[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


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: DSC_5572-460.jpg (79 KB, 460x588)
79 KB
79 KB JPG
JPG Edition

Previous: >>3460482
Post stupid questions that need no extra thread. Use /gear/ for gear related stupid questions.
>>
Can i get some film making resources?
>>
>>3467529
Whats better or the difference between a 35mm macro lens and a 100mm one, both canon.
>>
>>3467529
Is this man a meme or not. I seriously can't tell.
>>
I'm follwing what he says but I end up with a pink border around the selection I've made once it's completed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOPHbSgJUSI
What has gone wrong?
>>
>>3467553
Kinda. The dude's website is GOAT for general info regarding gear, mostly has good advice for taking photos/noobs outside of the whole jpg thing, and is majorly antigearfagging while not taking himself seriously at all.
>>
>>3467529
A friend of mine just gave me an old Minolta X-700, Minolta F/1,7 50mm lense on it and a Tokina AT-X 60-120mm F/2,8.
I replaced the batteries and the camera seems to work, will shoot a test roll of film soon.
All of them look like mint condition.
Are they any good?
Are there adapters for Minolta MD to Canon EF?
>>
File: ken phallus.png (32 KB, 619x307)
32 KB
32 KB PNG
>>3467560
>>
>>3467584
is this a joke
>>
>>3467590
Even if it's totally true, it's still a good joke.
>>
>>3467553
He shoots unedited jpg on full auto.
>>
>registered for an online photography fundamentals class for shits and giggles at my university
>care so little about it that I've put off looking at assignments for the past two weeks
>there's an assignment due tomorrow at noon
>if I miss just one assignment, an A grade is impossible, thus my perfect GPA is dead

The prof's grading for aesthetics and technicals on two photos that demonstrate motion blur and fast shutter speed. What should I take pictures of?

I was going to take two pictures of some branches and leaves swaying violently in the spring wind, one at 1/500 and another at 1", but my heart sank when the assignment said that the pictures' aesthetics mattered as well.
>>
File: ken baby.jpg (95 KB, 692x428)
95 KB
95 KB JPG
>>3467590
>is this a joke
Ken has some wise words on many topics.
>>
>>3467680
Pictures of you jerking off, super high contrast, crank dehaze, drop color temp
>>
>>3467538
No, your chances of making your own film are approximately zero. If you want to get involved in that process start looking into wet plate colloidon.
>>
File: ken kids.png (280 KB, 750x1334)
280 KB
280 KB PNG
is ken redpilled?
>>
File: ken sony.png (15 KB, 561x152)
15 KB
15 KB PNG
>>
My Pentax K-3 is acting up. It'll freeze up. I'll have a photo on the back screen but it'll just freeze and still be up after I've turned the camera off. I have to pop the battery. I've reached out to Pentax and they said they'll be getting back to me. Has this happened to anyone else?
>>
>>3467704
>they said they'll be getting back to me.
That's what I'd say too.
>>
>>3467668
I bought a fotasy adapter with glass in it from amazon. Can’t speak for other brands, but the image quality with that one was absolutely affected. Blech. Looked like there was a thin coat of vasoline on the lens.
>>
How does Live view & video recording work on a DSLR
I'm assuming the mirror stays up in both cases, but what happens to the shutter?
>>
>>3467786
Really fast wow!
>>
>>3467795
Soo it's the actual physical shutter that does the 60(30?) Hz movement all the time?

I mean, given how there's a finite amount of actuations a shutter can handle, I'd imagine that's kinda not the case?
>>
I'm trying to remember the name of a camera, think it was M4/3, that had a pop up viewfinder that pointed straight up where you had to look down into it
>>
>>3467796
It's the electronic shutter. Imagine the shutter noises in a video if it was the mechanical shutter.
>>
>>3467805
Well yeah, that's what I was wondering

Soo the mechanical shutter fully opens and electronic takes over?
>>
If I use copper shims on my adapters, I can regain the hard-stop of infinity focus instead of having to fight for it, right?
Will the same shimming (the exact same, not just the concept) work for every lens that pairs with that adapter, then?
>>
>>3467817
Yes the sensor is permanently exposed to light.
>>
Should I go for a 15mm or a 21mm prime for generic and some landscapes? I already have a nifty 35mm and find it quite restricting most of the time.
Using APS-C camera btw.
>>
>>3467804
GX7
>>
>>3467830
I use 16mm most of the time of my kit lens for general street use, so 15 for me. Then use my 30 1.4 for portraits if I need a thinner dof. Both in apsc.
>>
any full Nikon full frames worth looking for? I'm currently using a D3300 and I was thinking of getting a used full frame.
>>
>>3467867
D750 or D800
>>
>>3467867
fucker beat me to it >>3467926
>>
>>3467931
I was very tempted to put "used K1" at the end there, but I didn't
>>
>>3467680
how can anyone qualify aesthetics? feels the same as grading 'creativity'
>>
>>3467968
Given that it's a "fundamentals" class I'm guessing OP probably just needs to stick to either the rule of thirds or the golden ratio
Probably enough
>>
>>3467855
Thank you
>>
>>3467694
hahahah hell yeah dude nice
>>
File: 1547056933613.jpg (1008 KB, 2048x1366)
1008 KB
1008 KB JPG
What is your best guess as to how this picture was taken?
>>
I have a potentially broken film camera lying around and don't know how to use it, so I was just fiddling with it. I used the film advance lever while the camera had no film in it and now the lever doesn't fully extend and gets stuck midway. Is this normal? How do I reset it? It has a dead battery if that matters.
>>
What advantages do DSLRs still have over mirrorless?
>>
>>3468072
They are much larger and heavier, which makes you feel special and important.
>>
>>3468072
Battery life. Difference is huge. Also, Live View from viewfinder. No delay, no blackout.
>>
really started taking the whole "one you have with you" thing seriously recently
i can't always be with my camera and in the past i hated my cheap cellphone camera. was considering dropping huge bucks to get a high end one with a good camera
now i pay more attention to stuff like angles, composition, etc. now i like my phone camera photos a whole lot more now and i'm less inclined to spend money to upgrade it. pretty satisfying feeling
>>
File: 71zntY9vSaL._SL1500_.jpg (152 KB, 1500x1500)
152 KB
152 KB JPG
What SD cards do you guys use?
I need one for the em10 M2, and i'm not sure if i should go U3 or U1.
was thinking about pic related.
>>
>>3468032

with a camera
>>
>>3468032
Post process grayscale bar, rest was done with the camera.
>>
what can i use to diffuse flash with one like this
>>
File: VCXZCXVXCVVXCVXC.jpg (587 KB, 4032x3024)
587 KB
587 KB JPG
>>3468129

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationRight-Hand, Top
>>
>>3468130
A fifty dollar milk jug
>>
Is it a common practice to scrub certain less meaningful exif? Can processing software tools do that? My uploads feel spammy because the exif trail is so long.
>>
>>3468180
Nah.
I honestly scrub it anyway. Generally including it does no good once you have a basic grasp of the triangle settings, and doesn't really inform anyone curious about a shot anything useful.
>>
Is it true that micro SD with adapter is slower than full SD card in camera?
>>
wondering if I should get a sony fullframe dslm
thought about getting a fuji aps c mirrorless camera to upgrade from my old ass nikon dslr but I heard a sony a7/a7r is about the same size as something like the xt2/txt3?

any reason not to go full frame? because what Im thinking is, I'm going to invest quite some money into my hobby, why not get into full frame if I'm already about to spend so much money
>>
>>3467543
Working distance
>>
>>3467688
Kinda feels like the Ken M from those facebook posts
>>
File: cable release.png (1.69 MB, 1255x921)
1.69 MB
1.69 MB PNG
>>3467529
Is there one universal type of screw-in cable release, or are they different for each manufacturer? Does this look like it would work with a Nikon SLR?
>>
>>3468249
The adapter is straight pin to pin so it's as fast as the micro SD
That being said full sized SD cards tend to have better performance and more write cycles.
>>
How do I copyright my images in bulk? What cost can I expect? I'm building a site and want to protect my stuff. I'm in EU if that changes anything.
>>
Heading into a forest to shoot with someone
What can I bring to create some sort of atmospheric dust/fog?
>>
>>3468378
Smoke bomb (don't start a forest fire), over driven vape, dust, marking chalk dust (you can find it in hardware stores).
>>
>>3468350
Thanks anon, and yes it's old.
>>
>>3468339
Thanks, ill stick to the extreme pro.
>>3468378
Some places sell dry ice, dont touch it though, just drop it in a bucket up high.
The smoke travels quite far.
>>
Which software has the most robust export options? I would like to make profiles defining size, format, quality, and save them such that I may export the exact same profiles in the future. I'd have a /p/ profile, twatter, website, maybe large profile to share with the family. I'm using Darktable currently and it's annoying to tweak preferences, export a set, repeat. Anybody have a decent flow down?
>>
>>3468202
I've clearly outed myself as a nub. I can't get enough of anons' photos with exif, though all I've found insightful is aperture, iso, and shutter speed. Maybe camera model is interesting, too.
What would a much more experienced photographer care to look at in exif, if they cared to? That's a loaded question I realize that, but answer however.
>>
>>3468681
I only look at exif if someone is asking for help, and then it's more of to get a clue as to how (usually also if) they're thinking about exposure.
>>
Is the lens cap size the same as the filter size? I'd like to figure out the lens cap size for a 85mm 1.8 lens (sony)
>>
File: irfanview.jpg (342 KB, 2009x793)
342 KB
342 KB JPG
>>3468675
Not sure if it's what you're looking for, but I've been using irfanview for well over a decade for image viewing & organizing.
You can save profiles for jpeg, has a bunch of other save options, I've yet to find an image file it can't open, it has batch rename & conversion...
>>
I will be going to China on a scholarship.
I never had a real camera, I always used a panasonic lumix compact but nothing more.
Thinking of getting a sony a7III, plan on shooting lots of shit a t night, is this a good first "real" camera??
>>
been away a while, occasional lurker. do astrophotography generals appear anymore? I always liked to see the night skies that anons used to post here
>>
>>3468896
It's a good camera, but you have to think of interchangeable lens cameras as systems. Sony E mount is not a particularly good system because the lenses cost more than their Nikon/Canon counterparts while often being optically inferior. If you have heaps of money, go for it, otherwise go Nikon/Canon. Canon lenses are usually sharper than Nikon ones, but it's a huge difference and it's not every lens. If you buy Nikon anything after and including the D800 is perfectly good, if you're getting Canon get at least the 5DmIV because the 5DmIII had some questionable DR and high ISO noise.
>>
>>3468974
>>3468896
And by "lenses cost more" I mean potentially a LOT more. There are older Nikon/Canon lenses that are as good if not better than their modern Sony equivalents and cost a third of the price or less. With more modern optically stabilised glass it's a bit closer, but they're usually still more expensive. You can get the original Nikon 24-70/2.8 VR for about half as much as the Sony 24-70/2.8 GM will cost you.
>>
>read or watch camera review
Reviewer starts talking about video/4k
How many people that buy cameras care about that I've had my dslr for years and don't think I've ever touched the video stuff
>>
>>3469005
Normies
>>
>>3469005
>read or watch camera review
>Reviewer starts out with begging for viewers to SMASH the like button, become his patreon, buy his presets, t-shirts, photo courses, and to follow him on all social medias

I give it a dislike then scroll forward a few mins to see if they actually talk about the title
>>
File: Untitled.jpg (215 KB, 1900x1029)
215 KB
215 KB JPG
Are post processing questions allowed here?

Just wondering if anyone knows how to achieve an effect as seen here, or if this has a name so that I can look it up? I'm trying to imitate this.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Softwarepaint.net 4.0.21
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution96 dpi
Vertical Resolution96 dpi
>>
>>3469119
Isn't that just a shitty printer?
>>
>>3468966
No but there should be since Astro Reddit is full of people who's advice is to just spend another $2k
>>
>>3469119
Looks like some late 90's cut out that teenager chicks would do with their scissors. Cheap printer, regular paper, ccd digital pnshoot, and very rough cutout from background in any editing program. Plus a bit of shadow effect.
>>
>>3469311
>>3469407
Sorry, I think its because I took a shitty picture of it. Heres a much better example. Any ideas?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>
>>3469436
Colored bw photo.
>>
How to get this look?

https://www.instagram.com/p/BwnDR_wlxmO/

>inb4 overexpose, up brightness in post

I know it seems that simple but when I do that it will oversaturate everything. And even when I fuck around with the colors it just won't work.
>>
I'd love to hear some fellow amateur editing workflows. Does anyone use tagging or rating or any other prevalent qualification schemes?
>>
>>3467657
Most of his photos are massively overexposed snapshits. It's kind of crazy that he thinks he's a pro.
>>
>>3469436
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDyqmUKjNdg
>>
So I’ve been learning a bit about crop factor and what. I’ve gotta be missing something because people seem to say the photo quality so close enough that it’s not a huge issue unless you’re doing very high res stuff. So why wouldn’t you slap a 200mm lens on a MFT camera and get an effectively 400mm lens after crop factor without the cost of a 400mm lens on a full frame camera? Is there more noise or something?

I’ve been getting into photography for a couple weeks, so I’m sure there’s a simple answer I’m missing.
>>
File: esper.jpg (123 KB, 1920x790)
123 KB
123 KB JPG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uGV7Zb7Bgg
What camera specs would you need to be able to zoom in on a picture like in Blade Runner, e.g. I wanted to take a landscape shot and when I get to a PC have a nose about and see what everyone was doing at the time
>>
How do I shoot concerts with a fisheye lens?
>>
File: laserss.jpg (3.74 MB, 1604x5502)
3.74 MB
3.74 MB JPG
>>3469642
mft only recently got true pro telephoto lenses. It's not as cheap when you start looking at the price of those. But yes, crop actually comes handy on longer ranges. Many wildlife photogs have in the past shot apsc dslr's just for that extra reach they give you.
>>3469644
Something like this?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:04:25 18:12:58
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1604
Image Height5502
>>
>>3469658
Exactly like that
>>
>>3469448
>>3469539
Thanks guys. Any way to do that without doing it by hand? and it needs to be done in a way that doesn't look realistic, but instead, stylized.
>>
>>3467529
https://kenrockwell.com/2000/images/video/rockwell.MPG
Jesus christ what's wrong with this guy? Someone fucking stop him, he's out of control
>>
Any film emulation presets for rawtherapy and how to use them?
I ditched winblows and unfortunately lightroom with it and am learning how to edit with rawtherapy.
Are there any film emulation presets available, and if so how to implement them?
>>
>>3469777
There's fuji luts for darktable
>>
>>3469777
No idea about rawtherapy. But darktable calls them styles, and they've huge database here:
https://dtstyle.net/
They have usual film emulations.
>>
>>3467699
Based
>>
I'm fucking confused and a little retarded, please enlighten me: isn't a mirrorless just a DSLR without a view finder? What's the big fucking deal?
>>
>>3469851
Well mirrorless cameras often have viewfinders, just electronic ones. So you have to be more precise, and say "mirrorless cameras are just DSLR's without the SLR/Mirror optical viewfinder".
>>
I’m going to be teaching a workshop in the near future and was wondering if it’s possible to display the EVF of my camera on a tv in real time. Is this as simple as tethering or do I need to do something else?
>>
File: p thr 3467529 po 3468032.jpg (2.28 MB, 2048x1366)
2.28 MB
2.28 MB JPG
>>3468032
By a noob?
>>
How am I supposed to take a good self portrait of my own asshole?

Do I need to buy a mini tripod?
>>
>>3469642
Not just for telephoto work but also good for macro work since deeper DOF in relation to the len's sweet spot. MFT in general has probably more pronounced noise especially when in low light scenarios. Also, most MFT cameras are probably limited to 20mp for now but some have high res option (combined images) as long as there is no movement whithin the scene. Some also can do 60 fps shooting stills probably because of the smaller sensor size. So overall there are advantages and tradeoffs if I'm correct.
>>
>>3469919
I have seen 2 dollar chink mini tripods for mirrorless/dslrs. Get a macro lens then use your mobile phone remote app to precisely focus on the wriggling parasite peeping out from your asshole.
>>
>>3469931
>use your mobile phone remote app
Already am.

>I have seen 2 dollar chink mini tripods for mirrorless/dslrs.
Guess I'll just have to buy one I thought they were silly but after trying all sorts of shit I see no better solution.

>to precisely focus on the wriggling parasite peeping out from your asshole.
I'm just trying to nail focus and framing for a shot with the largest toy in with some bokeh for my patreon. No parasites.
>>
>>3469851
>no mirror
>no mirror slap
>shutter is therefore almost completely silent, or actually completely silent if you use electronic shutter
>you can do focus peaking in the viewfinder since the viewfinder is essentially a live preview screen
>viewfinder benefits from the fact that image sensors see more in low light than the human eye, so they can be brighter in low light situations where it's difficult to compose your shot through an optical viewfinder
>viewfinder has a bit of delay between moving the camera and displaying shit because it's not optical (this varies and is usually only a couple of milliseconds, but you still notice it a lot with slower ones because human reflexes are pretty good)
>viewfinder has a limited resolution, dumb boomers sometimes lie and say they can see the pixels
>jewish companies can sell them for more money than DSLRs because muh innovation when in reality it's just a DSLR with a tiny second screen instead of a mirror
>shit battery life due to viewfinder consuming energy
That's about it
>>
File: Olympus-XA2.jpg (13 KB, 400x300)
13 KB
13 KB JPG
I wanna get into film photography. I have 3 film cameras at my disposal, an Olympus XA-2, a Pentax ME F, and a Kodak Ektralite 10.
Which one would be best to learn on? Probably gonna rule out the Ektralite right away, so it's between the XA-2 and the ME F.
I've browsed through archives of this board and there seems to be a lot of debate as to whether you should start with a simple point and shoot or an SLR, so I guess I'm just looking for some more opinions.
>>
UV filters, yes or no? I always use hoods anyway.
>>
>>3470002
A film camera is basically a box that only lets in light through one specific hole and has a way to accurately control how long that hole is open. Everything else is just extra features, and image quality will depend on the lens in front of the camera and the person behind it. I think the XA-2's lens is widely regarded to be pretty sharp and it's decently fast for daytime shooting.
A good SLR will have TTL metering, an optical viewfinder instead of a rangefinder, exposure compensation, shutter priority, etc. But you don't necessarily need those to take nice pictures, they just save you some time and effort. The main reason to get an interchangeable lens camera is to be able to shoot at different focal lengths. You can't really shoot closeup portraits with a 35mm lens, you can't shoot subjects that are far away, you can't shoot any wider than 35mm for wide angle landscape shots, you can't get a shallower dof than what the 35/3.5 gives you, etc.
But for general use, street photography, touristy kind of pictures, etc a 35mm lens is pretty good. I wouldn't recommend buying it because it has meme status and therefore pretty expensive for what it is, but since you already have it you should try it out.
If you find yourself constantly wishing you had different focal lengths or the lens was faster get some lenses for your pentax.
>>
>>3470002
Use the XA-2 first off to learn composition then slowly transition to the ME F to learn about the exposure triangle
>>
>>3470018
CPL or ND might be more useful.
>>
>>3470018
UV filters are useful if you are shooting film, on digital cameras they serve no real purpose except producing a slight colorcast (depends on the model).
If you want to protect your front element from sand, water or whatever is present in the environment you're shooting in you would be better served with a clear filter (a B+W 007M for example but a lot of manufacturers make them).
For impacts the hood is usually a better protection.
>>
Goddamnit, anyone?
My 6D + Speedlite in nightclubs is missing focus a lot. I went back to my 6D after my 5DIII got stolen. But I can't remember it being this fucking bad. It will nail focus once in a while. Then it will miss like 15 shots. Fuck this. Is it the cam or do I have a bad copy of the lens?

Think I will start using my 5DIV from now on. It's really infuriating.
>>
>>3469917
Any tips for editing, All I can do is mess with sliders
>>
I recently got a tiffen red 25 filter for my D7100. The idea being that it'd make shooting for black and white more fun and help visualize the monochrome better. Playing around with it makes it seem obvious though that it's playing total havoc with my light meter. Any tips for adjusting your metering with colored filters?
>>
What do you guys think about the new Schoolboy Q album? What do you guys listen to when youre out shooting?
>>
>>3470410

Are you taking into account the filter factor? You have to compensate by increasing your exposure by 3 stops because it’s reducing the light entering your lens.
>>
File: IMG_20190426_230241.jpg (2.77 MB, 3024x4032)
2.77 MB
2.77 MB JPG
>>3470031
Holy shit, you mentioned that it's expensive now due to meme status. I bought this thing for like $20 off eBay about a decade ago (middle school hipster phase).
Just checked the current prices, what the fuck
>>
>>3470453
Sell it before price drops.
>>
>>3470454
why would the price drop? Do you think that film point and shoots will suddenly become less fashionable?
>>
>>3470431
Nowhere near as good as Blank Face. Lazy trap beats, not very clever lyrically. A step in the wrong direction for Q.
I don't listen to tunes when shooting. Eyes and ears waiting for something interesting.
>>
>>3470467

Yes
>>
>>3470467
Maybe in a few years. I'd hold onto it desu, might go higher.
>>3470453
It's a good little camera, honestly probably worth more than $20. But definitely not hundreds.
>>
>>3470477
Idk Numb Numb Juice, Water, 5200, CHopstix, all sounded pretty good to me.

Personally I prefer just keeping eyes open. Music helps keep me in the zone of whatever mood Im feeling.
>>
What's 500px about? Just image hosting? Or can you get connections?
>>
best online printing service?
>>
>>3470715
up to you, I think it's now owned by the chinks.
https://petapixel.com/2017/05/25/beware-500px-now-sells-photos-fotolia-without-credit/
>>
>>3470453
I bought one for $72 equiv. with the A11 flash. These things rarely appear in the web ad listings in my country and I needed a pocketable travel film cam that time. So yeah I fell for the hipster tax meme. It hurt my wallet then my feelings man. The scar of realization was ineviable.
>>
Do they make adapters to use sweet fuji glass on pentax k mount?
>>
File: shittygrass.jpg (3.66 MB, 3529x2517)
3.66 MB
3.66 MB JPG
I'm really pretty new to cameras and I can't seem to get grass to look normal. In every picture I take of landscapes, the grass and bushes looks blurry and distorted like I used an old 2000s camera phone. What am I doing wrong?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareVer.1.03
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.6
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern18142
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)51 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:04:21 17:57:57
Exposure Time1/80 sec
F-Numberf/29.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating800
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length34.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlLow Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3471076
the lens on your camera might just be shit
what camera/lens are you using?
>>
>>3471077
Standard 18-55mm Nikon lens. It looks great for most things like taking pictures of cars, buildings, macros and basically anything that isn't grass or landscapes.
>>
>>3471081
I just looked at your exif again
stop shooting at f/29 because it will rape your lens sharpness
f/8 to f/14 is sufficient for most sitations
>>
>>3471084
I'll keep that in mind. Like I said I'm pretty new to... all of it. I know some basics to a point but not enough. Are those f stops good for landscape shots then?
>>
>>3471085
just think of it like this
lower f/(number) means that your light opening is larger and lets in more light but it also means less depth of field and less objects that are in focus
higher f/(number) means that your opening is much smaller and lets in less light but has an advantage of having more things be in focus
usually the sweet spot for lenses is about f/5.6 and f/8 for optimal sharpness but sometimes f/8 is not enough to get everything in focus so you can go down to f/14 to achieve that.
>>
>>3471086
I see. I knew a bit of that but in my mind I just went with assuming the highest F would mean everything would be in focus. Obviously that's not the case.
So what are those really high F numbers good for then? What situation would they be best for?
>>
>>3471085
Lower f stop: less stuff in focus, longer hyperfocal distance, more aberrations
Higher f stop: more in focus, achieve infinity focus sooner, less aberrations, more diffraction
Aberrations are blurriness along the edges of the frame, color fringing, distortion, etc. Diffraction is when the image is evenly blurred across the frame. This isn't a huge issue since your final resolution will be lower than your camera's max resolution, but at f/29 it's definitely limiting your sharpness in a noticeable way. On an APS-C camera like yours I wouldn't go above f/11, and you never really need to either.
For landscape f/8-f/11 should be good, that's where your lens will have the lowest level of aberrations without running into diffraction, and it will keep everything farther than ~15 feet in focus when focused at infinity.
>>3471086 this is a pretty good example
>>3471087
>the highest F would mean everything would be in focus
That's correct but you don't really need everything in focus, and usually it's not worth it because you'll get diffraction. If you're taking a picture of mountains for example you won't need things that are 1-2 feet away from you to be in focus. Those super high f stops are mostly useful if you're shooting macro or extreme closeups and you want everything to be in focus and you don't have a tripod. If you have a tripod you can just focus stack, which is super easy to do.
Read a few articles about depth of field, infinity focus, macro focus, the exposure triangle and perspective distortion, there's no way we can sum up all of this stuff in a few posts.
>>
>>3471088
Thanks for the information guys. I'll read some more articles and get a better idea of things. Like I said, I knew a little from what I'd read but I definitely need to go deeper. I have a good idea of ISO at least but that is pretty simple anyway.
>>
>>3471087
high f/stop would be good for macro work
>>
should i be using that lens profile correction box in lightroom?? for wide-angle it seems to make sense but when i try it on like 50mm or 85mm it just kind flattens the image ever so slightly. is it situational or should i generally apply that thing? like at 200mm whats it going to do?
>>
>>3471087
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdxKl5np9KE
Watch his other vids too, helped me a lot.

And this dude too:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9lyUdwosxq_OxC1uggjUPA
>>
any good gear podcasts or youtube channels?reading up on things is tedious it would be nice to have something to listen to for multitasking's sake
>>
>>3471264
>reading up on things is tedious
You should do video games instead of photography for a hobby
Much easier on your weak little bean of a brain
>>
>>3471267
if i'm reading i can't get other work done like editing. but sure, feel superior.
>>
>>3470082
Is it a Sigma lens by any chance?
>>
>>3471269
I am superior, there is no question to it
>>
d500 yn?
>>
>>3471285
>>>/gear/
>>
Luminar vs Lightroom?
>>
>>3471345
Capture One
>>
Are posts such as "rate my photo and help me improve" allowed on this board?
>>
>>3471552
Yes
Though if you make your own thread for it it'd probably be neat to have more than one photo in it.
>>
>>3471552
There's usually a 'recent photo thread' going
>>
File: 14889197779_89119356f9_k.jpg (1.21 MB, 2045x2048)
1.21 MB
1.21 MB JPG
Could you post good examples of posing for fuller figuared women

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 550D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 (20060914.r.77) Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2012:10:07 17:46:13
Exposure Time1/160 sec
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/4.6
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length28.00 mm
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
Can for the life of me not decide between the FE
>sigma 20/1,4
>firin 20/2
>batis 18/2,8
or if I should just save up to the 24 gm

save me
>>
>>3470934
bump
recently took some shots that I’d like prints of, maybe even some large prints
best options in terms of
>price
>quality
>>
I'm finally at a point where Im comfortable with Darktable. Should I bother learning RawTherapee? Or does it really not matter between the two?
>>
I have a real stupid question that I'm almost sorry to ask.
What makes certain lenses better/more expensive than others? What are the qualities of a lens that makes it "good" and my kit zoom lens "bad?"
>>
>>3471729
>>3471729
Pentax limited series I believe are assembled by hand.
Some lenses require much more/better quality glass.
Remember these are precision optical instruments, so the tolerances in components and alignment of the glass has a big impact on sharpness.
Some are all metal construction, have built in metal lens hoods and others are made of plastic. Also weather sealing is an added expense in the design and construction.
Also your kit lens probably isn’t that “bad”
>>
>>3471735
And pricing is often structured not only by cost of goods to produce, but also hit quantity expected to sell
Your kit lens they make thousands and will sell thousands, whereas a big 600mm f4 costs much more to make and they will sell much lower quantities so they have to price it high enough to make money on low volume
>>
If Fuji has FinePix, why does Nikon have CoolPix
Imho it should be FinePix for Fuji, NicePix for Nikon and CoolPix for Canon
>>
>>3471770
>pentax pisspix
>>
>>3471770
for me it's finecybercoolpix
>>
>>3471770
>olympus oofpix
>>
>>3471770
> panasonic poopix
>>
What would be a good lens for landscapes? Right now I own a Sigma dx 10-20, but i'm not really satisfied with it's sharpness. I really like the focal between 15-20, is there any lens you'd suggest me? I have a Nikon d7100, and it'd be nice if it had a good manual focus ring since I never shoot landscapes with autofocus.
>>
File: sensor.jpg (204 KB, 1920x1042)
204 KB
204 KB JPG
how is my sensor getting so fucking dirty what the fuck? original Canon 5D. i store it either with a lens attached or with the plug in place. if i change a lens, i do it in the house before i go out shooting. real pain in the dick and chronic problem with this camera

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
PhotographerKen Schneider
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3472006
Do you have the same care for your lenses? Many times shit falls off from them and gets stuck into the camera.
>>
>>3472017
yeah, i only have a handful of lenses and they switch between the 5D and eos film cameras and get capped when not in use.

i guess i have to be more careful
>>
File: 1546689917010.jpg (144 KB, 960x1540)
144 KB
144 KB JPG
How retarded is the idea of developing a camera that can shoot both film and digital? They could develop a modular body with interchangable backs, and have one for film and one for digital. It'd be pretty big I assume, but if it's not heavier than a full frame body it'd be ok.

I think the idea is flawed because it would be easier to just buy a film camera to go with your digital, but the idea of maybe changing it on the go sounds nice.
>>
>>3472006
Often it's zoom lenses. They pump air in from surrounding. Primes need a bit of air for focusing, but not nearly as much.
>>
>>3472034
What you're describing already exists.
>>
>>3472034
>How retarded
retarded

the earliest digital cameras were digital sensor backs attached to film cameras so it's been done. no real advantage and it's more trouble than it is worth to just switch out a 36 exposure roll of film on the fly (though technically possible) presuming full frame / 35mm format
>>
>>3472036
>Often it's zoom lenses
ahh never thought of that. my main walk-around lens recently is a 28-135mm and the problem has been more pronounced then when just using primes
>>
Brace for a very stupid question

On Canon EF-S lenses, just standard kit lens sort of stuff, no STM or USM, is it okay to turn the focus ring manually when the lens is disconnected from the camera & switch is set to Manual Focus

Essentially, does the switch from AF to MF happen physically as you toggle the switch or does the lens need to be powered by the camera for the transition to happen
>>
>>3471674
pls
>>
>>3472195
If you're talking about slightly more serious architecture, not just plain street shot architecture, something with a bit of zoom. You can't just zoom by legs to the middle of the road if shot requires it. So fuji's are actually not good for that. Not much else on the market, panasonics, canons, leicas, and sonys.
>>
>>3472219
How busy is your schedule that you can't take 5 minutes to edit a RAW
>>
>>3472219
Wasn't talking about closeups. Pnshoots tend to have shitty far end of their range. Architecture tend to be picky about lenses, and can take long to plan and execute. Not what you're planing to do, so x100 should give you no problems at all, it should be actually good at it.
>>
>>3471770
Leica LamePix
Sony SadPix
Pentax PenisPix
>>
>>3472006
shit happens guy
I had to clean my camera sensor 3 times before dust spots stopped appearing in my photos, nowadays I swap lenses in heavy wind.
here's a tip though, tap your camera lens down after you've attached a new lens to it, I'm sure you take all the well known precautions when swapping lenses.
>>
>>3472089
there is a mechanical disconnect so yes its fine as long as the AF switch is set to off
>>
>>3472006
I feel your pain
My house is dusty as fuck no matter what I do so I have resorted to only changing lenses in the bathroom with all the vents and door closed after a shower once the humidity has come down a bit.
High intensity flashlight like the one on cellphones is an easy way to check and see how much dust is floating around.
>>
File: 1336346054605.jpg (29 KB, 320x287)
29 KB
29 KB JPG
So I got a camera. A Canon SL2 with the kit lens. How do I get motivated to shoot and where do I start? I'm into outdoors and stuff. Do you guys plan trips to shoot or do you just take it with you wherever?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
White Point Chromaticity0.3
>>
>>3472416
>just take it with you wherever
this
>>
>>3472416
just go out and take photos to practice desu. I unfortunately live in a country with searing heat even at night most of the time so I mostly shoot indoors or in cooler countries when I travel.
>>
>>3472426

Motivated was the wrong word. I just don't know where to start since I'm new to it all. But I'll take >>3472418 advice and just take it with me whenever I do stuff and go from there.
>>
>>3472429
My ratio used to be around 10% now I'm around 30%. Practice I guess.
>>
So, i have a 5D Mark II and i want to change my CF memory Card, it's there a limit of MB/s that the camera support?
>>
>>3472429
that's normal desu, especially when your'e honest with yourself.
>>
I bought a fujica GM670 today and I've just learnt I made a mistake.
I had this button set to 's' when I've meant to have it on 'r'. I loaded and shot three frames today with it switched to 's'.
Does this mean all my photos will be exposed on the same frame?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeOPPO
Camera ModelOPPO A73
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationUnknown
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:05:01 18:01:38
Exposure Time7499/250000 sec
F-Numberf/2.2
Exposure ProgramNot Defined
ISO Speed Rating333
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Light SourceOther
FlashFlash
Focal Length3.46 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1280
Image Height2560
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Digital Zoom Ratio1.5
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3472475
I'm not too sure exactly give the manual a read
http://www.cameramanuals.org/fuji_pdf/fujica_gl690_gm670.pdf
>>
Hello /p/

I have no camera for the moment, and I would like shooting landscapes, cities and sports events.

My maximum budget is 700 euros / 800 dollars. Should I go for the GX9 or GX85 which is cheaper

Also what is the best mirrorless under 800 dollars ?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2018:02:13 16:04:22
Image Width1000
Image Height563
>>
>>3472477
From what I've read online r means roll and s means sheet. I'm just trying to figure out if the film advanced or not and if I wasted frames
>>
File: ffsrtfm.jpg (57 KB, 928x562)
57 KB
57 KB JPG
>>3472475
>>3472479
>>
>>3472481
I read thru this but I'm not sure it answers my question. Either that or I can't read.
I'll just go thru the roll tomorrow and see what happens
>>
>>3472478
buy the cheaper, no big difference
>>
>>3472435
>10%
>30%
no, you just have no standards
>>
>>3472233
it's quite tricky. honestly, without a digital pen and some basic drawing skills you won't get an authentic painting look out of a picture.
>>
>>3472213
this is actually possible. capitalism condones that.
>>
>>3471770
Leica SS-RottenführerPix
>>
>>3472340
These few videos helped me a lot:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLG3eOzJfQr2e2OD4W0GmcSpO5oZ-c5FIu

And I like this guy's videos too:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9lyUdwosxq_OxC1uggjUPA/videos
>>
>>3472213
amazon does keep records of your returns and if you do this more than once or twice they will no longer honor your returns
>>
Why isn't there 35mm film with 48 exposures?
It looks like there is more than enough space in a roll for a bit more film.
>>
This is so stupid that I don't even know if this is in the right board. My screen is super laggy when I try to film raw video with my Eos M and Magic Lantern. Is it supposed to be that way?
>>
>>3472628
>hack firmware
>hardware does not hold upon
it's a miracle..
>>
>>3472634
Sure it really doesn't surprise me, I was thinking if there's something in the settings I can do about it. Or does it behave the same way with others.
>>
Where is a good place to shop for cheap and used cameras in London?
>>
>>3472807
literally just think about what your shooting, why you're shooting it, then try to make that as clear as possible in your final image.
>>
>>3472478
gx85 is amazing value right now, so it would be hard to beat.
>>
>>3472855
>fake ambush detected
You know you made it when you have a stalker
>>
>>3472861
better than a counterfeit chosis, but barely.
>>
File: carol5dmk.jpg (366 KB, 960x640)
366 KB
366 KB JPG
Anon, I don't own any digital cameras or lenses. Is $440 for a 5D Mk II a good deal? 70k shutter count, some major scratches on the body, but seems in good working order.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
PhotographerKarel Donk
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2012:07:10 22:33:56
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width960
Image Height640
>>
>>3472478
If you've never owned cams. gx85 or em10ii two lens bundle. Save extra cash, shoot for a month or two, then spend that extra on lenses of your preferred focus length.
>>
>>3472932
>>3472931
>>3472861
based
>>
>>3472932
I like his effort, he's giving trips something to do. It's also apparent they're all here all the time, just doning trips when trying to speak high. No trips, bs as usual.
>>
>>3472932
Well you tripfags are all somewhat intolerable. Fuck your $30, this is an anonymous image board. I swear /p/ is like bizzaro 4chan.
>>
They aren't fake trips, they are just trips... in hating trips, they are just making more trips. I like it.

>trip revolution
>>
>>3467697
Wow bluepilled as fuck. Buy more cameras fag. That doesnt harm the environment.
>>
How do I develop my own editing style?
>>
>>3473310
Just edit things in the way you like them & in the way it makes sense for the specific shot

Don't make all your shadows purple or something stupid just so you can be all editing style™©®®™©
>>
how to be more confident when doing street photography?
>>
>>3473311
But I just like being a big retard with my edits. Just doing shit just to do it. sometimes I'm just like "maybe make the sand more white than yellow" and then other times I'm like "i'm going to make that yellow the most repulsive paint-slathered-onto-a-shitty-canvas yellow I can manage. fuck it, i'm deleting all the people from this too. fuck it, the water is now the same colour as the sky so now it looks like there's no water. fuck it the sun's gone too."

It's like I know I have no distinct editing style so I just throw sliders all over the place just cuz.
>>
>>3473314
That's just being a retard moving sliders without a clear aim or objective you're trying to accomplish

You compose shots with the intent of conveying something, you edit them in the same sense.

Your issue isnt the lack of an editing style®™©™©®™©™™©, but the lack of thought put into what you're trying to convey through the edit
>>
>>3473314
>>3473316
Say you took shots of a party or fireworks or something, the entire point of the shot is to convey the emotion felt then

And assuming your "editing style" is typically moody with subdued desaturated colors and cold whites, regardless of it being your trademark DO NOT COPY editing style, it'll look shit in this setting because it doesn't agree with the photo
>>
>>3467926
D610 if you're on a budget
>>
That's the same crap that some "film" makers do.
They do a blog, just talking into the camera about some stupid shit going on in their lives

But it's in 21:9 format for some reason with some stupid "cinematic" LUT applied
>>
>>3472816
>But what If I'm shooting the picture because I like the aesthetics of the surrounding area or building. Is that still snapshit? What even defines snapshit?
It depends on how well you're able to convey that intention in the resulting image.

A snapshit is typically understood as just a shot that looks like no real intention other than "i should snap a picture of that" is conveyed. This is usually because there's stupid settings used, there are much better compositions that are plainly obvious than the one used, and just generally reeks of "I didn't think at all".

Making your intentions clear doesn't elevate it to being a good picture, but it's a step in the right direction.
>>
>>3473317
>>3473316
But that's the thing. I don't compose photos with the idea of conveying something. I compose photos in a way that I find aesthetically pleasing. Then the edit is just me toying about with things that I find aesthetically pleasing for the composition. Like the beach thing. I aesthetically enjoy the look of a horizon perfectly splitting an image in 2. Then from there, sure I could edit it to make it feel warm and inviting and all the emotions I felt when I was sitting in that exact spot. But I can also just fuck around with things that I find aesthetically pleasing, like having the horizon separate two contrasting or complimentary colours or making everything pastel for a laugh. The image is inherently aesthetically pleasing to me as shot, so basically anything I do to it will have that base level of "I like this. It is pleasing to my eye" based on the composition alone, therefore I don't have a set goal in mind for the edit. I don't know if that makes sense or if I'm conveying what I mean very well here, but it makes sense to me.
>>
>>3473324
>But that's the thing. I don't compose photos with the idea of conveying something.
>then proceeds to tell about all the stuff he intends on conveying.

Dude, you're getting hung up on terminology here. At the very least, you're showing people what you think looks good.

Knowing that you can take an image in multiple directions and even being unsure of which direction you want to take it isn't what people are shitting on. They're shitting on fiddling with sliders without knowing what effect they will give, which is what you're making your workflow sound like. It doesn't sound like you understand colors enough to say go dick with the HSV values to get a specific look, or, more importantly, to know why the changes you made gave you a certain look and how to intentionally apply that to other images, which isn't always a matter of copy/pasting settings.
>>
>>3473343
That's been a poor explanation on my end then. I understand what all the sliders do. I understand that doing X makes the image look Y. But I don't have a 'style'. I don't look at an image and think "This image needs more X and Y but a bit less Z so that I can convey what I want to convery". I look at an image and say "I'm just going to wing this and see what comes out". All of the actions I take are deliberate, but my workflow doesn't have a destination in mind when I begin and I feel like it's hindering me when editing. I /want/ to be able to look at an image and think "Okay, I want this image to be..." instead of thinking "okay, let's see where we end up". It's like editing ADHD or some shit.
>>
>>3473588
Manual
>>
>>3473588
Aperture priority when you want to control your aperture; shutter priority when it’s more important to control your shutter speed.

As a beginner, you should learn what each of those does and why you would want to control it manually before venturing out of full auto.
>>
>>3473592
>MANUAL
>>
>>3473613
Don't be a pussy just learn. Go to r*ddit if you want hugbox.
>>
>>3467529
I mean, technically "selfies" or whatever are /p/. But I also took pictures of pretty things outside and I realized they were better too.

Is it the case that good unretouched pics are actually better than photoshopped ones or am I doing something wrong?
>>
>>3473619
>selfies are /p/
>Post only photos that show at least trace amounts of thoughtful composition. Do not upload random snapshots.
Nope

>Is it the case that good unretouched pics are actually better than photoshopped ones or am I doing something wrong?
You're probably doing a bunch of stuff wrong, but that has nothing to do with whether or not "photoshopped" pictures are better than "unretouched".

The scare quotes are there because there's not really such thing as an unretouched image. There's images where you've let some process do things for you and images where you've taken more direct control of those things. Even if you were shooting film, your choice of film, the way that whoever develops the film develops it, the choice of paper it's printed onto and the way its printed all change the image. The digital version of this is shooting in jpg and using picture styles or lightroom presets, but even converting raw directly to tiff will still see changes.

Don't get hung up on retouched versus unretouched. Learn your gear, learn to post process, make good pictures.
>>
If you take a picture while inside of a darkroom, will nothing show up? Does that imply that all color film is missing some red wavelengths?
>>
>>3473828
no, but you would need a very long exposure to get a clear image. anyways, color film is typically developed in complete darkness, because it would still fog. Safe lights are used for black and white photography which is more sensitive to blue and green.
>>
>>3467529
Does anyone here use Ps with Camera Raw for nef file types? I noticed an on again off thing happen that can never be sorted out. Basically, I open an nef image in CamerRaw, edit it then when clicking on "Open Image" it will change color and contrast once in normal Ps. Then if I try to use that normal mode of Ps to change the contrast or brightness, the preview will show what I want, but when I click, "Okay" those changes are not applied and the image reverts to what it was before.

This problem seems to fix itself without me changing any settings. I looked into it online and there's never been a legit confirmed fix for it and no one knows why it does this. I can sit there all day with workflow color settings and get no where. What I have found is that programs like CCleaner seem to be deleting some sort of temp setting for Ps/CameraRaw. When this happens the problem will start to occur for a while then go away and I can edit normally. No amount of reinstalling, changing settings, or restarting fixes it. It just fixes itself at a later arbitrary time.

The problem is that getting it to happen or fix it is very inconsistent. I can lose an entire day's worth of work time to this seemingly random bug.
>>
>>3469658
>apsc dslr's just for that extra reach they give you.

that's not how it works
>>
>>3474034

Yeah, one of the most common misconceptions that just won't go away.
>>
File: 1556919924538.png (20 KB, 497x657)
20 KB
20 KB PNG
>>3474079
Nothing was said about pixel density. Only crop vs FF is implied. Just use FF with the same pixel density.

>fake /\M8U5H

Fuck off Chosis.
>>
>>3471720
I've heard that neither is better than the other, but it does feel like RT releases more often. I stuck with DT because its somewhat compatible with digikam
>>
File: p-trips.png (209 KB, 3768x5000)
209 KB
209 KB PNG
>>3474079
>>3474175
>>3474184
So, like does chosis have a mental illness? He has more posts than anyone when all the trips are combined that he's used. Fuck knows how many anon-posts he's made.
>>
Can I just say how this board has gone to utter shit. I used to come here off and on years ago, and I thought it was bad then. This place is overrun by boomers first camera who want to share their snapahits like they are uploading to Facebook. Majority of threads here are people posting whatever they feel like and the replies are either other shit photos with no response or short one sentence comments or quips.

People used to actually critique and get into discussions but the effort seems to be completely gone. How sad is it that a photography forum on the most popular image board is utter shit.

I think people need to man up and start self moderating. Call people out who start shit threads and post shit replies. Also, don't respond to shit threads after they have been told off. Where did the engaged members go?
>>
>>3474200
legitimately, you're sadder than he is.
>>3474243
Because you're a wonderful poster.
>>
>>3474243
Trying to insert elitism into what is inherently a very casual hobby is a bit iffy imo.

The way to get discussions is to start them & actually posting a comment along with your photo. Do you do that?

And doing a "purge" on what you deem are snapshits (I mean.. they probably are tbf) doesn't do anything to improve the quality of uploaded photos.

A snapshitter can't instantly transition into giving pro critic levels of responses. The good photographers need to pull the load otherwise the board becomes a snapshit echo chamber that can't climb out by itself.
>>
>>3474247
To add to this
Simplified guides towards photography may help.
Yes there's a lot of good literature on the topic, but the average hobby beginner isn't going to just dive straight into the books.

Maybe one of you veterans could put together info charts.
The way to avoid snapshits is to put thought into photographs, but the only thought the beginner generally has is "this view looks nice"
Soo, why not design some sort of flowchart that describes the general considerations one should take when taking a photo.
>>
>>3474249
>The way to avoid snapshits is to put thought into photographs, but the only thought the beginner generally has is "this view looks nice"
>Soo, why not design some sort of flowchart that describes the general considerations one should take when taking a photo.
Just link this and call it a day:
https://kenrockwell.com/tech/fart.htm
>>
>>3474246
No, it isn't anything other than saying that >>3469658 is a dumbshit that doesn't know much about cameras, dramawhore.
>>
>>3474254
>Some jackass going around using my name and posting low-quality comments because he hates the concept of trips in general. And when I called him out for it, other people joined in--with the asshole.
Because this is 4chan. Trips carried over from a single thread are antithetical to posting here.

Also, /p/ is a small board. There's literally no reason to trip here. If it isn't pretty clear who you are without the trip, especially with image threads, then well, maybe you need to ask some serious questions about what you're doing with photography.
>>
Is it safe to clean the outside plastic bits of my Rebel and lenses with 70% iso alcohol ?
I had some poison ivy on my hands and want to make sure I dont have any hanging out on the camera.
>>
File: setup.jpg (37 KB, 457x411)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
What setup is this?
>>
>>3474282
Yup.

>>3474291
A Canon 1Dx nursing its young. Too early to tell what the baby will grow into though
>>
>>3474291
lmao
Thanks for reminding me
Is there a cold shoe adapter mount thing that will hold a cellphone I plan on going to airshows and would like to use my phone to record video while using my camera to shoot stills
>>
>>3474295
I use metal adapter that fits in the hot shoe, and has the standard 1/4-20 tripod adapter thread on top. then mount my cellphone/gopro using any one of the cheap mounts on amazon
>>
What's the best way to scan APS/110 film?

My flatbed is kind of shit for it, it's barely good enough for 35mm.

Nobody makes scanners for 110 it seems. Despite being smaller, 35mm scanners don't even list it as something they can handle, so what do I do?
>>
Since most modern DSLRs and mirrorless cameras offer a dynamic range of at least roughly 12 stops, why isn't there an option to save images as HDR directly?
>inb4 save as RAW and throw it into a converter
>>
>>3474366
The film used in APS is basicly the same as used in 35mm, just cut smaller and on an APS roll.
You can scan it the same way as you scan 35 mm, grain will be the same size as on 35mm but the overall frame will be smaller.
Image quality of APS is naturaly worse than 35mm, wich was part of the reason it didn't catch on.
>>
>>3474427
Many cams have hdr saving options. For various reasons they only save in jpeg. Raw is processed as soon as it's opened in editor. You never actually see real raw data if you're working with adobe software.
>>
>>3474427
Three answers for you
Because some do.

Because proper hdr is an image that's got Dr greater than the Dr of the sensor and most "hdr" is just tone mapping.

Because in some cases format limitations.
>>
>>3474435
Why not throw the 12-15 stops of dynamic range directly into an HDR-format and call it a day?
It may not be exactly as much as some HDR formats can handle and you may have room to either side of the histogram, but it sure is way more than your standard .jpg.
>>
>>3474442
I may be wrong, some anon 1up me if so


>Why not throw the 12-15 stops of dynamic range directly into an HDR-format and call it a day?
The image will, basically, appear to lack contrast.

It's why people refer to high dynamic range and bit depth as offering latitude, it allows you more room to edit but you're always viewing on an 8 bit limited contrast display. (unless using proper HDR pro equipment)
>>
>>3474442
Then you're talking above sensor Dr, so any such shot will require at least two exposures (and yeah, there's a good number of bodies that do this) Remember though, some of sensor Dr is kinda cheating and not really useable and advances in Dr lately have been into the shadows, not double tailed.
>>
>>3474445
You obviously can't view a HDR image on a display not capable of viewing such a dynamic range.
If you just compressed it into 8-bit .jpg your picture would indeed lack contrast as what was formerly 12-15 stops appart now is now way closer together.
To view an image with 12 stops or more, you obviously need a display capable of displaying dynamic ranges that high, not that any consumer tier stuff does that anyway.
To show it, you would basicly crop the histogram down untill it is small enough to fit your displays dynamic range or use some sort of tone-mapping/dynamics compression.

Most of these HDR formats display up to 256 stops, pretty much nobody has acess to display with that kind of dynamic range and our eye can't see that much dynamic range anyway.
>>
>>3474448
I'm talking about the 12-15 stops of dynamic range a modern sensor tends to have, not using several exposures to increase it.
Also more than that isn't realy useful as it already exceeds the human eyes dynamic range.
For the dynamic range it doesn't matter if they got better at the low or high end, you can compensate that by exposing a bit more or less.
To say that only the shaddows got better just tells me that manufacturers learned from ETTR and now use it a little.
>>
>>3474459
>For the dynamic range it doesn't matter if they got better at the low or high end, you can compensate that by exposing a bit more or less.
Theoretically that would be true, but in practice it's not because performance fall off isn't uniform on either side of the middle point of the dynamic range. Like if we were giving letter grades, the bottom three stops would get a C, the next six would get an A then the next two a B, and the brightest one a D. If it were linear response across the relative brightnesses, you'd be right
>>
>>3474462
Yea, I know sesors work linear while our eyes and f-stops work logarythmic.
Each stop contains half as much information as the next brightest and the brightest one has 50% of the entire information wich is why ETTR is a thing.
(also noise reduction, but that's a different issue)
>>
>>3474452
>You obviously can't view a HDR image on a display not capable of viewing such a dynamic range.

Yeah, that's extremely wrong... You're probably talking about tv hdr. Photography hdr is something completely different. You can downsample hdr image into 16 bit's and it'll still be hdr.
>>
>>3474521
Last time I checked 16 bit wasn't even in most RAW-files.
Also: How would you view more dynamic range than the display could show without using lossy dynamics compression?
>>
>>3474431
>You can scan it the same way as you scan 35 mm
Ok, but a bunch of 35mm scanners don't support 110, so what do you suggest?

I don't want to use a flatbed. Too blurry.
>>
i live near an airport so i've been thinking about trying to shoot some planes now that it's getting nicer outside. i can obviously see when all the commercial flights are taking off/landing just by pulling up the airport's website but what about the smaller planes that are just owned by regular people and not airlines? is there any kind of publicly searchable database of the flight plans people file so i could try for some of those planes too?
>>
How do I acquire Capture One 12 Pro the not-spending-money-at-all way?
>>
whats a good beginner camera for lo fi photos?
>>
>>3474977
The $10 pawn shop one.
>>
>>3474955
iirc you don't actually need to file a flight plan
A lot of the baby cessnas probably don't do it

If your airport has a tower you could listen into the radio frequency. If it's a larger airport you'd probably have enough time to get there during the time they taxi to the runway
>>
>>3474955
Go to the hanger office, and talk to them. They may put you in touch with some of the owners and one of them might be happy to actually arrange some shots.
>>
Where the fuck did the weekly challenge thread go
>>
>>3474998
was also wondering this, there was some shitflinging about the prompt being food photography when i went to bed last night, did that somehow escalate into the op getting banned? or is he just deleting his old threads in preparation for the new one (for some reason)?
>>
>>3475001
I don't know, man. Today is when I was planning on going through and critiquing, and VERY fucking much hoping to be critiqued myself. I'm a little pissed. I was watching the thread so closely.

For such a small board /p/ sure is full of whiny faggots.
>>
File: canonIXUS40.jpg (6 KB, 244x167)
6 KB
6 KB JPG
First post and visit on /p/ ever. more of a /k/ and /out/ regular. So uhh. As I don't like smartphones, I don't have one, but I still do stuff, and I always had to ask other people to take pictures for me. Today, my fiancee scored me pic related for free from a facebook recycling group. The first camera I have ever owned, I know fuck all about photography, and I am as artistic as an industrial paint mixer. I want to learn to actually use this thing instead of just using the default settings and take shitty pictures. I already know that this camera isn't great, but since it was free, it's what I will be using as the alternative is no camera at all. I want to take pictures of outdoors stuff, and hobby stuff. Wat do? How far can I push this small free thing?
>>
>>3474998
AC got banned
>>
>>3475009
I sincerely doubt it
>>
>>3475009
what happened? also i thought the op was just anonymous
>>
>>3474958
anyone?
>>
>>3475008
You are probably better off with your phone than that piece of shitpotato
>>
>>3475012
Not sure, but all of AC's shit got deleted, which means he was banned. Pretty sure op of weekly challenge was just him without his trip, kinda like the catalog thread.
>>
>>3475011
See >>3474950
>>
>>3475011
Negroid, only one way all of your posts get deleted on 4chan...
>>
>>3475008
You're best advised to use your phone over the ixus, that thing can't take a picture to save it's life.
>>
>>3475008
welcome to /digishit/ my fine sir, just google or youtube the camera's name, if you find nothing of use check vids and articles about similar ones. also look up basic shit like composition, also what's iso, fstop, all that shit. best of luck dear schmuck
>>
File: IMG_20190505_192224.jpg (4.01 MB, 2340x4160)
4.01 MB
4.01 MB JPG
>>3475008
Wahey, that is shitty
Though that said, my first camera was a bridge Fuji with a sensor not much better than this.

You'll probably get unusable amounts of noise with the thing if you as much as look at the ISO setting, probably want to keep that on the lowest value it gets (50) though experiment and see how far you can go.

It does apparently have a manual mode, learn about the exposure triangle (ISO, Aperture & Shutter speed), though you'll probably be mostly changing Shutter speed.
The longest equivalent local length is 105mm, now the rule of thumb for handholding a camera is to use a shutter speed greater than the focal length, If you zoom in to the max you'll probably want to aim for at least 1/120s shutter speed.

Given that fiddling with the ISO is ill advised on this camera, I suggest you get one of these

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera ModelRedmi Note 4
Camera Softwaremido-user 7.0 NRD90M V10.2.3.0.NCFMIXM release-keys
Equipment MakeXiaomi
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)0 mm
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2019:05:05 19:22:24
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Time (UTC)17:22:23
Date (UTC)2019:05:05
Color Space InformationsRGB
F-Numberf/2.0
Focal Length3.57 mm
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Exposure ModeAuto
Image Height4160
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Exposure ProgramNot Defined
White BalanceAuto
Image Width2340
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Brightness0 EV
ISO Speed Rating1250
Exposure Time1/14 sec
>>
File: campfire.jpg (34 KB, 533x345)
34 KB
34 KB JPG
>>3475014
Considering my phone has no camera at all I doubt it. Don't take it as an insult towards your thing, take it as a challenge. I'm not expecting miracles either and a better camera would be a better camera but now I will use what I have and I would like to be able to utilise it properly.
>>
>>3475021
>(50) though experiment and see how far you can go.
The vast majority of sensors have a native iso of 100. Setting it below native doesn't do anything to help.

also
>manual mode on a point and shoot that doesn't have anything but a d-pad for physical controls
Please, never give anyone advice again. That camera is a pure point and shoot. Trying to use any exposure mode other than auto or a priority (and even priority modes) is less pleasant than having your nuts tapped danced on.

guy with the elph, yeah, read up some on how cameras work and how exposure works, but the big thing you should worry about with a camera like that is nailing your composition. It'll suck in lower light because old, canon, and small sensor. That's fine though. Get out, use the thing, figure out what specific questions you have from using it, then google them up, and leave this toxic ass place forever. Enjoy your life and shoot loads!
>>
>>3475027
What's the point of the under 100 ISO then?
>>
>>3475031
So you can use longer shutter speed or wider aperture in bright conditions.
>>
>>3475031
Our favorite NYC Jews have a good article talking about it
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/tips-and-solutions/understanding-exposure-part-4-iso
>>
>>3475036
>>3475038
I see that it's a helpful feature
But the more I read about ISO the more it feels like big camera is trying to steal from me
>>
>>3475043
>But the more I read about ISO the more it feels like big camera is trying to steal from me
heh, wait till you look deeply enough to find out that digital ISO 100 isn't necessarily ISO 100...
>>
File: ak.jpg (447 KB, 1536x2048)
447 KB
447 KB JPG
>>3475019
>>3475021
>>3475024
Thanks for the tips, will look into composition and exposure triangle. Even though the exposure triangle with my camera is probably similiar to learning long distance ballistic stuff to shoot a pistol to 10 meters, it won't probably do no harm to know these. I do have to say, even though I thought I will be probably using this camera purely as an utilitarian tool, it did feel exiting to take those first few familiarisation shots. I have taken pictures with smartphones ofcourse, but that never had the same feel to it as taking pictures with my own camera. Will definitely get a tripod from fleamarket. Now I guess it's just shoot and get better at it.
Picture related is what I'm more familiar with shooting.
>>
>>3475055
Get this for a more familiar feel

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeApple
Camera ModeliPhone 6s
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time1/15 sec
F-Numberf/2.2
ISO Speed Rating400
Lens Aperturef/2.2
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeSpot
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length4.15 mm
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
>>
How high a shutter count is too high for a used dslr?
>>
>>3475059
Depends on the model
There's a site that tracks the point of failure on shutters of certain models, google your specific one.
>>
>>3475059
I'd start getting meh around 200k. Most shutters are rated for 250k, most exceed that by a bunch before failure (like 6 figures), and shutter replacements are usually around $200. So it's not worth it for a body that's only worth like $300, but one that's like a $1500 body?
>>
>>3475059
my 5D has upwards of 300k clicks and still thwop THWOPS like it always has

>>3475063
>shutter replacements are usually around $200
not sure where that price is from but the actual quote i got was more like $500 from a repair shop in the southeastern US
>>
>>3475057
>That feel when that's actually a real firearm and it's got a 500ms delay on the trigger, so you get a perfect "I've just been shot" look on every person with every photo.

What the fuck is this even legal?
How is that a self defense weapon?
>>
>>3475072
...it's not a weapon. At all.
>>
>>3475070
>not sure where that price is from but the actual quote i got was more like $500 from a repair shop in the southeastern US
Nikon did my D810 for $270. So your actual quote is likely you getting actually hosed.
>>
>>3475075
>Nikon did my D810 for $270. So your actual quote is likely you getting actually hosed.

Canon charged $320 before any discount and plus shipping... back when they would work on a 5D classic. can't speak to Nikon's policy, but Canon won't open a camera that's been out of production for more than 10 years. the only service they offer for a 5D presently is a sensor cleaning, so to get a shutter replacement for an older Canon, you have to find an independent shop buth capable and willing to do the work. That probably explains the price difference.
>>
Would I be better off buying a cheap dslr for the same price as a point and shoot I've had my eye on?
>>
>>3475109
Depends. do you care about portability? are you willing to buy more than the kit lens? what types of subjects do you want to shoot?
>>
>>3475137
>do you care about portability?
kind of, I supposed I don't mind have a camera around my neck or a small bag if it means better dynamic range that what I would get with the point and shoot
>are you willing to buy more than the kit lens
eventually
>what types of subjects do you want to shoot?
Everything
>>
File: 84180473.jpg (333 KB, 1200x1200)
333 KB
333 KB JPG
How to get a gig as a fashion photographer in the USA
>>
>>3475715
okay, because you want to get more than the kit lens, then a system camera (either mirrorless or dslr) is a good fit. Because you "kind of" care about portability, its a bit of a tossup-- mirrorless cameras are only slightly smaller, because the lenses are in general about the same size as those from their DSLR counterparts. I suggest looking at prices and budget, DSLR bodies and glass are much more affordable. good luck!
>>
>>3467657
According to what ive read in his site, he doesn't do that at all. Jpg yes, full auto no.
>>
>>3475740
Find out what lubes you're not allergic to, then invest in plenty of that.
Fashion isn't a business, and there's nothing objective about it, it's a cult. You need to fuck your way to the top and if you get to the top with an intact anus (aka, stretched out, but not prolapsed), you're doing a good job.
>>
>>3475820
Fuck... I thought so
>>
are 90s minolta lenses good and if so is there a conversion kit for my x100f that will take them
>>
I hate photos coming out of my original OnePlus One. Wanna up my day to day photography game but still keep things portable. Should I just get a better smartphone (like Note 9, S10e or Pixel 3) or try to "futureproof" myself with something like Sony A5100?
>>
my images come out as 6000x4000 what is the best resolution to resize them to and which program works best? I assume photoshop will work good
>>
>>3468115
motherfucker beat me to it
>>
>>3476587
>>3476587
New thread
>>
What does exposure comp even do



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[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.