lighting is good. angle is not.

It was a really tight spot to shoot. Ideally would have shot square fish, but didn’t have one at the time. The wall is really really close so didn’t leave me with many options. Thanks

@andycollins let’s try to be a little more constructive/helpful. let’s not make this website about bashing and photo masturbation, let’s improve our craft.

The only thing bothering me is the truck thats peaking around the corner there. Maybe a small step to the right or just moving somewhere to frame the truck behind the wall entirely.

@jordanwiens – obviously the photog didn’t find it harsh, he explained his reasoning for shooting it that way. i can understand why he felt like he needed to shoot it that way. what i said is no different than saying “the lighting looks good, but i don’t dig the angle, maybe try ____________” except that i didn’t assume to know fuck-all about this spot. i have no clue what he should’ve tried to do because the photo gives me no clues to work with. the only thing i could’ve said was “get more of the run up” to which he could’ve replied “i can’t because _______________”. i wasn’t bashing, i was telling him that the lighting is good and that the angle is not.

@joshhotz – square fish looks like it would’ve been rad. no digi fish? it looks rough to shoot, esp with him being goofy foot. also, “i would’ve like to see more of the run up.”

I love blunt criticizim. And I think @ andycollins is wrong about the angle.

I love blunts too.

@andycollins , @jordanwiens wasn’t saying you were bashing. just giving a baseline for a good critique. Thanks everyone for the words and crit. Let’s all be happy and not fearful of speaking our minds on photos.

Truck, bad. Fisheye yes. Would have looked sick as a fishy shot. fickflip yes. dude’s got a sick flip and a high one at that.