HOME | DD

jmraspa — Cherry Blossom

Published: 2004-09-12 04:15:12 +0000 UTC; Views: 719; Favourites: 7; Downloads: 39
Redirect to original
Description A picture that I don't really like, but I'm sure someone out there will.
Related content
Comments: 21

missmichelle29 [2005-02-24 03:10:31 +0000 UTC]

that's beautiful!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

jmraspa In reply to missmichelle29 [2005-02-24 23:23:17 +0000 UTC]

Thank you! Wow, I haven't heard from you in a long time.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

brunette1985 [2005-02-23 03:33:25 +0000 UTC]

pretty.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MoroseInsomniac [2005-01-17 04:53:33 +0000 UTC]

Hrm. If I were you I'd've gotten a little more bokeh out of the backround; maybe even burned it out a bit more, just to bring more focus to the flower and tree in the foreground. Other than that, I think it's a good photo, regardless of cheesecake status.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ketz33 [2004-11-28 20:04:03 +0000 UTC]

you know why its hard not to take traditional photographs? because you recognize something so beautiful... something you come across that catches the eye. and it is something that catches alot of peoples eyes because of the beauty. so in that sense it is traditional. but it still an awesome picture. I like it

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

r34p3r [2004-11-15 22:25:26 +0000 UTC]

awesome shot
great color and depth perfect

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

jmraspa In reply to r34p3r [2004-11-16 05:29:07 +0000 UTC]

Thank you! And thank you for the !

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

elephunk [2004-11-10 19:23:31 +0000 UTC]

i am curious as to what kind of camera you use? i'm surprised that you don't like this shot, it's very unique.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

jmraspa In reply to elephunk [2004-11-10 21:57:38 +0000 UTC]

That was a Canon 10S, and I cropped the shot by about one third. I just don't like taking ocnventional pictures, but sometimes it's pretty hard not to.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

elephunk In reply to jmraspa [2004-11-10 22:11:50 +0000 UTC]

i understand that. thanks for getting back to me on that. do you use any sort of photo editing software?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

jmraspa In reply to elephunk [2004-11-11 06:20:35 +0000 UTC]

Photoshop, but ironically, only for the most basic adjustments, like levels, contrast, brightness, saturation. I pretty much use it to color correct my pictures after I scan them, and then I crop and add a border. Kind of a waste, huh?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

elephunk In reply to jmraspa [2004-11-11 13:44:51 +0000 UTC]

well, if it helps turn out the pictures, then i would guess that it wasn't a waste. anyway, i'm in search of a good camera, and i thought maybe you'd have some suggestions? i've been looking into photoshop anyway for awhile...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

jmraspa In reply to elephunk [2004-11-13 06:45:59 +0000 UTC]

Well, the camera that you get doesn't really matter. Just any SLR with a meter and a 50mm lens will get you what you need. Check eBay for something; I'm sure you can find something for under $100. Photoshop, however, is not really any good to you unless you understand the photography behind it. Knowing that the dodge tool will lighten things will not let you utilize it fully unless you also know that dodging is lowering the exposure of the picture. Stuff like that. If you can get access to a darkroom and some photography classes, I would recommend that over getting Photoshop. I had to relearn a lot of stuff because I learned Photoshop before photography.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

elephunk In reply to jmraspa [2004-11-13 23:40:29 +0000 UTC]

thanks for the advice. ^_^ i kind of want a camera that will do a lot of the work for me, i guess that's why i'm looking at pricer cameras. my family has a samsung digimax, and that thing doesn't do jack. i have some good shots, but they'd be better with a different camera, i have a feeling.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

jmraspa In reply to elephunk [2004-11-14 21:31:30 +0000 UTC]

well, it's never the camera; it's the discerning eye behind it. but decent equipment can make a difference. If you're looking into digital, i can't help you, but my friend ~lostinsanity03 can helo you out. He knows digital incredibly well, but has a slight bias towards Canon. If it's film you're interested in, talk to me, since that's my field.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

elephunk In reply to jmraspa [2004-11-15 03:17:27 +0000 UTC]

hmm. well, i dont really mind which type i get. i dont have access to a dark room, so all of my film would have to go through the grocery store. ~_~ that might be problematic.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

jmraspa In reply to elephunk [2004-11-15 05:16:04 +0000 UTC]

true, true. digital is probably the best to start with just so you can take LOTS of pictures on the cheap. talk to my friend, or check out this website, it has tons of good reviews.

[link]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Amaria [2004-09-12 23:11:13 +0000 UTC]

What the hell? You dont like this? Seriously? This is almost worse than the cheesecake.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

jmraspa In reply to Amaria [2004-09-12 23:38:54 +0000 UTC]

I think it's because this is a picture of flowers. Flowers are boring...unless I was a calendar photographer.

Speaking of cheesecake,


I still don't like it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Amaria In reply to jmraspa [2004-09-12 23:50:08 +0000 UTC]

Boring to photograph perhaps, but not boring to look at. Theyre one of the prettiest things God (or nature) has come up with.

Besides, its not the fact that its flowers that makes it pretty, its everything else. The dash of purple v. the blacks. The off centeredness. Good photo regardless of subject.

Mmm. Cheesecake. Weirdo.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

jmraspa In reply to Amaria [2004-09-12 23:33:28 +0000 UTC]

but cheesecake really is bad.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0