[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
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 85 posters in this thread.

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]



File: Canon_EOS_1DxII_hero_3000.jpg (486 KB, 3000x2016)
486 KB
486 KB JPG
Prove to me that you don't need to have expensive gear to be a good photographer.

>Pro-tip: you can't
>>
I can prove to you that you don't need to have cheap gear to be a bad photographer
>>
In reference to what?
Stupid and unqualified statement. SAGE goes in all fields.
>>
Define "expensive".
>>
Define "good".
>>
File: cord-0165.jpg (680 KB, 3585x2400)
680 KB
680 KB JPG
i made this with a pirated version of lightroom and a 60 dollar DSLR from 2008

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON D40X
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.6
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern758
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)30 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2019:04:15 19:37:54
Exposure Time1/6 sec
F-Numberf/3.8
Exposure ProgramNot Defined
ISO Speed Rating1600
Lens Aperturef/3.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length20.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlHigh Gain Up
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
>>3468264
The definition of "expensive" spreads quite a distance.
However you can take pretty great pictures with pretty cheap gear.
Keep in mind that most people won`t look at your pictures in large prints or at large screens, so sharpness is not as important.
Pretty much nobody will look at a 100% crop and most websites/social media compress the shit out of your images anyway.
As long as you can adjust whatever you need to and have access to some post processing tools you can take pretty damn good pictures.
>>
>>3468274
is this some kind of artistic take on the arthur fist meme?
>>
Define "gear"
>>
>>3468320
thats an interesting interpretation, i liek it. My actual intention with it was trying to interpret the sensation of touch while on drugs, how i found my hand felt disconnected from the rest of the limb when i tried touching something, its how i think bad depth perception would look if it was a physical attribute
>>
fuck gear related threads
>>
>>3468264

You've drawn a correlation and think it's causation. it isn't.
Professionals have expensive gear because they know how to get the best from it. You can drop 20k on gear and still be shit.
>>
>>3468324
If that's how you feel when you touch something, why is your hand just hanging there doing nothing?
>>
>>3468264
I have seen great pictures taken with shit gear. That being said, if a photographer shows up to photograph my wedding with a rabble complete with pop up flash and kit lens, either I paid him $20 or I was bamboozled in to thinking he was much better than he actually is.
>>
>>3468402
How do you know? Most likely the pictures will be amazing just like the other pictures you saw and based your decision to hire him on
>>
>>3468264
I've seen a lot of really nice shots on Instagram that were shot with mediocre gear, even some that were shot with a Sony so it just goes to show what can be done
>>
>>3468264
I'm a good photographer and all I use are point and shoots I find at thrift stores for $5
>>
I'm a bad photographer and I use a 645z
>>
Here, a group full of images rendered through the worst lens known to man:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/2122756@N21/pool/
Some are good at least
>>
>>3468392
its more focusing on the disconnect under drugs or false depth perception, rather than what is being touched
>>
Define "photographer".
>>
>>3468439
prove it
>>
>>3468427
>even some that were shot with a great camera
>>
File: 1137-005.jpg (681 KB, 635x1000)
681 KB
681 KB JPG
Canon Rebel SII, 50mm plastic fantastic, Tri-X 400

op is a fag

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
>>
>>3468447
The a6000 kit lens? You're just shit. It's actually very decent for a kit lens although slow af. I've had better colors from it than my Sigma prime. It's small, lightweight and has stabilization. Find me a better value than that.
>>
>>3468649
Nope I said Sony, even if the camera was half decent it's users are all gumbies
>>
>>3468722
*Gumbys
>>
>>3468264
My entire print catalogue is made up of shots from my x100, despite having owned a ff Sony for the last year and a half.
>>
>>3468324
Oh god, enough to me for not taking the bait.
>>
Old gear will excel in most lighting situations. I owned a 450D from 2009 till last year when I finally upgraded.

Back in the late 2000s no one was taking photos in the dark without a flash, and no one blew up their prints to 40 x 30 unless its a billboard viewed from afar. You really don't need 15 stops of dynamic range and 50 MP for everything you do. Obviously I'm not telling anyone to bring their Holga to a war zone, but if the masters can make do with their manual rangefinders, you can make do with your Sony faggot.
>>
>>3468780
>You really don't need 15 stops of dynamic range and 50 MP for everything you do.
50mp can come handy. But dynamic range is the biggest meme in the world. In real world environment it's still so fucking low compared to human eyes, it's having no fucking effect on end picture. Everyone of note, even with the best sensors and most expensive dbacks, is still exposure bracketing! People take at lest two, three brackets per landscape or architecture, and often as many as couple of hours of interval shooting, for optimum selection later in editing.
>>
pic related
>>
>>3468722
eat shit Canon fag, cope harder
>>
>>3468797

Are you implying that Barack Obama is cheap gear?
>>
>>3468797
degenerates attract one another
>>
>>3469059

Then how come I hate both of them?
>>
>>3469023
good morning, poopchute
>>
>>3468549
Junkies begone
>>
>>3468274
yeah it's shit.. you're proving the OP right you retard
>>
>>3468264
>Prove to me that you don't need to have expensive gear to be a good photographer.
>couldn't even get the subject in focus
>>
File: GettyImages-182644297.jpg (296 KB, 1536x1152)
296 KB
296 KB JPG
>>3468264
Legendary New York Times fashion photographer, Bill Cunningham, using an entry level Nikon DSLR with a Nikkor AF 24mm f/2.8 (sells for less than $300 currently on eBay)
>>
>>3468264
>more revered than you’ll ever be

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width369
Image Height550
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
Bait thread, but using shitty gear makes you a better photographer. Learning to expose each scene without blowing out the highlights and crushing the shadows, instead of using dynamic range as a safety-net. Having a single AF point to accurately track a moving subject instead of using multi-AF and cropping your shots. Blending in with the crowd instead of using your Big Black Camera™ for clout. There are plenty of reasons why you should start out with a shitty camera
>>
>>3468648
Okay here >>3469865
I purchasedd this for $5 At value village and it works just fine.
>>
>>3469913
It's a film camera. The film emulsion takes the image, not the camera body
>>
I bought a 1DX M1 for $1700, shit rocks and still holds up three years later

I still suck ass so you're right
>>
>>3469429
everytime you post this it seems he hasn't changed his clothes for years that barnacles already started attaching themselves and later to his hair and beard
>>
>>3469945
Kys
>>
File: Lombok 003.jpg (1.07 MB, 1200x800)
1.07 MB
1.07 MB JPG
this was taken on a $15 camera and free roll of film

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeSONY
Camera ModelILCE-7
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:04:22 19:09:32
Exposure Time1/8 sec
F-Numberf/0.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating200
Brightness-2.6 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceOther
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length0.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1200
Image Height800
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3470144
And this was taken on a DSLR from 2004 and a kit lens

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATION
Camera ModelNIKON D70s
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern822
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)60 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution111 dpi
Vertical Resolution111 dpi
Image Created2007:03:12 20:41:41
Exposure Time1/1000 sec
F-Numberf/5.6
Exposure ProgramManual
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length40.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width650
Image Height650
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Gain ControlNone
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
>>
File: Hand to Birds.jpg (220 KB, 696x523)
220 KB
220 KB JPG
>>3470145
And this was taken on a bridge camera from 2001

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width725
Image Height567
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:01:09 21:31:33
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width696
Image Height523
>>
File: 129.png (541 KB, 680x816)
541 KB
541 KB PNG
>>3468264
I have a D7000 with a 50 and I'm a goo-
>>
>>3470144
>A7 with manual lens
>$15 camera and free roll of film
>>
>>3468264
You don't need expensive gear. You need good gear. There is a difference.
>>
>>3468264
The best gear is the gear you always carry with you
>>
>>3468264
>Pro tip: You can be a good photographer regardless of the gear you carry.

Ask yourself what makes a good photographer .

If you link the concept of "being a good photographer" to sharpness and dynamic range then I'm sorry but to me you have no idea about photography.

Those things are important for some types of pictures, (I personally love pin sharp portraits and landscapes) but there are many examples of awesome photographers whose pictures are not sharp, well focused or have great IQ but that transmit way more than others that are all of those things.

Ask yourself what kind of pictures you want to take, what do you want to transmit to the people who is watching them and then research what gear you need to convey those emotions in the way that you want to do it.

Gear is important but concept is king.

Otherwise everyone with enough money can take the same pictures that you can.
>>
>>3470144
This is great. How deep out there were you?
>>
>>3468264
Define expensive.
>>
>>3468658
It shows. Terrible shot.
>>
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7ECB90D96DF59DE5
>>
>>3471425
i used my a7 + macro lens + nikon es-1 slide copier for scanning film

>>3471509
not that deep. standing in waist deep water but needing to jump up with the camera over my head when waves were passing
>>
>>3468264
>define expensive
>define good
>what is a good photographer
>what is a bad photographer
>you're unironically thinking that expensive gear has anything to do with good photography

I've seen people with 1200D cameras and max 250 bucks glass doing astonishing jobs. I've seen idiots with daddy's fuck you money spending over 10 grand on a lens + body combo and even after a while not getting close to what the 1200D lad did.

You're a fucking moron. The cancerous type of moron who thinks that "hurr durr, if you have, you good" type of moron. Get a clue you moronic neanderthal. No amazing photographer became amazing because of his thousands of dollars worth of gear.
>>
File: fSWXgEiqZTs.jpg (106 KB, 779x758)
106 KB
106 KB JPG
>>3468264
Look like, fullframe? Cheap and nice!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareWindows Photo Editor 10.0.10011.16384
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Created2019:05:02 17:30:44
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3469093
And you're proving that /p/ is just bunch of GASers.
>>
Expensive gear wont compensate for lack of any sort of artistic knowledge - you have to acquire that yourself. By that logic skill as a photographer lies in the person, not the gear.

You may need good gear to take good photos, but you said "good photographer" implying you're talking about the person taking the photos. You can be a good photographer taking okay pictures because you dont have good gear, but a bad photographer wont magically take amazing pictures just because they spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on gear.
>>
>>3468264
Since you've been asked to define everything else, define "photographer".
>>
>>3473239
Even with improvements to cameras wont a good one always be good, Why do people keep buying newer models?
>>
>>3473974
marketing. But it is not actually such a sin to be a gearfag, costs of traveling for shoots dominates in the end. well, hopefully.
>>
File: CRW_5766 (Large).jpg (1.5 MB, 1620x1080)
1.5 MB
1.5 MB JPG
>>3468264
Proofs

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 10D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows)
PhotographerMichael Ackerman
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:01:07 10:59:00
Exposure Time1/1500 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating3200
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length70.00 mm
>>
File: CRW_5784 (Large).jpg (1.4 MB, 1616x1080)
1.4 MB
1.4 MB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 10D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows)
PhotographerMichael Ackerman
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:01:07 10:59:07
Exposure Time1/1500 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating3200
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length110.00 mm
>>
File: CRW_5634 (Large).jpg (1.55 MB, 1620x1080)
1.55 MB
1.55 MB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 10D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows)
PhotographerMichael Ackerman
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:01:07 10:58:17
Exposure Time1/1000 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating3200
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length145.00 mm
>>
>>3474665
>>3474666
>sports photography
>good

no
>>
File: CRW_5685 (Large).jpg (1.35 MB, 1620x1080)
1.35 MB
1.35 MB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 10D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows)
PhotographerMichael Ackerman
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2019:01:07 10:58:31
Exposure Time1/1500 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating3200
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length70.00 mm
>>
>>3474669
It's more important than street.
>>
>>3469290
>>3469290

That's just because he's a cheap jew
>>
File: w1000-430576gqND1qsl.jpg (973 KB, 1100x1651)
973 KB
973 KB JPG
>>3474669
sports photography is awesome. far better than shitposting
>>
>>3468274
point still stands lmao
dumbass
>>
>>3468658
>Canon Rebel SII, 50mm plastic fantastic
no shit

>>3470146
whats a bridge camera
>>
>>3474665
>>3474666
>>3474668

>10D in 2019

bold man
>>
>>3475000
>whats a bridge camera
Know those cameras that are the same size as cameras that you can swap lenses with, but have a fixed lens? Those are bridge cameras.

They're almost universally shit upon because they combine the weaknesses of compacts (small sensor, fixed lens, subpar controls) with the size of a dslr/mirrorless effectively giving you the worst of both worlds.

You're basically always better off avoiding these and getting a dedicated compact or an ilc (interchangable lens camera).
>>
File: 18d05cu-960.jpg (429 KB, 1920x1354)
429 KB
429 KB JPG
>>3468264
here is proof u succer. no go away.
>>
>>3475047
ahh gotcha so like a x100
>>
>>3475097
no
>>
File: IMG_20190419_202129294.jpg (2.8 MB, 4032x3024)
2.8 MB
2.8 MB JPG
proof. simply amazing work
>>
>>3474697
>>3474828
The heavy emphasis on burst shooting and hoping you get something is lame as fuck.
>>
>>3477685
There's no more of a heavy emphasis on burst shooting in sports photography than any other kind.
>>
>>3477686
Burst shooting sucks in general. The difference is that in sports photography it's just about a requirement.
>>
>>3477688
>The difference is that in sports photography it's just about a requirement.
No, it really isn't.
>>
>>3477688
Now that I have more of a chance to comment, no, burst firing is only a crutch, even in sports. It's for people who can't read the situation well enough to hit the shutter release at the right moment. Shooting off a burst of say a football play is no different from shooting off a burst of the husband and bride kissing. You only do it if you feel you need a backup to your sense of timing and feel for the moment.
>>
File: skele.jpg (191 KB, 800x720)
191 KB
191 KB JPG
>>
>>3474666
o///o
>>
>>3477728
burst shooting is a crutch, but only for those who don't know how to properly use it.

>You only do it if you feel you need a backup to your sense of timing and feel for the moment.
This is sorta true but also a gross over-simplification. There are plenty of moments that even the most experienced photographer won't be able to anticipate/react quickly enough to capture in the moment, which is where burst shooting comes in. Also, capturing 'peak action' won't necessarily create the best photo, for a number of reason, so it's important to be able to capture a sequence of photos of that particular play. Also, you need to take into account that even the most sophisticated autofocus system will miss focus on occasion, especially in continuous mode.
>>
>>3468791
>saying this unironically
>>
>>3480165
Dynamic range really isn't all that important though,
Fujichrome Velvia is only about 4 or 5 stops of dynamic range and plenty of photographers still love it.
>>
>>3468264

any camera that shoots RAW is good enough

just make it look good in photoshop like all the professionals do

bam
>>
>>3475047
>>3475097


Buy an RX100

much bigger sensor than a bridge camera. they hold their value, though, for the later models
>>
File: Velvia100_ (22).jpg (673 KB, 1200x806)
673 KB
673 KB JPG
>>3480220
Doesn't mean it's not limited though.
To use it effectively you need to wait for the right light and/or use filters (GNDs for sure, maybe a polariser too, or a warming filter if there's lots of shadows).
Which is fine for landscapes but not something you'd use on midday trying to capture scenes that evolve and that you can't come back later and shoot again.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakePlustek
Camera ModelOpticFilm 8100
Camera SoftwareSilverFast 8.8.0 r15 (Mar 1 2019) 5e078a5 01.03.
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
>>
Your photos just can't be technically the best, but make a story around using shitty point and shoots that will succeed and boom, you are a good photographer.
>>
File: daido.png (2.69 MB, 1418x2864)
2.69 MB
2.69 MB PNG
Based daido and his boy say otherwise
>>
>>3468264
>no good photographers existed before 24mp DSLR's
your logic is as flawed as Sony's raw format
>>
>>3480653
>your logic is as flawed as Sony's raw format
what's wrong with it?
>>
Ren Hang

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2012:10:30 01:57:18
>>
>>3480594
>Any camera is fine.
Why was Daido scratching his nose? Was he lying?
>>
Every great photo taken ever has was taken with a camera technologically inferior to an entry level DSLR.
>>
>>3480657
eats your stars even in RAW format which means there is in camera processing on RAW which shouldn't be
firmware update didn't fix it
>just buy a new camera
>>
>>3480233
You're forgetting about decisive moment shooting.
If you can't predict a camera's inconsistent shutter lag or take over full control when you feel the AI isn't thinking what you're thinking, getting the picture you want gets more and more up to luck than ability.
>>
>>3480662
lol
>>
File: reflection.jpg (227 KB, 618x960)
227 KB
227 KB JPG
I took this with a Canon AE-1 and a 50mm 1.4 that I got for $10 at a flea market.
>>
>>3468274
ok?
>>
>>3470144
Really aesthetic, great pic imo.
>>
>>3468271
>>3468273
Define "define 'define'".
>>
>>3469290
>Legendary
Never heard of him.
>>
>>3470144
>film
.jpg

ohyou
>>
>>3480899
is there something that doesn't add up?
>>
>>3468658

You're not really disproving his point eh?
>>
>>3468264
At this point even low end bodies feature 24 MP, 12 stops of dynamic range and rather good low-light performance.
Combine that with any somewhat decent lense and you can take pictures far sharper and with higher dynamic range than most displays can show.
Even 4K is just barely above 8 MP and good luck finding a screen capable of three times as much, pretty much nobody will view your image on a screen with that high resolution.
These days it is far more about composition than it is about overall sharpness.
Either your pictures look good or they don't, unless you do a 100% crop side by side you won't see much of a difference most of the time.

If you want insane resolution, shoot CMS-20 II film in medium or large format and scan it at something like 20.000 dpi.
I don't see why anyone would need that much resolution, but it is about as much as you can get these days.
>>
>>3480742
That is fairly interesting at least.
>>
>>3480899
Not even that guy, but all of my film scans that I get done at a shop always come back in .jpg, whats wrong with jpg for film scans?
>>
>>3481459
A .tif file will offer more latitude when you process it.

Honestly though you have the negatives if you need to rescan so i wouldn't be super concerned about it unless it looks really bad.
>>
>>3468264
You're empirically wrong andf it's not even worth debating such a child like misconception.

We'll chat when you grow up. Off you toddle!
>>
>>3481973
what the fuck?



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.