>>4081703>you failed even at 18% gray.
It was never my goal. Exposure compensation exists for a reason. The world isn't 18% gray.> I'm not seeing where you would dodge and burn your piece of shit photo to improve it. Baby steps my guy. Learn to get a basic exposure first and then you can worry about your master stroke dodging and burning.
lol, you're the type to let the camera tell you what to do>You are the only person saying this.
You said "better to not post anything then", in /p/ jargon that's a "nophoto".>This only happens when you have bad, retarded opinions. Again, 16 years, lots of opinion posts, no doxxing.
No, that happens when you have unpopular opinions. Not a worry if you'reparroting the status quo.>Nah, check exif data in the RPT. There are lots of unique camera and lens combos. Even still, there aren't a few dozen doxxings, so your point is still moot.
I can count at least 7 doxings and attempts, at least one swatting and more and I'm not here 24/7 or anything. >That's because you're self-satisfied with sub-standard work and you think that no one "gets" you.
No, the public is. I have deleted pictures that got a bunch of likes and comments because I knew they were bad so I felt disgusted by the plebs who thought they were good. If someone has no critical eye they don't deserve to see my work. I'd rather be told something I've done sucks than be praised for it. I don't agree with everything you say about the one picture I posted here, but if you called it good I'd actually be mad and probably hating myself (and you as well) for having posted it.>You're just not a very good photographer
Fair, I don't consider myself particularly good.>because you've convinced yourself from the outset that you should only take the photos that present themselves to you.
That's the complete opposite of what I believe. The best photography is the one that takes the most from the photographer. The best photograph is the one that is the most filled with intent.