Haze Posted February 4, 2010 Report Share Posted February 4, 2010 I know not great but they are all I have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasu Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 They're JPGs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairman ali Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 They're JPGs. SO WHAT NOOB?! Work on your quality and effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niño Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 They're JPGs. SO WHAT NOOB?! Work on your quality and effects.OhMyFuxingGod. Quality is partially in the saved file type, example: JPEG is much, much lower then PNG. So your mother. ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairman ali Posted February 5, 2010 Report Share Posted February 5, 2010 They're JPGs. SO WHAT NOOB?! Work on your quality and effects.OhMyFuxingGod. Quality is partially in the saved file type' date=' example: JPEG is much, much lower then PNG. So your mother. ;D[/quote'] I didn't mean that quality, mr ass face. I meant the quality of using stocks. Not slapping on 1 stock with a bunch of colours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasu Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 They're JPGs. SO WHAT NOOB?! Work on your quality and effects.OhMyFuxingGod. Quality is partially in the saved file type' date=' example: JPEG is much, much lower then PNG. So your mother. ;D[/quote'] I didn't mean that quality, mr ass face. I meant the quality of using stocks. Not slapping on 1 stock with a bunch of colours. Take it easy Ken, there are better ways to express your thoughts.And the outcome is really important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niño Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 They're JPGs. SO WHAT NOOB?! Work on your quality and effects.OhMyFuxingGod. Quality is partially in the saved file type' date=' example: JPEG is much, much lower then PNG. So your mother. ;D[/quote'] I didn't mean that quality, mr ass face. I meant the quality of using stocks. Not slapping on 1 stock with a bunch of colours. Take it easy Ken, there are better ways to express your thoughts.And the outcome is really important.True that, sorry if I upset you babeh. ;] Oksie, CnC for the second one. The second one... is nice, the rainbow blend, or whatever, looks a bit odd directly at the bottom center of the image, to the left of the rainbow effect I just mentioned there are some pixely bits that can get quite distracting if you pick up on them, but because of the eye grabbing focal that shouldn't matter too much. x] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.