip mall parking lot. Most of my photos are taken within a 2 hour radius of a major US city either Reno, Carson city, or San Francisco.

that being said some of these photos took an immense amount of work and time to get into a position to take. This photo is about 7 hours of uphill climbing on ice and snow of a 12-13 hour day. Just about everyone normal would consider the time and energy for some of these shots to be psychotic and i dont blame them.

>>4441003
>I'm not a fan of the ones with vehicles or with lighter sky. It sort of exposes how baked the pictures are having a white sky with neon orange sand.
I kind of agree. this is how i originally edited the photos. I think in the end im going to have a more deepfried desert landscape series that stays super orange and then a more subdued series with the dune buggys

>>4441003
>This one almost looks like an early 00's Oakley ad or something, like I can imagine a guy with spiky hair and wrap around shades driving it.
kind of exactly what im going for. I think Im going to still work on the desert and dune buggy series to make them less edited and more natural

>>4441003
>early 00's Oakley ad

>>4441000
>wider
wider

I have a lot from the pacific coast of really dramatic rock pinnacles and other shit. its kind of an unwieldy amount that I dont really think I can sort through for now but its the shit im going to go through and edit and cull next. just assume its fuego

alright im done
downsizing files is getting tedious again

btw I just use a fujifilm XT3 with a ~35mm and ~70mm full frame equivalent prime lenses and mainly shoot auto everything.

hope that makes someone upset

>>4440793
>>4441055
I really like the series and get the concept but i think you went a little too far with mcdonalds deep frier oil filter. set the WB neutrally and boost oranges selectively. also I see a lot of potential in taking candid photos of travel/camping process, to compliment the grand landscapes
>>4441067
>>4441100
>>4441061
personal standouts in no particular order

>>4441106
thank you for sharing. your shits good so i hope you share more.

>>4441111
>auto everything
insane.
but the digits cannot be defied

>>4441053
imagine this printed in one of those jumbo photobooks, man, nice.
>>4441064
love how you caught all the snow
>>4441066
this is too dark imo, unless you personally wanted it to be that dark i'd say this whole little B/W series needs an exposure slider boost.
>>4441111
>auto everything
just like the pros, turbo sperg chudcels on this board could never.

>>4440790 (OP)
>>4440791
>>4440792
I like these the most out of the orange set. I agree with the other anon about the sky, but I still prefer this photo >>4440793 in this version as opposed to the more normal looking version. It looks cool.

>>4441111
oh thanks
i was gonna ask why you set your micro four thirds to _DSF filenames but its just a skill issue

the x-t3, with resolution close to a 16 or 20mp full frame camera and the same DR as a canon 5div, is capable of much more professional looking pictures than this

like it or not photography is about presentation and aesthetics not just composition and content. do better. literally all of your nature shots look like phone smears and have randomly slightly out of focus foregrounds. i have seen vastly better looking work from other people even with the x-t2.

>>4441162
most pros (and i mean real pros) shoot manual. auto modes are for news and weddings.

annie leibovitz does higher quality work than /p/ with an x100t and she prefers it specifically for using manual exposure

>>4441246
>pros like annie leibovitz
tribe members who suck the right cocks and do "art" photography are not the same as working professionals. I know /p/ hates the "blue collar" type photographer but the sad reality is that the market is dictated by them, not by you pseudo-artiste wanker types.

>>4441248
>she doesnt count because she's a jew!
If it's so easy why dont you marry a horny AF khazar titty goddess and become a world famous photographer?
>muh blue collar dictates the market
Yeah jose at the jobsite doesnt want artisan chisels he wants a power tool with a built in radio, and jose at the wedding wants 120fps with C-AF and 45mp so he doesn't have to compose or have timing.

Meanwhile people who actually do real photography instead of soulless snapshitting that anyones cousin could do if everyone chipped in to buy them an a1 and 24-70 GM work with light, not with camera settings. So called "blue collar" photography is not a real profession. It depends on common people NOT buying nice cameras to survive.

Is it any wonder all of these grifters cry and beg people to NOT buy the nice cameras, and start out with micro four thirds or APS-C and never move up unless they too join the "profession"? Absolutely fucking not. The average wedding photographer could be replaced by literally anyone with a minimum IQ of 95 if they bought the newest canikony and practiced on their dog for 2 weeks.

>>4441262
its crazy how every shitty available light holiday and event photographer on earth would totally go out of business if every family had at least one guy with a nice camera

these so called professionals are begging us non stop to believe we do not need nice full frame mirrorless. because if we do, suddenly they stop offering something special. if anything the average person would end up being better at it than the professionals because they'd know their subjects better.

>>4441243
define professional looking photos
maybe you should share one of your own if youre so opinionated about what a professional photo looks like

>muh camera muh full frame muh mp
dont care

>like it or not photography is about presentation and aesthetics not just composition and content.
whats your point?

>do better. literally all of your nature shots look like phone smears and have randomly slightly out of focus foregrounds. i have seen vastly better looking work from other people even with the x-t2.
pixel peeping on compressed jpegs is the literal gayest shit ever. If a tiny pine shrub's needles are slightly higher resolution is that going to make your understanding of place and scale in this photo any better? You talk about aesthetics and presentation like you know something about either. Show me some of your landscapes you think are "vastly" better looking


>>4441246
if i shot in a studio i would probably use manual settings.

>>4441266
Your entire post is just "stop noticing things" but your photos are blurry. Is this the power of the average fuji person?
>No, I do not lack skill, I did not fuck up, if you can notice how I fucked up you need to stand 20 feet further back or only view on a phone or super tiny 10" netbook. SHOW ME YOURS STOP NOTICING THINGS!
Why is every fuji person like this? You lack skill. You didn't check focus. You didn't pay attention to your settings. All of your photos are half blurry in front and sorta blurry in back. It doesn't look good.

>>4441271
show me something that vastly looks better or maybe even one of your own photos

>>4441271
cuz they pay $1000 for a camera to hold themselves to the standards of a teenage girl with a phone. bad on purpose/not caring is zoomer cool. if you are smart or good at stuff that is incel rizz l, bruh. no soul. only incels are smart and good at stuff.

~vibes~

>>4441273
>My blurry foregrounds aren't blurry until you show me a sharp foreground, specifically yours
Why is every fuji person like this?

You have an expensive ass mirrorless camera that has been used to shoot vogue covers. Just check whats in focus before you move on and make sure you're using settings that don't look like m43.

Your post-processing screams early 00's, but it's actually quite stylish. I like it.

>>4441064
This one's surreal.

Ignore the gearfag nophoto, he's seething that someone had the nerve to actually go outside to take pictures.

>>4441275
If you want to act as an authority on presentation, aesthetics, composition, and content then you should qualify your criticism with your own work. If you shot more photos you might have a better understanding of what youre talking about. If you shared your own photos we could come to a mutual understanding of photography.

This is a sample image directly from sony's website for the Alpha 7 IV full frame camera. There is a slight degradation of sharpness in the foreground and background. Why? because thats how a fucking camera and focus works you fucking retard. Not to mention jpeg compression and atmospherics that also deteriorate sharpness. If you want every little tiny piece of texture and foreground and background to be as sharp as humanly possible then create composites in post processing.

>>4441286
>Being proud of shooting as poorly as a sony ad man that works for a playstation company
Back in the day people shooting on the nikon d300 knew how to turn a focus ring and stack out amateurish blurry foregrounds and keep the ISO and aperture until control so their landscape photos didnt look bad enough to necessitate "staaahp pixel peeping!" cope.

You have a ways to go, son. You sure bought the gear, but you're still a queer. 7/10 good intent too much fuji cope.

>>4441078
i've seen this one a few times and it's still awesome. saved. i'm starting to try such a dark, heavy style myself
>>4440814
the pieces of ice flying around are sik but i don't like the the framing on some of these. it feels like an awkward medium. too tight to get a feel of spacial context, too wide to abstract them
>>4440811 >>4440813 these two i think are stronger because they lean into one of those directions
>>4441111
blessed digits for a nice thread. absolutely CHECK'D

>>4441289
post some of your photos

>>4441291
>i've seen this one a few times and it's still awesome. saved.
thanks man. this is a mountain called Matterhorn Peak in the sawtooth range in california. My friend emily was leading the way because i was gassed and thats her in the photo. send me an email at lightwertks.contact @ gmail and i'll send you the high res photo if you want

Do you have an Instagram handle?

>>4440942
Ever heard of cars? They can get you places.

>>4441697
@lightwerks.studio