>>3800692
I'm currently on an old (ca. 2015 Core i7) MacBook Air and planning to upgrade to a 16" Apple Silicon MacBook Pro as soon as such a thing actually exists for purchase.

>>3800793
>Is there some reason to edit in field?
Not necessarily in the field, per se, but like others have said, they're great for editing while chilling on the couch, or in bed, or on a road trip, or in a coffee shop.

>>3801019
>name a better alternative [to CDs for photo storage]
This is actually a really good question. CDs and even DVDs or Blu Rays suck because they're so low-capacity--max you can do with even a quad-layer Blu Ray is about 100GB per disc, so if I wanted to archive my entire photography hoard that would take... many discs. I guess that's fine if you don't shoot that much (or shoot JPEGs, since they're so much smaller). And they do have the advantage that optical discs offer more shelf-stable longevity than most options.

What would be a lot better is something like LTO tape drive, which has similar longevity and media prices to BD-R but the media itself is a lot higher capacity (on the order of terabytes, depending on what LTO generation you get). The big downside there is that the drives themselves are hellaciously expensive and compatibility between generations is iffy (usually they can read two generations behind, so an LTO7 drive can read LTO5 tapes but not LTO4).

The plan I'm currently working on since I have some serious data hoarding tendencies is to just buy about ten hard drives, roughly one per year I've been taking pictures, and then store them in a Pelican case for long term backup, with some sort of routine where I refresh each year's drive once every month or two to make sure they stay viable and the drives themselves haven't failed.

>>3801309
>also, go ask /g/ how many ssds/hdd they've had die over time? also unpredictably
The key takeaway is that you should have more than one backup if you're serious about backups.

(I say, as someone who barely has one backup)

>>3801019
Just print them out if they're worth looking at. Decent quality prints should last centuries.

>>3801729
>Blu Ray
https://www.verbatim-europe.co.uk/en/prod/mdisc-lifetime-archival-bdxl-100gb--5-pack-jewel-case-43834/
While I'd imagine the costs are high per disk, 100 GB seems like a shit ton for jpeg storage, assuming an average image size of about 4 MB. I think I have mixed opinions of storing raw files.

Plus, the alternative I can think of is paying for cloud storage. That, or get your images printed onto 35mm slides, which probably have their own preservation issues, particularly since printed slides likely have a very different chemical make-up compared to colour reversal film.

>>3800826
Idk about other software but lr has a tethered shooting mode

>>3801642
Damn both of these are making are me diamonds that lenovo price point though

>>3801729
Using Pelican case instead of a faraday cage to block out all harmful magnetic waves
>Disappointed

File: oscar.png (1.32 MB, 863x576)

1.32 MB PNG

So far, anyway.

>>3801008
Your father raised a fucking pussy. You broke it you fucking mong, own up and repair/replace it afterward.

>>3801013
basado

>>3800977
>28-70mm f/2.8.
Oh no.

>>3801189
what's wrong with that?

>>3800977
gr8 b8 r8 8/8

>>3800816
>>3800817
These photos seem to have avoided the awful... I don't know what to call it, lens flare smear?, that the others had. Agree that these are good photos. Amazing that these came from the same source as
>>3792988

File: booba with boob eyes.jpg (21 KB, 598x574)

21 KB JPG

>>3800816
>>3800817

>>3800554
>le dont crop, i took the first class of photography trust me!
Nigga read a Vogue or any high end fashion magazine, cropping is fine.

>>3801977
facts

>>3800914
They used a either a really aggresive tiffen BM filter or tried to do it on post. More likely the second.

I'll let you in on a secret, if you can't take a good interesting photograph with a cheap PnS then you're not going to take good interesting photographs with a more expensive setup.

You need to learn the absolute basics or you'll turn into a gearfag, not a photographer.

>>3801160

OP don't listen to >>3801162
Get a canon t7 and go out and take pictures. you'll learn along the way, that's part of the fun.

>>3801160
>canon 700D
I personally can't stand Canon or Nikon's plasticky consumer DSLRs because of the lack of direct controls and the dark pentamirror viewfinder. I would recommend Canon's ##D series cameras instead, like the 50D, 60D or 70D, just for the fact that they have that much more direct control. Two command dials allows you to play with settings in manual mode much more quickly, which will encourage you to change them more frequently and therefore learn faster.

>>3801162
OP don’t listen to this ho buy the nicest camera in your budget.

>>3801160
>is it worth investing more for a newer model ?
Get whatever you want for your first camera and just plan for the inevitability of reselling it if/when you outgrow it. I got a Sony a6000 as my first camera at /p/'s recommendation and while the raws I got out of the camera looked good and I enjoyed composing photos, I eventually found that the camera's clumsiness of the controls, poorly organized menus and short battery life were just making the experience harder than it needed to be, so I sold it and bought a used 5D Mark II instead, which was just easier to learn on and use. I don't know if I'd recommend a 5DII to a complete beginner (or a 6D, which is a little newer but only marginally more expensive)--the problem is that full frame EF lenses can be expensive (but shop it, you might find something you're comfortable with). Just giving that as an example. The 700D/T5i is popular for a reason. Get it and learn on it.

Because that takes more than setting your body to A and pushing the button.

>>3801958
I was thinking earlier today about trying to recreate a double exposure digitally.
Is that a thing you do?
GIMP pill me on double exposure effects.

File: Screenshot_2021-01-21-11-(...).jpg (341 KB, 720x1520)

341 KB JPG

>>3801958
Why not, I do a fair amount, but it gets sometime in your way when you take photos, you start to think "I could change that in post". I've separated my Instagram accounts in two, one where I post photomanipulation and one where I post strictly photography with non to minimal retouching.
Pic related is the stuff I do ( @yvonmind )

File: Nuketown.jpg (3.77 MB, 2620x3935)

3.77 MB JPG

>>3801990
I wasn't gonna say it but...

>>3801996
Yeah, I have done them, they are kind of like the glass sphere of manipulations, easy to do and so many people do them they eventually just get annoying unless you do something truly unique or of immense detail.

>>3802136
I noticed this at first but eventually settled into focusing on the shoot and seeing if any photos in post have manipulation potential (Pic Related)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 21.0 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2021:01:21 11:39:03
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2620
Image Height	3935

>>3801958
graphic design has its own board

this picture feel like what someone would take when their first macro lens comes in the mail. the first one is nice, though.

Under exposed and muddy, I remember doing exactly this style when I got my macro and flash.
Its still lots of fun though

>>3801565
>>3801577
i have neither of these things lol was just walking around looking for lit leaves in overcast weather. thanks for the feedback

File: PIC_0197-20a-01.jpg (1.38 MB, 1429x2000)

1.38 MB JPG

spider

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D5600
Camera Software	Snapseed 2.0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	854
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	450 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2021:01:21 00:21:03
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Fine Weather
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	300.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1429
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Soft
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3801600
I think your photos are good. A bit too contrasted, but that is a personal choice.
Composition is ok, some are better, the fern one has a nice minimalist vibe.
Overall very decent photos, not sure what could be done more with the subject, maybe find more interesting plants ?

>>3801889
you can extrapolate that to a lot of technical things

>>3801864
That's a bad image because photog decided to put overly bright and distracting highlight spots directly above the face of the model. Eyes go to the brightest spot of the image. It has nothing to do with equipment he used.

File: 1611102052201~2.jpg (140 KB, 1372x1022)

140 KB JPG

>>3801292
>Portrait mode looks like fucking dog shit
So does landscape mode

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1372
Image Height	1022
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2021:01:21 09:35:27

>>3801901
kek

God I wanna drink that fucking coke... that's the sexiest damn coke I've ever seen in portrait mode.

>>3801901
>sideways

Hnnngh...

>>3802435
Yeah, sounds about right for a fully working one. Lens-wise, vf/rf-wise and feature-wise it's one of the best classic folders you can get.
Also check the back for the existence of a small red window. Iskras didn't have that window from factory, they have an automatic advance mechanism (it stops automatically on the next frame, that is). Any such red windows are aftermarket modifications. Either because the mechanism was broken (can happen if forced), or because people found the manual method more reliable, or some could have been modified to shoot 645 portraits.
In any case if you see such a window, somebody has been tampering with the camera, and you should be careful making sure everything works as it should.

>>3802459
I noticed the presence of the window in one of the pictures after I bought it (€140 shipped), I hope everything else is working properly.
Thank you for the advice.

File: FA41E542-46EB-44EC-A218-6(...).jpg (3.8 MB, 4032x3024)

3.8 MB JPG

>at work
>boss going through old boxes
>knows I like ‘camera stuff’
>hands me these

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone SE (2nd generation)
Camera Software	13.6.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2021:01:22 11:12:04
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	64
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Brightness	3.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	3.99 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	4032
Image Height	3024
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3802740
lucky bastard

>>3802740
>>3803283
220 colour negative expired twenty years ago is hardly the boon you'd like it to be. IIUC 220 has a partial backing paper, so it's useless in cameras with red windows or a loading method that has a way to look at the backing paper (as on Kiev 80/88 manually-loaded backs). Not to mention the 2 extra stops of light it's gonna require, and the gnarly colour shifts (or pre-fading) that expired film is prone to.

I don't suppose it was stored in a freezer, either?

Still, ebay that shit, lomofags gonna eat it all up.

>>3801421
>sharpness tests for XF lenses
only the macro lenses are designed for sharpness. fuji has explicitly stated they chase qualities besides sharpness in their lenses.
if you pray at the altar of mtf charts, you'll be dissapointed with fuji. sony ---> that way.

>>3801439
>fuji has explicitly stated they chase qualities besides sharpness in their lenses.
A lens's primary job is to focus light, so this is pretty worrisome.

>>3801440
they obviously focus fine. they have a different philosophy than just photos of brick walls. if you agree with it (i do), it's a pro. if you don't (spec sheet sniffers), it's a massive con. ymmv.

>>3801443
>they obviously focus fine.
Except they can't focus light into a sharp image. :-/

>>3801454
Except they do, and they do it perfectly fine.

>>3793252
Subtle. Nice eye.

File: IMG_4909.jpg (2.3 MB, 1125x1807)

2.3 MB JPG

One of my favorite shots from a trip to bangkok.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 3.2.1 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2020:06:16 10:38:06
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3800699
lol

File: 4CFBA6BE-D929-4D0F-A262-6(...).jpg (1.45 MB, 1932x1932)

1.45 MB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T1
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T1 Ver4.30
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2021:01:20 20:07:48
Exposure Time	1/600 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	10.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

Bop it

Twist it

Bump it

Pull it

Crop it

>>3800274
Looks interesting, do you have one?

>>3800274
I didn't know that was a thing.
Are there some example images taken with one?
I'm not sure I even know what a photo looks like out of something like that.

>>3800899
Nope, I own a full spectrum canon dslr though.
>>3801003
It can shoot raw if you hack it. It's about as noisy as you'd expect from such a small sensor.

>>3801193
>full spectrum canon dslr though
Got some pictures to share or are you going to keep teasing us?

>>3800602
>Real infrared cameras I have at work are far more interesting...but they cost like $50K a piece for VGA resolution.
FLIR scopes arent anywhere near that expensive, and there is chinkshit for even less.

https://www.amazon.com/FLIR-Systems-III-320-Thermal-Detector/dp/B01BE2JZ9O/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=flir+scope&qid=1611160115&sr=8-4

>>3801105
Olympus won’t be bankrupt precisely because they got rid of the camera business. I don’t like it, but it was the right thing to do. Every other part of the company is turning a profit.

>>3801429
Get the more premium xh1 then

>>3801105
Do you Fuji shills ever sleep?

>>3800683
Unironically 150mm and snipe while people think it's a short lens lol

>>3801510
Olympus still make microscopes and laparoscopes and endoscopes.
Oddly enough, Olympus has entered into a joint venture with Sony for medical imaging, as Olympus has huge amounts of market share in medical imaging, which Sony concluded that if you can't beat them, join them.
Now, if you want to buy an endoscopy trolley, one option is a trolley with Olympus endoscopic equipment, with a Sony medical grade Blu Ray recorder and a Sony medical grade printer.

If you want an Olympus microscope, then that's an alternative to Zeiss.
>>3801105
>L-Mount
S cameras are selling less than optimally and the L-Mount is a depressing landscape of Sigma E-Mount lenses that have been remounted to L.
Then there's Leica, who are happy enough to sell a handful of cameras a month - their only customers are rich collectors.
It's a real shame, because I actually rather like the S5. I'd consider it if I had to make a jump over to FF.
Right now, I'd rather stick with Olympus, or OM-DIGITAL.

>>3801509
>you will be astonished at how he recoils
>how injured he is
>how he suddenly shrinks back
>I've been found out.
You're not doing this for free? Are you?

>>3801561
based

>>3800836
See when something has been done to death, isn't it very important that a jew in New York did it for the first time?

>>3801001
>isolate single photos to be judged on their own
But that's exactly what OP did.

>>3801933
>that's what op did
No
>cherry picked a handful of photos and announced who they were by
>implying they are supposed to be good because of who took them