Post confessions. I have too many. See in post below.
1. I hate namefags, but I like wakkowarner poster because he tries and adds posts to the board2. /vid/ If i researched story as much as gear, I'd make a living off of youtube by now3. Everybody knows the "fullframe" "your a poorfag" has two different devices that he namefags on, and his advice is purposefully wrong or he likes to stroke his dick here.
>>3786188I take great pleasure in fiddling with the exif data in the jpegs I post here. I use an X-T2 but frequently fake bullshit cameras and settings to make people here go wow at the colours or noise performance or sharpness of lenses for my unedited sooc photos.So far nobody has picked it up, and it brings me great mirth trolling the utter gear faggots here.
>>3786231That's not a sin. That's like jesus going into the temple and smacking all those kikes upside the head for doing business in a place of worship.
>>3786188I've been editing on a screen with a 40% srgb rating I havr a ff camera yet I only use my p&s with a 1" sensor
I have faked being isi through exif manipulation and RNI presets, simps go and praise the garbage I post without fail. It's hilarious. It's as simple as taking a garbage snapshit of some sign, applying a film preset and adding borders. Simps are drawn to it like a hummingbird to nectar.
>>3786188I'm such a poser. I just latch onto styles of other people whose stuff I like, but I don't even know why I like them. I feel like I'm learning nothing, and not growing at all. Nothing speaks to me anymore. I just take pictures because it's a habit.
>>3786188I only have the slightest regards for my pictures because usually I don't try to see them objectively. When I do so, I almost get scared for how weak they are and how wrong I am thinking they are acceptable. This doesn't stops me from not liking almost 99% of the pictures I see around.
I have faked being moopco but it's really hard to act that retarded. Also I don't enjoy just looking at the camera and never using it
I check Leica M classifieds every single day even if my current camera has a better sensor
>>3786191You're* a poorfagAnd most of the board knows aps-c fanbois are just as bad as mft copelets. Just get a job for one month and buy a real camera.>>3786231No you don't, and you didn't fool anyone with your "film" pics either.
I love light trails so much bros
>>3786336>and you didn't fool anyone with your "film" pics either.I haven't been caught yet :^) seethe more gear faggot
I am going to buy a gopro 9 and start vlogging
>>3786188I only shoot digital black and white because color is much more difficult and also more expensive because I would have to buy tons of provia and velvia for it to look good. You can't work with digital colors unless you have tons of free time to spend on manipulating a single picture.
>>3786361funny, i only shoot color because black and white is much more difficult.
I shittalk cameras I've never seen or used on /pee/.
>>3786359What about the post you made with the cat photo, you were instantly called out.
>>3786368>funny, i only shoot color because black and white is much more difficult.Silver Efex Pro does it for you
I like girl feet.
>>3786406That's not a confession, it's normal. Imagine liking male feet like I do. I feel like a freak.
I make the same confess thread over and over cause I can't get yous any other way
>>3786276What? This is the process of becoming. Good artists mimic, great artists steal.
>>3786359>>3786336I am so curious as to what you look like, and what your living conditions are. Not saying that to be rude. 100% curiosity.
>>3786188I use adapted film SLR lenses on a Micro Four Thirds camera.
it's a stunning feat but somehow this might actually be the worst thread on this board right now.
>>3786188I don't actually own a camera. But I'm here because I like to troll people. And /p/ can easily be trolled with gear related things.
>>3786610White, tall, fat, very comfortablely well-off engineer in Australia.
I only call people poorfag to make them seem more like me.
>>3786610>>3786630This is my living room.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelX-T3Camera SoftwareCapture One 20 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)24 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiExposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/4.0Brightness0.5 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length16.00 mmImage Width2000Image Height1333RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>3786647Do you masturbate to cartoons?
I edit on HP monitors from 2009 with only 1440 X 900 resolution
>>3786647It looks like a basement.
I post on pee every day and I haven't taken a photo in months ;-)
>>3786647>aussie animechadGIGABASED. If you lived in Brisvegas I'd be your pal.
>>3786647Not sure why you'd lie but that power outlet looks a lot more like a North American one than it does Australian.>>3787290>BrisvegasIncredibly cringe inducing
>>3787343Fuck off melbournian cunt
I bought a bunch of cameras and never shot a single thing with them. I don't even know where they are.>>3786235Its more like a pharisee making up laws to get his way.
>>3787352>melbournian cuntCQld actually, not that it matters. Calling it Brisvegas is still some spine tingling fucking cringe.
>>3787374>not calling it brisvegasBro...
>>3786370I like /p/ I don't like /pee/
>>3786614I dont think this is bad at all.>>3786616The gearfag reveals himself
>>3786630Age? I'm guessing late fifties, but possibly 60s.
I have bought a 1/4 pro-mist filter for the meme. In hindsight i should probably have bought a black pro mist, and i don't really see anythimg different in the photos
>>3787362Which one you have?
>>3786614But why tho. Lenses wide angle enough to be practical are expensive as hell. Are using vintage fast 50s for portraits?
>>3787444Is it misty though? You know, pro mist. Not make mist.
>>3786188I always read AF as "as fuck" in my head.
>>3786188I don't participate in photography.
Lately, I feel like soon I'll have to use cameras that I don't like. The old cameras are nearing their end and the recent cameras offer customization options, not really as a feature, but actually out of necessity for compactness and proof of snazzy improvements. Although the cameras have indeed increased in functionality, more and more dedicated buttons are missing - the extensive ability to manually adjust settings deliberately and without detours is missing. You might think that intelligent autofocus would not require manual intervention, based on the naming. I guess my intelligence must be dumber to really not want to manually intervene when the autofocus struggles or fails situationally.Is someone who really uses the camera to its full potential supposed to constantly struggle with too few buttons that are overloaded as a result? Is this the nucamera? Like really?!
>>3786188Ive spent the last 5 years trying to obsess over gear like I do guns. I went from Sony, to Panasonic, to Fujifilm. Spent thousands of dollars and it doesn't help that I work around camera equipment all day too. As a preemptive new years resolution I decided to ditch it all. I just finished selling everything and only have an RP and the RF 50mm 1.8. I can already tell im having a better time.
I got hit into by a drunk driver a while back and I saw someone die on the side of the road so I've been very afraid of driving anywhere I don't have to lately and when I want to take pictures I just walk around the same little tiny city and wooded towns
>>3789347idk in some ways I think it helps me as a photographer and forces me to be more creative and explore different genres but in some way I feel like I'm limiting myself
>>3786647Based fig photographer. Honestly, though, my biggest problem is the desk itself. You can get a nice, much larger desk from IKEA for far less than the cost of any one of those figures. No one should ever have to hold their mouse so far from their keyboard.
>>3789341buy yourself a fuji and transcend.
>>3789384I used an X-T3 for a couple years and enjoyed it. I almost got an X-S10 but then I realized that I was essentially overspending on an APS-C camera simply because of its video features that are essentially useless if you decide to take it to the next level. If I ever want to take video seriously I'll just drop 4 grand for a C70 and use all the lenses I already have for RF at that point. Maybe someday I'll be able to really appreciate stuff like the X-E and X-Pro series though.
>>3789384more like transition
I have no idea what I'm doing in DarkTable.I mean I get what it's for and how to use the interface, but I have no idea what makes photos look better.I end up tweaking stuff forever and I don't know how any of it actually improves the original photo.
I reply to every photo in the /rpt/ critiquing them but I never post photos
Idk how to post-process at all. I just go into darktable and fiddle with random sliders until I think it looks cool.
>>3790551And do you name your files CUK...?
>>3790573sorry friendo, I don't get the meme
I used to lust after the creamy full frame f1.4 bokeh. But since I've switched to full frame I've rarely shot wide open.
>>3791800Are you me? Shooting at f/1.2 was fun for the first few days, but I knew it was a crutch to lean against and hide my juvenile inability. I frequently just shot at around f/2 to have SOMETHING in focus, and to stop having the entire photo smeared into oblivion.Sold the lenses for faster compacts. f/1.8 is enough.
>>3791800>>3791827Apertures below f/2 may still be relevant for e.g. full body shots, distant portraits or wide-angle portraits.
>>3791800Bokeh is the biggest meme. I only shoot full frame for good low light although APSC works fine desu.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1280Image Height853
i bought three 1dxmk2's and they're just sitting there
>>3791871Why did you get three of them?
>>3791901i thought they looked really cool with L lenses so i got one for each of my favourite lenses but photography is like super boring so i never got around to taking more than 10 or so pictures
>>3786275They look nothing like her shots though, yours are clearly from a suburb and have no soul. I have a feeling you have to samefag most of your "praise". You also just admitted to being obsessed with a female who apparently takes bad photos. That's a bit sad and creepy, anon.
>>3791800>>3791842kek, when travelling, I shoot at f8 or f11 with my apsc. I only use wide open when lowlight handheld.
>>3786231>I am mentally illCool I guess.
>>3786647why didn't i see your christmas contribution this year?
>>3786647Are you catboy kami?
I stop down because my work isn't strong enough for the subject to be isolated. I need as much photo as I can get in the hopes that people won't notice how shitty I am.
>>3786188I think Jared Polin is actually a fantastic photographer and I'd fuck the shit out of Chelsea Northrup.
>>3792186We'd all fuck her. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
>>3792188I wouldn't admit that other than completely anonymously.
>>3792195Why? I bet she has a horse cunt. Who doesn't like horse cunts?
>>3792196Isn't she a Jew?
>>3792198Pretty sure, yeah. She looks Israeli. You can still fuck them, just don't respect or trust them.
>>3792186>Chelsea NorthrupShe's up to no good. Stay away.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 21.2 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2021:01:04 15:42:45Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width460Image Height459
>>3786231yeah you're the film fag. no one here believes you.
I take creepshots of my old and fat female neighbors
>>3786191>I hate namefags, but I like wakkowarner poster because he tries and adds posts to the boardLiterally never seen that anon in my life, seems like a /co/fag
>>3791827It's always useful for night shooting, though. You don't have to be right next to something to get that stupid bokeh. Shoot at normal distances and everything is usually in focus even at something like 1.2
>>3789628Half of it is just having an idea ahead of time about where you want the photo to go. That just takes experience.The other half is that Darktable has a gorillion different settings and a lot do quite similar things. There's no obvious start to finish workflow all laid out for you like in Lightroom. Look on youtube for screencasts of people editing photos start to finish. Stick to the more recent ones though as DT has changed in recent versions and the recommended way to edit photos is with Filmic and the newer RGB modules rather than base curve.
>>3787376>>3787290I-I'm in Brisbane bros.... let's go shooting sometime...
>>3786647i don't know who you are, but i'm >>3786231 and i just left your post up without contesting just to see the fall out. terribly good fun. thanks anon :)
I love full colour saturation bros...
>>3786188I don't have a tripod!>>3786231>>3786275basedboth gearfaggotry and idol worship are stupid pursuits and should be mocked>>3786361>You can't work with digital colors unless you have tons of free time to spend on manipulating a single picture.I don't think that's true, once you get the hang of your program of choice, you become very quick.>>3789628>>3790551Same goes for you two, developing RAWs is its own skill that you need to practice, but it's worth it.>>3786699>>3787362>>3791871>>3791960classic /p/>>3789400go back to /g/>>3795669Hi Ken!
i nutted to some photographer girl from tiktok
>>3795616>>3795960But what I don't get is: Why edit at all?
>>3758112I posted this as bait to see if people would have a serious discussion and they're arguing to this day.
I don't know who isi is, and can't say I really care.I don't look at your exif data or file name, even if I like your image.I probably saved your image and didn't bother to comment.I've been shooting for almost 5 years, have a good amount of success, but still don't feel like I know what I'm doing.90% of my model shoots involve nudity, kink, or both. 50% of those I get bored by (even though getting good shots), but I'd rather shoot something then nothing.
>>3786188I have never seen any of the photos I've taken on film, because I'm too lazy to drive 15 minutes to get them developed, or do it myself.
i dont know what i'm doing here. this is all new to me
>>3786188I shoot RAW, but only edit in-camera
I use a vaccuum cleaner to clean my lenses and cameras.
>>3796140seems as a very good option desu, will do this
I often crop and edit my digital photos into various film boarders (MF, 35mm, Polaroid) and pass them off as such
>>3796034Every image is edited, if you don't do it then it's done by the camera, which means the japanese engineer who wrote the firmware is now editing your photos.When you process RAWs yourself, it just means that you define how it looks like, instead of some hardcoded algorithm.Well, technically unedited photos exist, they look something like pic related. That's the actual unedited data coming from your sensor.(Not entirely true since the gamut of your camera is much larger than your average sRGB monitor, but you get the point).Developing RAWs means working in the darkroom yourself instead of sending pics to be developed at some random store.
>>3796631some further thoughts- The lines between a "natural" edit and manipulation are very blurry. What is manipulation? Changing the white balance? Removing sensor dust from the image? Removing a person?Even back in the film days, photos were often manipulated.- Some people oppose "editing" because they want their photos to be "realistic". See above regarding firmware vs. you doing the edit.But a photo can never be realistic, if it was, then looking at a picture of the sun would both warm your skin and damage your eyesight. It does neither.And a film comparison again, Cross-Process completely fucks with your colors so they're obviously false, but it can look good so people did it. I don't see many people complaining about Cross-Processing being "unrealistic", it's obvious that it is.- Sensor is unrealistic, the lens is unrealistic, the filter is unrealistic etc.- If you like your SOOC colors, that's fine. I like some of my cam's presets more than what I can make in darktable too sometimes. Just be aware that JPEG is a very compressed and limiting format.Looks like that's it! Got to go.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareGoogleImage-Specific Properties:
>>3796631>>3796633All that makes sense.If your camera only does jpegs, what all are you losing as far as image data? Or I guess I'm asking limited how?
>>3796647A JPEG is lossily compressed, this means it loses information compared to the original. It does this by creating an approximation of the image aimed at looking like the original to a human viewer.Lossy audio codecs like MP3, AAC, Opus etc. do the same thing with sounds, get it to sound close enough to the original with a fraction of the data. And the same goes for video codecs of course.Some (especially newer) codecs are better than others at creating the same perceived quality with less data (or a higher quality with the same amount of data). This is why YouTube for example is testing AV1 now, it's more efficient than older ones like AVC/H.264 and VP9.JPEG has held on so long because it's "good enough" (the enemy of "better") and images tend to be small in file size. But there are also interesting newer formats like AVIF which basically encodes an image as a single-frame AV1 video.>If your camera only does jpegs, what all are you losing as far as image data?You're losing the original image data. You can make JPEG's compression artifacts more visible by taking a good quality image and saving it as JPEG with quality set to 30 or so in an image editor.Pic related is what happens when you save a JPEG over and over, the tiny errors accumulate until it's just noise. Had to compress it as a high-quality itself because of the 5MB size limit here lolApart from the lossy compression, there are two other problems:- Your cam most likely uses chroma subsampling, this means that the colors are saved at a lower resolution than the brightness in the image to save data.- JPEGs have 8 bit color, this means for every color channel (red, green, blue), there are 256 possible brightness steps. RAW files come in 12 bit (4096 steps per color) or even more.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:
>>3796688>Or I guess I'm asking limited how?Limited in how much visual information you can squeeze out of the image. One common case are shadows, when they're almost black you can hardly lighten them up without it looking terrible, but if you have the same image as a RAW, you can usually lighten them up by quite a bit with good quality.And then there's the fact that cameras sometimes do some heavy-handed processing that you might not like, such as strong sharpening or denoising that loses detail.
>>3796688Your comparison is a little offRaw data is a relative format, meaning it has no colour information until a raw editing program assigns them. This means the editing potential isn't limited by the file format but by the sensors performance.Wav is uncompressed but still absolute, raw is more like getting all the original master tracks for a song and composing it yourself.>>3796647To put it simply, jpegs what you see is all the data you get, raw stores a lot of data you don't see in the preview; giving you much more flexibility in post.
>>3796127Well, film is all about buying into a lifestyle, being seen with film gear and telling everyone that you shoot film. The images don't matter.
>>3796712>Raw data is a relative format, meaning it has no colour information until a raw editing program assigns them.You're right, my bad.Maybe the equivalent to WAV would be something like 32 bit float TIFF.
I have fucked a couple of instathots I shot with and am scared of getting cancelled now.
>>3786191namefags are held to the quality of the content they posttripcodes are fine if you are posting stuff that benefits from being attached to your identity. except with basically no exception it's just used to attract attention. there is never any use for a vanity trip
I've got a couple sessions that I uploaded to my computer, but still haven't looked at them. i want to go take more pictures, but I should probably look at the past that I took.
>>3796647>what all are you losing as far as image data?A lot. A RAW can be a thousand different photos since you have shitloads of room to edit the exposure and colors. A jpeg is a processed raw.
>>3797715Totally /x/ tier schizo question inbound.So you know how there's legends of... stuff showing up on film that wasn't visibly present to the photographer?Can a digital camera do that?Does the process of the camera making a jpeg out of the raw harm that?
>>3797027good for you desui think you'll be fine as long as you weren't a douchebag about it.
>>3796078I started the Fuji worms thread and it's been a huge success, mostly thanks to one very dedicated hater.
>>3797938>Can a digital camera do that?Yes, because you can recover details you weren't aware of.>Does the process of the camera making a jpeg out of the raw harm that?Yes, because a jpeg is just a crude approximation of the original information that looks good enough to a human. You can recover lots of detail from the shadows in a raw for example, but in a jpeg it will be blocky garbage mostly.
>>3797938Light leaks, double exposure, poor exposure, high grain, developing abnormalities and intentional hoaxes all give the much increased chance of supernatural phenomena. Digital takes this out, so everything that looks like a ghost on digital are really ghosts.
i admit im really like my xt2 alot[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2021:01:15 06:20:56Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width250Image Height176
>>3795618Let's go brisbane bro
>>3795669I love high contrast black and white