First reel of film, I fucked it for the most part. Would like some feedback on how to improve shots and what not. Bulb on my flash blew halfway through while I was down in London. Let’s get to it.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width848Image Height1280Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>3946152>is a nophotocringe
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera ModelEZ ControllerCamera SoftwareEZ Controller 5.01.024 (091007)Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKIImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationUnknownImage Created2021:10:19 10:45:49Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Height2075Image Width3130Color Space InformationsRGB
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelEZ ControllerCamera SoftwareEZ Controller 5.01.024 (091007)Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3130Image Height2075
>>3945652>we’ll take the lotwas harry flexing on ron?
>>3946774>you can make EVERYTHING look "film."everyone says this, no one can do it
Talk bugs, post bugs, freak out closet dwellers. This here is some kind of dung beetle.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 1000DCamera SoftwareRawTherapee 5.8Image-Specific Properties:Image Width3898Image Height2594Compression SchemeUncompressedPixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2021:09:03 13:29:49Exposure Time1/500 secF-Numberf/7.1Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/7.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length55.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiColor Space InformationsRGB
>>3939321really nicekeep up the good work bug-man
>>3949964tnx, bug season is ending however
is it just a hipster meme camera? or actually quality?
>>3952676There's a reason only oldfags know how to shoot these retro cameras, they are handled different and not like a DSLR would.They are best used at hip level and with your left hand doing almost all the work but surprise, the Zfc has a flipper screen and can't be quite used like that simulating a tilt-up screen being the viewfinder.
>>3952708Babby MF is better than the real thing even without the hood.
>>3952683cant shoot birds on mf without hauling around a lens the size of a howitzer
>>3952741They'll spread it for a rollei if'n y're proud an gat the wyrd.
>>3952708I have cameras with no grip and it's fine but the zfc was the only one I had for birding and I just didn't find it comfortable to use compared to the z50 which I no longer have.
You guys getting the new 40mm ricoh gr 3x?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAndroid RP1A.200720.012.G975WVLS6GUG1Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1434Image Height1439
>>3950733Oh, I realize how I misread that now. Derp.
are you saying i shouldn't buy this
>>3950759Why would you when this gem exists?
>>3950629mine doesn't wobble thankfully, just skips inputs unless I clean it frequentlyIf there was another camera in the same niche I would use that instead.
I wish Leica would release a 40mm version of the Q. I find 28mm pretty hard to work with for anything except buildings.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelX-T3Camera SoftwareDigital Camera X-T3 Ver3.21Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)53 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2020:08:03 09:56:09Exposure Time1/420 secF-Numberf/5.0Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/4.9Brightness7.2 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length35.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1086Image Height724RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
Give me 1 (one) good reason why used lenses with fungus / haze / balsam separation should NOT be used marketed as parts or repair[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiColor Space InformationsRGB
>>3947815I did a repair on a 100mm 3.5 Zeiss that had element separation. Hardest part was getting the lens holder out with a spanner. Norland 61 is the adhesive to use.Turned a $120 parts only into an admirable performer.
>>3951842What did you use for re-collimating the elements?
>>3951914>collimatingNot him, but good lenses can be aligned with V-blocks. The optical and physical center will be the same on any modern-ish lens groups from a developed country. If you're trying to repair something east-block or nazi-era German, you need the pricey optical gear.
>>3947842>many fungusjust run from that shit
>>3949296there's a lot more things you can do to add character to your photos, but I'm not even saying you can't buy them, I'm just saying they should be marked down, to basically nothing
Has anyone ever owned a Sony NEX-F3? I found the one my dad got 7 years ago, I never really owned a DLSR or a Mirrorless, always shot with phone camera (Samsung S8)So I want to know just what possibly I could do to improve the shots taken and be up to modern standards or enough to beat my S8Or is it not worth to keep? I mean it still is selling for around $300-$400 AUD on Ebay so it has kept its value for some time
This is the lens it came with, though I am an absolute noob with equipment so I don't even know what all this means[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:
since you already have it, learn about iso, aperture, shutter speed, EV compersation and how to properly mix them together.the advantage over the S8 is more retained details in photo since NEX has a bigger APSC sensor, zoom lens, tilt screen, tilting flash. if you want crispier details, shoot in RAW mode and learn to post process with a photo editing software like LR, PS, C1 etc. take advantage of the kit lens since you will learn what focal length you will use and favor most of the time. just go out and shoot and in the process learn how to frame and compose shots. others also put a pancake lens on these NEX cameras to make them quite compact and light.
The image quality from that camera for photos is only marginally worse than the latest and greatest $2000 apsc bodies, like the a6600.Where it suffers is autofocus speed, not having a viewfinder and a bit of a clunky interface. They are awesomely compact though!>I don't know what all this means18-55 is the focal range, this is how much the lens can zoom.3.5-5.6 is the max aperture range, a larger aperture (lower number) allows more light in, which allows a faster shutter speed, better performance in low light and a shallower depth of field for those blurry backgrounds that make pro portraits look so nice. Some zoom lenses like yours have a variable max aperture that changes with the amount of zoom you're using.For good photos you need to be familiar with the exposure triangle; shutter speed, aperture and iso.As a rule of thumb, you want to keep shutter speed at least 1\(2*focal length) to avoid blue from your hand shaking, so if your zoom is at 50mm, 1\100 or faster should be ok. Aperture should be set to what you think looks nice, but remembering that less light, like being indoors, will benefit from it being wide open (number as low as possible), and iso should be as low as you can get away with whilst satisfying the above 2, higher iso = more noise. You should be able to set the camera to aperture priority mode, where you adjust the aperture, and the camera adjusts the other 2 parameters for you, which is a great place for a beginner to start.Then there's editing, you can either dive into something "pro" like lightroom or capture one, or something a bit more "fun" like Snapseed. Both options can give fantastic results.Most importantly, go out and snap some pics,the more you shoot and edit, the better your photos will look.
>>3952884They’re a perfectly Not Bad camera, you can get some great shots with them. Just to add a bit more to >>3952925* Dont have high expectations over ISO1600. * Shoot RAW+JPEG. RAW gives you WAY more freedom in editing, but you might not be interested in that immediately. Trust me, many of us wish we’d done that. * Get a CPL filter to take glare off everything, water, leaves, glass, everything. K&F is very good and won’t break the bank. * look at Skylum for editing software. It’s pay once, fucking good, and much simpler than Adobe stuff. I know quite a few serious photographers that have adopted it. Results are MUCH better when you use a RAW file. Sorry for lack of explanations here, but look into it more yourself. Most of all, have fun and take photos. Also keep that camera when you upgrade, with a small lens theyre pocket size and more convenient to carry than a big boi. Here’s a (very) quick example of editing RAW. With JPEG you can only really adjust saturation, brightness, black point etc. RAW you can adjust almost everything except your shutter speed in post. Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
hi i really love how cinemstill 800t looks on instagram but i only have a a6000. i know i can turn the white balance to tungsteen balanced, and put iso 800 but you know its missing the haliation effect like glowing angel red balls on lights. so i thought what if i took a knife or screwdriver and put little mark or holes in the sensor say like 10 or 15 holes and that those holes might have burning yellow or red light in those parts because the pixels are more "opened up" for light. has anyone tried before? i would love my sony a6000 to be a cinestill machine!
>>3952557my bad, forgot to mention that i live in Denmark which is super expensive. i was trying to imply that your friend is most likely wrong. in sweden i got my scans for 10 bucks.
>>3952610Where? All the places I know of cost like 30 bucks for dev and scan?
>>3952780here in Quebec it's $3.5 CAD for C-41. but add 7 bucks for low res scans.
>>3952477jesus but also, godspeed OP
>>3952780you mean where in sweden?
Gearfaggotry got another one:>we were interested in each other's footage and encouraged each other on and on. So many new and exciting camera releases - so many of them under $1500 and rapid advances in image quality. At the peak of the DSLR revolution there was also regular socialising online between pros and hobbyists and of course at camera shows. Communities like the EOSHD Forum around the world were full of a great mix of people all using the same affordable gear and exchanging their experiences, their knowledge.>But I have realised things have changed and I no longer want to be involved in it. Marketeers and their sponsors, social media influencers and their managers, clickbait and the social media companies have taken over from internet communities and they are pure consumerism. Most of the camera community is no longer even reading 2 page articles on a desktop computer or laptop, just quickly scrolling or flicking through shallow novelty on a phone.>We're now in age of Facebook and Instagram where the only content that succeeds is a daily treadmill of shallow instant gratification or divisive extreme opinion. They have taken my livelihood away, taken away the spirit of the camera community as it was, and even harmed the very basis of how the internet was originally meant to be, as a technology.>The World Wide Web was not supposed to be dominated by a dishonest bunch of divas and big egos showing off, it was going to be a valuable worldwide resource not laden with adverts and misinformation or bullshit rumours - but detailed experiences and knowledge, not driven by shallow engagement and clickbait.Full blogpost also in the vid description:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osq2iDh8JEI
>>3952445I mean this guy is constantly whining in his videos about "where is their actual footage/images" and then I can barely find anything of his. He seems to constantly use covid as an excuse for not having anything recent but his channel has videos going back 8 years and there's barely anything there. What is there isn't anything particularly impressive either, I'm sure there's a million other videos of similar quality on youtube. This just screams of a guy who has invested a large amount of his life into something and now doesn't care about it as much as he did before. The whole "I'm going to roast everyone" schtick is old too, people are over it. It's funny because in one of his videos he says "the best way to get noticed on youtube is to mention bigger channels" and he also complains about other channels using clickbait yet he mentions bigger channels in his videos then speaks about them for about a minute then goes on a rant about how some other random channel has more subs than Madonna. Then he wonders why his videos don't get views. Don't get me wrong, it fucking sucks when something you like starts to change in ways you don't like but that's life and it's always going to happen. This is why my philosophy in life is always to do shit for myself that I'm interested in. If other people are interested in the same shit then cool but if not I was going to do it anyway so it's fine. This guy is a classic example of sour grapes.
>>3952448He's got some test shots on his vimeo page, and often has short clips in his reviews. He's not a creator, he's a gearfag that got his groove by doing blog posts on his site. He's still good at that, honest, and rarely biased. It's the whole blog sphere that's going down, so he tried moving to youtoube, but he's simply too awkward at it. Clickbait and rants aren't cutting it next to professional output Mckinnon is doing. They're a different segment altogether. He's a tech reviewer, the other is content creator that plugs gear and services into his content as stream of revenue.
>>3952565>He's not a creator, he's a gearfagSo why does he waste his time ranting about how other youtubers have no footage when it's clear they're so just general tech reviewers rather than creatives? There's plenty of space on youtube for someone who is straight to the point without getting into skits or bullshit like that. If I want a no bullshit, straight to the point review of a lens then I can go to Christopher Frost's channel and get it. Basically, the industry/community evolved and this guy is being left behind and he's very obviously sour about it.
>>3952565Well said, that's basically it.People are too dumb/impatient to read again and the mainstream has moved into something else (vlog/talking shill head) that some know how to exploit better, and in the future something else will come along.
>>3952439Indeed, with some luck we get another funny mustache guy who can finish the job.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelEZ ControllerCamera SoftwareEZ Controller 6.50.008 (160222)Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3089Image Height2048
Sup /pp/,I'm doing an at home project to keep myself busy when I'm done with work and not busy with the kid and wife. I wanted to try and make a cinematic film experience using both open source software while using Linux and using a Galaxy S21 Ultra. The S21 captures good enough quality and I've seen some specialized cases that makes using lenses and lens filters possible. I've already grabbed a cheap $25 action stick that allows for adding a direction light and YAW abilities for the phone. What accessories should I use to complete the cinematic experience? What sort of light color and brightest helps to make the lighting look more natural? Should I use a bright light and apply a lens filter that will filter out the light but since more light applied more data is acquired for editing?
>>3952849>kid>wifeyou need to subjugate 3 autists to do the work for you better than you ever could. Director, writer, DP. That's how worthless all the shit I didn't read was and your place in the world as a shabbos goy.
You can get away with "bad" camera work and still have it work due to it being a low budget film. Just worry about audio. You can fix most footage in post, can't fix audio.
>>3952849There's a video general for questions like this Go ask there >>3951487
Any Ricoh GR + Fujifilm owners here? I need a Ricoh simulation recipe for my Wormji. I got memed into switching from Ricoh GR to a Fujifilm X100T and I hate Fuji colors & tonality in sooc jpegs. Unfortunately i've sold the GR to buy the X100T so i can't do any comparisons anymore.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareGoogleImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1600Image Height900Scene Capture TypeStandard
The only good thing about the GR is the positive film setting. No idea what you are talking about. The normal SOOCs look straight trash.
>>3952653much better files in general than I have seen from my x-e2 so far, for all settings and conditions Sony sensors are just better.
>>3946787[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width549Image Height558Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>3952653wrong
>>3951460>>3951466this is way better
I took some photos on the way home. I think it’s a bit generic but I like it[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationRight-Hand, TopHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width4032Image Height3024Scene Capture TypeStandard
yea it looks ok
>>3952072Hey man, at least you're taking pictures and trying. Better than half these guys just jerking each other off about what brands to use.
How do you carry your gear around? Do people bring their lenses in picrel?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1500Image Height1500Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Compression SchemeUnknownPixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2016:10:11 16:17:22Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1500Image Height1500
>>3951869very nice. ready to go!
>>3951869Cute purse.But no really, it's cute.I'm thinking of getting a fanny pack. Tired of letting bags hang over my shoulder/neck. I get bruises after a long day of lugging heavy stuff around.
>>3952826You can use the 5L as a fanny pack.
>>3946914In a red Amoeba Records tote bag.
Camera case inside the Jansport.Tammy 150-600 takes up one half, usually hooked to my body. any other glass goes in the other separated by the beanie. Usually the 16-80 and a my fm w a 50 prime. They trade spaces if I'm not shooting birds. Stuff that can't scratch just kinda bounces around wherever there's room.It works.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakemotorolaCamera Modelmoto g(7)Camera Softwareriver-user 10 QPUS30.52-23-13-4 d00bb5 release-keysSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2021:10:18 23:33:30Exposure Time1/20 secF-Numberf/1.8ISO Speed Rating745Lens Aperturef/1.8Brightness-5.9 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length3.95 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1836Image Height3264Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
What are some of your favorite photo books?
>>3949767rawsmunbtro photograpas?
>>3952119>rauschenberg photographsNiggers can't read cursive
I never read any photo books, which is a shame. Which one would you recommend?
https://youtu.be/DDxUrZuA1WkThis book seems great
>>3945190"Dicks"By Richard Dickson
Hi, /p/, /k/ here. I went to a WWII reenactment a few weeks ago (D-Day Conneaut) and managed to take a ton of photos. Most were took on a Kodak 35RF, but I brought a Baby Brownie Special with some old 127 film along for the beach landings where I managed to take some cool snaps. I took this one with King's Royal 125 ASA Panchromatic, 1960s vintage, and IMO it looks like it could be an original. Aside from getting lucky again and stumbling across 50+ year old film, is there any way to get this effect these days? I'm hoping to use 35mm from not on since 127 is expensive as hell and doesn't have many exposures, but if I have to use 127 I'll see what I can do.
>>3952732William Mortensen and pictorial photography in general is a better idea of whatever the fuck straight photography is. His books give a better idea of what prewar photography was in the darkroom by his own admission of what is boring or derivative than what anyone would ever tell you. Newspaper prints were cooked even more than this, which I took after dawn and proceeded to cook to fuck and back in a more Adams style because I couldn't get tiddy on the scene to pose on it.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareCapture One 10.2.1 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution1152 dpiVertical Resolution1152 dpiImage Width1000Image Height1000
Yeah, this is the epitome of progressive 30s photography that offended f/64 so much they glowed.
>>3952744Imagine getting so asshurt over handmade texture filters and pencil smudges done in post in addition to the usual doge and bun that you launch a campaign to only shoot rocks and still edit the fuck out of them so they lock good. I see more Mortensen in your OP photos and prewar photography in general than some goddamn eurofag like HGB.
>>3952745I will say, bresson had taste in women like we have taste in burgers and nam footage, if you know what I mean.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera ModelXY-15Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 WindowsPhotographer©Bruce Davidson/Magnum PhotosImage-Specific Properties:Image Width3306Image Height4954Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Compression SchemeUncompressedPixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2012:07:23 17:21:04Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width793Image Height1189
>>3942289>I can't quite put my finger on what "makes" the look. The washed out colors? The motion blur?Lack of contrast and blur do a lot, but tbqh a lot of how we read the age of an image and would date it to WW2 is because of either very influential photos like Capa's D-Day photos, stills from video, low quality reproductions in textbooks/newspapers. Then people do re-enactment like you're doing and reinforce those visual cues. Large majority of WW2 photos from say the US Signal Corps were technically sound photos.If you want to date a photo, just take it normally. Make sure you get shit loads of dust on the negative. Then completely fuck the detail and contrast by printing it and re-photographing it a couple of times.
