[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography

Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks Make sure to check your spam box!


[Catalog] [Archive]

File: images.jpg (37 KB, 697x440)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
I want to get into photojournalism but I have no idea how you would even start.

I want to go to dangerous areas and conflicts.
I assume you make your own connections with people who will take you places but what do you do from there?

How does one sell/get there images out there? How do you make a living off of it?
27 replies and 2 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3465884
I'm more a freelancer on riots/demonstrations here

I would say something about 80/100 bucks per act

it depends on the media that bought your pic, bigger the media or the exposure, better the money.

from my photoj mates I see working here, depends on the day. maybe 2k to 3k per month working almost everyday. if you have some dangerous assignment, it would be close to 4k.
>>
>>3465918
>Working everyday
> 2k or 3k

Wtf.
>>
File: 1553674796263.png (43 KB, 434x521)
43 KB
43 KB PNG
>turning to 4chan for career advice
>>
>>3465987
>>
>>3465987
this >>3465992 pretty much...

it's kinda depressing tbqh

File: six-shooter-IMG_2426.jpg (65 KB, 600x446)
65 KB
65 KB JPG
222 replies and 69 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3440766

Wow, that's awesome.
>>
>>3447613
that's a really boring picture
>>
cvatik
>>
File: weegee.jpg (37 KB, 400x487)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>3440766
>weegee
My african american.jpg
>>
>>3440766
I googled Jock, am I going to jail now?

File: _P3M0028.jpg (713 KB, 1500x1000)
713 KB
713 KB JPG
Went to a nearby park in the late afternoon, took some pics but I'm not really happy with them. Besides critique of these specific photos I'd like some pointers/tips/experiences on how to shoot in this particular environment, as I'm having trouble taking a good picture even if I see something interesting/nice. Also, what to do with all these boring-ass grey/green/brown colours?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSIGMA
Camera ModelSIGMA DP3 Merrill
Camera SoftwareSIGMA Photo Pro 6.4.1
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)75 mm
Serial Number90609357
Focal Length Range50
Firmware Version1.02.8.7091
Camera SoftwareSIGMA Photo Pro 6.4.1.4167
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution180 dpi
Vertical Resolution180 dpi
Image Created2019:04:14 21:44:47
Exposure Time1/160 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating100
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1500
Image Height1000
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Unique Image ID30303630393335371F3F864F31393143
Drive ModeSINGLE
ResolutionHI
Autofocus ModeAF-S
Focus SettingAF-S
White BalanceAuto
Exposure ModeA
Metering Mode8
Exposure-0.7
Contrast0
Shadow0
Highlight0
Saturation0
Sharpness-1
Fill Light0
Color Adjustment1
Adjustment ModeCustom
Quality10
20 replies and 18 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
File: 50-57035--3.jpg (536 KB, 1400x1100)
536 KB
536 KB JPG
>>3464744
You're taking shots you shouldn't be. And forest really isn't at its best right now. Especially when the sun is shining. Sparse leaves and sun combine for very high contrasting scenes. Very demanding shooting situations. You normally need some canopies to disperse the light when sun is out. You should be shooting meadows right now. Judging from the undergrowth, It'll take at least few weeks for greens to penetrate forest. Go back when all is green, improve your composition, and get a circ polarizing filter to help with high contrasting scenes, they do wonders with leaves of any kind. Also, go there midday, evening sun isn't very good for shooting in the forests because it's giving even harsher shadows, and ugly sun. It's different when you're shooting at the forest from longer ranges.
Exposure bracketing, fog, mist, rain, snow, panoramas, pathways, everything helps... Focus on details, flowers, leaves, trunk parts, look for cedars and bokehwhore. Closeup and macro in your conditions should work well, though.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3464797
Thanks, all of that makes sense.
>>
>>3464748
This one's decent.

I think the main problem with the other park pics is that they're just like "here's a tree" which is hard to do in an interesting way. I don't have any really good advice other than just don't take those pictures, which isn't particularly good advice. Maybe just keep trying and see if you can find some way to take a picture of a tree that no one has done a million times before.
>>
>>3464757
Aesthetically pleasing picture : good contrast, texture, well balanced composition. Only flaw : boring subject, but it doesn't matter.
>>
When it comes to shooting specific objects in nature, lighting is one thing but so is the subject.

Considering that fallen trees, dead trees, rocks, streams, litter, etc., are actually normal occurrences (for better or worse), there's a need to actually take a step back from taking a photo and reflect on the subject's significance, if it's one of the above. Look at your surroundings or consider the location and think about whether that object may have an actual story or force behind it. Usually, you may find that you take only one or two or zero pictures with this approach, and that's good enough. It's hard to make actually good pictures if you're shooting to shoot.

I think there also comes a time when it would help to research your subject and really build a relationship with it.

File: IMG_0764 (8) resize.jpg (1.19 MB, 1685x1123)
1.19 MB
1.19 MB JPG
Been ages, but finally went out and took some photos. It was just an hour and a half, but it felt good to dust off the camera again.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 5D Mark II
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width5616
Image Height3744
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:04:16 17:33:48
Exposure Time1/500 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length85.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1685
Image Height1123
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
10 replies and 5 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
They like very generic photos. Somewhere there is a garden, there is a skinny basic bitch in the shrubs making squinty faces
>>
>>3465383
Don't bother, he's a classic geartroll.

>>3465318
I like the greens, good colour, without being distracting.
>>3465323
>>3465321
Not a fan of the bokeyed foreground. I get it's supposed to give depth, but it's kind of ugly.
>>
mind the objects in the foreground. They're distracting. Specially when they're just some big blob
>>
>>3465318
Good photos, good model, good location.

My only advice would be to use slightly lower apertures. My experience has been that f/4 is usually around where I like to shoot to get the model looking nice and sharp but still with the background at a portraity level of out of focus and no missed focus. Especially when using something like a 5D2 where the autofocus system is kinda shitty.

I'll occasionally bokehwhore with an f/1.2, but f/4 is usually where I find I like the results best.

(Obviously this is subjective since you might just value shallow DoF over nailing focus and getting crisp shots more than I do, which is fine--like I said, I still really like the shots)
>>
>>3465383
I like the skin processing in this one, it's not over the top. I might have opted for a bit less though, cause in the OP (I guess also due to resizing) it looks a bit too smooth.

Also the shots look perfectly in focus to me.

File: pic (1).jpg (379 KB, 1080x721)
379 KB
379 KB JPG
Have fun.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution6300 dpi
Vertical Resolution6300 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
83 replies and 64 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
File: IMG-20190412-WA0008.jpg (147 KB, 1600x1200)
147 KB
147 KB JPG
My son took this on his S8
>>
The moab/creek photos are totally underwhelming and barely touch the potential of the area, which has been shot to death anyway. Its not enough to just shoot from the road.
>>
>>3463498
Yeah, I regret not taking the time to do that area right.

Any general thoughts from what you've seen otherwise?

Thank you for the comment.
>>
File: IMG_0274.jpg (289 KB, 1000x666)
289 KB
289 KB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 1300D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.1 (Windows)
PhotographerDavid Marrero
Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.5
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:04:15 01:32:53
Exposure Time15 sec
F-Numberf/11.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/11.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length18.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
There are some pretty good shots in here. Too many for detailed critique, but here are some of the ones I particularly like:

>>3461411
>>3461413 although clean your sensor/heal-tool your pics.
>>3461416
>>3461418
>>3461424 for some reason
>>3461442 Be honest: Did you set that structure on fire for the cool picture?
>>3462241
>>3462245 Aww, it's a family
>>3462251
>>3462295
>>3462300 but it would be better if it were a bit less blurry
>>3464870

Hey

Im thinking of starting a community where people can trade or give their unused equipment. Not for buying and selling (though you can negotiate something) but a place where people can donate or trade unwanted gear. I have a bunch of shit to give away because i mostly use nikon nowadays, but let me know if you guys are interested? Show me what you dont want and maybe youll want some of my gear

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width900
Image Height601
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3465681
you got any old digital point and shoot cameras?


The only foreseeable way this won't work is that people get greedy or don't follow through. For example pretty much every travel camera.
>>
>>3465697
When i say community i mean like a way of arbitration and pseudo identity. I was thinking a chatroom

And yeah i got a dozen old point and shoots, digital and film
>>
>>3465713
Well as far as I know, there's just /p/ discord servers. discord.gg/bMYJUCe
>>
>>3465768
Jesus that server is reddit

Join this instead


https://discord.gg/j8aH3vM

File: IMG_20180915_155719_HDR.jpg (4.99 MB, 4000x3000)
4.99 MB
4.99 MB JPG
>have more if interested

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeXiaomi
Camera ModelRedmi 5
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)4 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2018:09:15 15:57:19
Exposure Time1/50 sec
F-Numberf/2.2
Exposure ProgramNot Defined
ISO Speed Rating125
Lens Aperturef/2.2
Brightness2.8 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length3.83 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4000
Image Height3000
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Time (UTC)10:57:17
Date (UTC)2018:09:15
>>
Looks absolutely dreadful
>>
Well it's good that you toned down on the snapseed abuse

There's too much in the photo without a clear focal point, yes you have the lines leading towards the bridge but it's really hard to follow them

Personally I'd crop it to a portrait shot and use the bridge as a focal point, have the river be a diagonal leading up to it
>>
>posting 5mb phone photos
>>
File: moab1.jpg (4.58 MB, 4500x3000)
4.58 MB
4.58 MB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-6000
Camera SoftwareILCE-6000 v3.10
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)82 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution350 dpi
Vertical Resolution350 dpi
Image Created2019:03:26 15:50:22
Exposure Time1/160 sec
F-Numberf/5.0
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating100
Brightness7.2 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Auto
Focal Length55.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3464189
Not terrible, especially for a cellphone shot.

Would've been better if you hadn't clipped the peak of the mountain in the background (especially since the river leads the eye right back there), and would be better with better gear and some editing, but subject and composition are decent.

File: 20190413_225411.jpg (1.92 MB, 4032x2268)
1.92 MB
1.92 MB JPG
pic from recently, how much of the black space around the main shape should I leave? I think fuck it all of it, would like other thoughts

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Makesamsung
Camera ModelSM-G930V
Camera SoftwareG930VVRU4BQH4
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)26 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4032
Image Height2268
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:04:13 22:54:11
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/1.7
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating64
Lens Aperturef/1.7
Brightness2.2 EV
Exposure Bias-0.6 EV
Metering ModeSpot
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length4.20 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4032
Image Height2268
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Unique Image IDC12QSJK01SM
>>
>>3464289
>I think fuck it all of it
If by this you mean "fuck it, I should leave all of the black space around the main shape", then I disagree.

If by that you mean "fuck it, fuck all of it, fuck this photo entirely", then that's closer to my feelings on it.

It's just not a very interesting photo. The "main shape" isn't really much more interesting to look at than any other picture of fluorescent lighting, it's all underexposed, and it just generally has the feel of a photo taken by accident while looking at the lens to see if you got a fingerprint on it.
>>
You have to think like a mosquito dude

They're prison cells with fluorescent bars

File: FILE0043.jpg (315 KB, 1600x1200)
315 KB
315 KB JPG
The London Underground, 2005

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Makewww.axisoft.com
Camera ModelH-10
Camera SoftwareEXIF Software Version 0.06a
Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2005:06:04 18:28:21
Exposure Time1/30 sec
F-Numberf/3.5
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating100
Exposure Bias1/11 EV
Metering ModeAverage
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length7.45 mm
Commentv1.405_20040419000854
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1600
Image Height1200
82 replies and 38 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3464040
Turn your trip back on, ambush. And you’re not really thinking the occasional shitty deer in a containment thread outweighs the incessant stream of shitposting all over the board, right?
>>
>>3460461
>>3460464
>>3460465
>>3460496
some of these people were looking at phones, are you blind? texting was huge back in 2005
>>
>>3460425
I just knew it was going to have Mitchell in it. Fucking repost of a repost of a repost.
>>
Lived in London 2010-2015. Definitely didn't have the same pleasant atmosphere as these photos by the time I left.
>>
>>3460447
Now be good children and go to sleep at bedtime or curvyman will slither into your bedrooms and steal all of your hair and shirts.

File: fate.jpg (3.25 MB, 4608x3456)
3.25 MB
3.25 MB JPG
Hi I love taking photos but I haven't been officially judged or criticised and I would really appreciate any feedback on some photos I upload. Will start with this one. Please don't hesitate to rip into it or whatever. Also, non photoshopped.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON
Camera ModelCOOLPIX L810
Camera SoftwareCOOLPIX L810 V1.0
Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.1
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created0000:00:00 00:00:00
Exposure Time1/400 sec
F-Numberf/3.9
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating80
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length9.30 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4608
Image Height3456
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlLow Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SharpnessHard
Subject Distance RangeMacro
Color ModeB & W
Image QualityNORMAL
White BalanceAUTO
Image SharpeningNORMAL
Focus ModeAF-S
ISO SelectionAUTO
Image AdjustmentNORMAL
Focus Distancex0.5 m
Auto FocusSingle Area, Top Selected, Center Focused
Scene ModeCOPY
SaturationNormal
Noise ReductionOFF
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3462623
I see a ballsack on one of the rocks
>>
>>3462623
>I haven't been officially judged or criticised
4chan official photo judge here, I give it 5 keks
>>
hi, okay overall ive derived that defo need focus for next time thats true. Thanks all, ill be posting more though maybe this thread is dead cos im shit at quick reponses so il upload on a new thread. ALSO with the feedback in mind im gonna try upload a focused picture mayb you'll figure it out. WITH Colour and no ballsack
>>
It's just a slow board. Your thread is likely gonna be around for a while. We already have threads for constructive criticism though.
>>
>>3462623
Kind of a messy composition. It's unclear to be what the subject is supposed to be, exactly--the thing most in focus is the tree on the far left; the thing that's most interesting is the rocky thing in the lower left corner; there's a leading line with the path but it leads kind of nowhere; there's the other two rock formation; there's the entire top half of the photo which just kind of looks like nothing. It's hard to tell the scale of things, or even their position in the frame, from how you've composed the shot. Could be enormous rock formations. Could be medium-sized close rock formations with a baby conifer in front of them.

I'd also recommend doing a bit of editing on it. Contrast is very low, which gives it a very gray feel overall. Personal preference, but I'd punch it up with some higher contrast, after going back and fixing the composition.

File: DSCN2171.jpg (241 KB, 1024x768)
241 KB
241 KB JPG
Hey /p/ol I come forward with a few simple questions and hopefully a good solution to my following problem.
I'll be going to a concert in the soon-far future and I was already thinking of bringing my camera with me only to find out they don't even allow gopros inside.
Have any of you encountered this sort of problem in the past? What did you end up settling for? Did you somehow smuggle a camera inside anyways or did you sort to buying a phone that has an okayish camera? What would you recommend?
inb4 "just shove the gopro up your ass"
inb4 op can't inb4
Have one of my shitty pictures as an offering

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON
Camera ModelCOOLPIX L110
Camera SoftwareCOOLPIX L110V1.4
Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)414 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2012:08:24 12:00:52
Exposure Time5/298 sec
F-Numberf/5.4
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating115
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length75.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1024
Image Height768
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlLow Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
Color ModeCOLOR
Image QualityNORMAL
White BalanceAUTO
Image SharpeningAUTO
Focus ModeAF-S
ISO SelectionAUTO
Image AdjustmentAUTO
Lens AdapterOFF
Auto FocusCenter
Scene ModePARTY/INDOOR
SaturationNormal
Noise ReductionOFF
4 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3464792
Illegal through northern hemisphere. I'm afraid.
>>
File: Muse-2000x3000.jpg (386 KB, 2000x3000)
386 KB
386 KB JPG
>>3464691
>not wanting to relive a fun experience
Why even take photos asshole? Best decision I made was sneaking a 360° cam into a Muse concert. I can put on my VR headset and it's like I'm right back there. Are you going to get better photos than the people in the press box; no. But you'll get to take them from your viewpoint and thats what matters.
>>
File: DG-0018.jpg (1022 KB, 686x1000)
1022 KB
1022 KB JPG
>>3464674
Just use a small point and shoot. Odds are when they say "no cameras" they mean no professorial gear. Big fuck off DSLRs with big zoom lenses etc.
Went to this concert and the security guards patted everyone down, dude felt something in my pocket and I showed him my camera, he was like"dafuq is this?" told him it was a camera and let me in. Camera I had was a Ricoh RT-550.
>pic related

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakePlustek
Camera ModelOpticFilm 8100
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 7.3.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution0 dpi
Vertical Resolution0 dpi
Image Created2019:04:17 21:48:51
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3464674
>/p/ol
end yourself
>>
>>3465692
>advocating genocide
See, this is what we fight.

File: 1475607596001.jpg (100 KB, 1024x737)
100 KB
100 KB JPG
Which lens is the best deal, the original Canon for $350 USED, or a new Yongonu for $200.
Both case there's no real warranty.
>>
I'm assuming from the prices that you're talking about the companies' respective 35mm f/2.0 lenses.

I've owned them both and the Yongnuo's actually not that bad. Build quality is shit (it feels almost exactly like the old EF 50mm f/1.8 II), but image quality is fine, and the genuine Canon 35/2 isn't *that* much better (notably its AF motor sounds like a swarm of angry little bees).
>>
>>3465683
I'm talking about the 85mm.
It's the reliability factor which worries me. Also I read the AF isn't as accurate.
>>
>>3465684
Ahh. I don't have experience with the Yongnuo 85, but I've got the Canon 85/1.8 and it's one of my top-two most used lenses. AF is accurate and it's been extremely reliable over the years I've owned it (after buying it used). So given the issues you've heard about the yongnuo, probably better to invest the extra $150 for the Canon.
>>
>>3465684
Optically it's ok, but the autofocus is just slow and loud. Get the Canon used.

Stay from the Yongnuo 100mm btw, that's a bit of a turd.
>>
File: 1499968404961.jpg (621 KB, 1024x683)
621 KB
621 KB JPG
>>3465687
>>3465688
TY girls.

File: 64330031.jpg (1.29 MB, 1306x1947)
1.29 MB
1.29 MB JPG
What is, in your opinion, the best photo (OC) you've ever seen posted on this board?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNoritsu Koki
Camera ModelQSS
Camera SoftwarePhotos 1.5
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72
Vertical Resolution72
Image Created2018:07:18 14:36:32
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1306
Image Height1947
24 replies and 11 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3464245
Thanks so much anon, I had it saved before on an old phone and I haven't been able to find it again.
>>
File: DSC_2590.jpg (402 KB, 1000x1000)
402 KB
402 KB JPG
>>
>>3461909
>>3462094
>>3462136
ken is the greatest photog of all time
plebs will disagree
>>
File: yalll.jpg (221 KB, 1000x857)
221 KB
221 KB JPG
>>3461247
I always liked Yall.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 450D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution1205 dpi
Vertical Resolution1205 dpi
Image Created2010:06:25 23:24:37
Exposure Time1/100 sec
F-Numberf/4.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Lens Aperturef/4.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1000
Image Height857
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
File: 64100027.jpg (1.1 MB, 1306x1947)
1.1 MB
1.1 MB JPG
>>3464291
He didn't get a lot of love in his thread but I honestly think his photos are brilliant.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNoritsu Koki
Camera ModelQSS
Camera SoftwarePhotos 1.5
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72
Vertical Resolution72
Image Created2018:07:18 11:57:54
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1306
Image Height1947

File: petracollins.jpg (142 KB, 1000x1046)
142 KB
142 KB JPG
your thoughts on petra collins body of work?
>>
Breaking into the photography scene at the age of 15, Petra Collins’ gaze was an inspiration to men and women, young and old. Taking the worlds of fashion and art by storm, Collins’ work celebrates the female body and works to capture femininity honestly, channelling her feminism into the lens. From capturing her teen peers in the late 2000s, to shooting the likes of Kim Kardashian and Lil Yachty in 2018, her work evokes intimacy and poignancy even in the simplest of moments. Using light as her tool, Collins shines beams of neon and brightness onto her subjects, bringing the film alive. An artist who breathed fresh life into the fashion industry, the female gaze became a promising and continuing part of activism in photography.
>>
>>3464497
She has a thing with lil people and said lil people lips n mouths, but they doesnt come up as pervert pics but rather as a normal artistic picture PLUS she has a dark bloody side which is always good to see (even though is pretty cliche and bland though)
>>
garbage, a bunch of formal words to glorify someone doesn’t make them good. She’s trash, lots of similar and better styles on instagram before her.
>>
>>3464497
had to look her up.. meh
if it works for her, great. but i find it pretty boring

File: 1969-12-31 05.00.00 4.jpg (2.39 MB, 3984x2988)
2.39 MB
2.39 MB JPG
LG G4

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera ModelLG-H812
Camera SoftwareVSCO Android Version
Sensing MethodUnknown
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2019:04:07 10:57:03
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
F-Numberf/1.8
Focal Length4.42 mm
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Exposure ModeAuto
Image Height2988
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Exposure ProgramNot Defined
White BalanceAuto
Image Width3984
Metering ModeUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Brightness0 EV
ISO Speed Rating50
Exposure Time1/1171 sec
>>
Okay
>>
Dreadful picture.
>>
i think it'll look cooler if the parts at the bottom right weren't there


Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.