up

I live in one of the biggest urban sprawls in this country and there's not even a NEW camera shop that has a large selection within 35 miles of me. There's one closer but they don't have a ton of stuff. I'm not sure that's really a good business move. Refurbishing broken shit and selling at a profit is probably a better business

Nice idea, I wish I had one locally desu. How will you compete with international used marketplaces like MPB for example?

>>4311480
Not him but I imagine the only way a shop like this will survive in current day is to offer socialization, like meeting, workshops, competitions ect. It's the only thing that the internet can't do

>>4297683
desu yeah. Nobody wants to spend money on old outdated technology. I have a camera i got as a graduation present literally ten years ago and i only used it a couple times. Sad, but, my iphone is probably better now. I do like the pictures it took but idk why i would lug around a big huge camera when I already have my phone. I do like my polaroid but i dont have friends so i never use it lmao

>>4313776
oh my, if I were to know how deeply displeased and unsatisfied that random person would be I would never have even taken the lens cap off in the first place, much less would have I taken those photographs

no but seriously, I shoot what catches my attention
so, in short, I shoot what I find interesting, and not what is 'beautiful' or whatever
and those interesting things can be aesthetically pleasing as well, and it's on me as a photographer to portray stuff in a certain light (and it can be pretty or it can be repulsive or whatever)
The dent in the truck photos in the beginning of the thread, for example. It's a dent, it's not pretty, but it makes that truck different from the other ones, and in the context of the photograph I believe I managed to approach it in an aesthetically pleasing way: it has texture, an organic shape that at the same time is conflicting with the sense of 'indestructibility' of a gigantic truck like this one, and also complements its brute aspect

>>4313742
Only shooting conventionally pretty things to me is the equivalent to being a picky eater: it's childish, as if you didn't develop a proper palate, a proper sense of taste
Shooting cats and flowers and little cottages at the hillside can be nice, but only being able to appreciate that is kinda like those kids who only eat candy, cereals and random shit with copious amounts of corn syrup

Photography is not meant to be always pretty, it's a medium to express yourself
You can choose to express a wide range of emotions and impressions, or you can have a narrow and shallow approach of only showing beauty, which is not what I'm aiming for in the first place

>>4313787
>no but seriously, I shoot what catches my attention
Well you must have ADHD
>Photography is not meant to be always pretty, it's a medium to express yourself
Well express yourself man, but I am not seeing any intent with most of these. There is no composition, no playing with light and shadows, they are just photos of buildings probably taken at mid day.

Funnily enough the only interesting photo is your self portrait
>>4313173
Because you did played with the light and tried some perspective.

You wanted to be a /p/oster taking photos of building corners but unironically you might be better at taking portraits.

File: [0] Ektar 100 - 120_med.jpg (4.51 MB, 3000x4500)

4.51 MB JPG

>>4313789
>You wanted to be a /p/oster taking photos of building corners but unironically you might be better at taking portraits.
kek I can live with that

>no but seriously, I shoot what catches my attention
>Well you must have ADHD
I like shooting urban scenes and its transformations, and its workers
hence why there are so many photos of trucks and machines and people working and the restoration of the museum etc.

>There is no composition
>no playing with light and shadows
I truly don't take criticism personally, I believe it's great for improving, but would you elaborate on that please?
because I'm honestly searching for some in-depth criticism so that I can think about it (and either incorporate that to my work or not, but at least think about it so that I make more conscious decisions in the future)
But just saying "oh it's bad", "you didn't shoot pretty things" is null
>picrel: pretty things

>>4313712
By unfocused I mean that they're lacking a clear subject. I didn't even notice the couple to be honest.
Try playing around with light in a scene to pull the viewers attention. In general we pay attention to the lightest parts of an image first. If you place your subject there, the viewer will naturally understand the context of what you're trying to show them.

This is tough to do in wide shots, mostly because wide shots are just tougher to get right. The wider the shot the more other things are in the image to distract your viewer.

>>4313801
thanks for the feedback
yeah, sometimes in wide shots it's tough to direct the viewer not only because there may be many things going on at once, but also because we have much less control over light
The most I can do for some subjects is select the time of the day (and the season etc.) that I go to shoot it
If I can't control light, I'll pay more attention to "control the light" in terms of the way I frame it

>>4312998
peak asesthetics

>>4312998
Too visually busy. Bike is annoyingly close to the edge of the frame.

perhaps you can find some bortle 1 sites

>>4312968
Nobody is stealing your photos

>>4312998
>jUsT uSe YoUr PhOnE
You could have had a really cool photo but instead you have over-sharpened, mushy garbage that is more computer generated than optical

>>4310293
What film were you using? I quite like the look of it.

>>4313724
gold 200 developed in the cs41 kit accordingly to standard instructions, scanned on a Nikon Coolscan LS2000 and Vuescan, inverted in lightroom with negative lab pro

Other than some troll setting very yellow auto WB on the leica they rook arike

File: dis green nuff.jpg (4.38 MB, 3662x2634)

4.38 MB JPG

>>4313734
nah its just me not having an ir cut filter yet, the m8 likes to make fabrics purple and foliage yellow

here, i made an edit just for you, didn't touch the white balance at all, just hue-shifted the yellows into green

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Leica Camera AG
Camera Model	M8 Digital Camera
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:14 21:46:08
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3662
Image Height	2634
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	00000000000000000000000000003464

>>4313730
Thanks. I might try to bulk buy some gold when I get back into shooting 35mm. Seems like an acceptable quality alternative to portra without the assrape price.

File: solarografia_2.jpg (152 KB, 1280x659)

152 KB JPG

>>4313685
Here's the one taken with the left one.

Pictures were digitized with a regular DSLR with two lights pointing the photo paper in a 45 degree angle. Exposure checked with a gray paper beforehand.

>>4313347
>>4313690
How long did you expose these for? Judging by the sun rings I'd guess around 3-4 weeks, right? Also, did you develop them or just scanned them as they are?

>>4313334
I wonder where did those white marks come from

>>4313704
About three weeks is correct, since the exposing time was tied to the duration of the course. I scanned them as they were, no need to develop solarographs.

File: image.jpg (264 KB, 2048x1756)

264 KB JPG

>>4313705
I know some people do develop solargraphs but if I recall correctly that's if you just use one of those semi-diy pinhole boxes for 20-30 seconds of exposure.

>>4313721
Film photography is chemistry

File: 1_57e35474-cdd2-4281-b5bf(...).jpg (176 KB, 713x713)

176 KB JPG

gimmicks like this exist now.
Filters and anamorphic lenses to bolt onto your phone to make them look less like ass. They're good fun to play with.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	GIMP 2.10.34
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	25 dpi
Vertical Resolution	25 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:14 14:51:30
Image Width	713
Image Height	713

>>4308076
The only non-nigger manufacturer you're talking about are Xperia phones with their pro camera apps. They even have a two-stage button where a half-press triggers auto-focus (just like a real camera!). Otherwise, you can map the volume buttons but still no AF half-press.

>>4308104
post-processing (typically mitigated by shooting in RAW) and cancerous ergonomics. You have most of the controls available to you on most camera apps these days but you have to use a touchscreen to adjust anything at all.
Also, you look like a sad faggot taking creepshots when using a phone.

>>4312132
>iPhone photo
>Android UI visible
What

imo, either use your phone or go at least aps-cope/cuck/crippled/cringe/castrated, no point in going below that if you want kinda serious shots

File: wermz.jpg (219 KB, 846x567)

219 KB JPG

>>4313526
naw bro it happens in my 2018 release of camera raw as well so its not just one release

>>4311154
pyw

>>4312683
There still is.
Sooc jpeg: soft, zombie colors
Processing foolji raws in any program: a wait, for sure. Why do they take so much longer to load?

>>4310716
Fuji simply because they suck. Its a rare case where there is a such thing as bad gear and a pricy camera actually has worse IQ - such things have been unknown since the death of the canon DSLR.

Fujifags seethe hard about nice gear too, like they think good image quality is a bad thing and you shouldnt even have the option. They are all aged 20-30 and do not know that most film is significantly higher resolutiom than an xt5 because all they ever saw was walmart 4x6s

>>4310716
fuji for sure
looking at brands in terms of general "why would I not use them" points, can think of the most for fuji, but i can also think of a lot of niche "why would I use them" points
they're really only ideal for a very specific set of niche preferences, and sub-optimal for most
other brands feel like their better general purpose options, or have 1-2 clear usage cases
the mass normie popularity (and inventory issues) probably gives a sour grape feel to people who might otherwise be ideal users, similar to leica
definitely seems to inspire the most hate here for sure, its just a shame people cant be honest about the faults without exaggerating or relying on more dubious criticisms

pretty crazy how much the sentiments have changed though, they used to be seemingly universally liked, even here
still one of my favorite brands to use though, but most people are better off looking elsewhere

>>4310824
very cool and well-framed photo anon. I like that every side of the house is captured with something around it (grass, trees or sky) to frame it. you could warm up the white balance a little though to remove the banding around the edges of the tree and the roofline. yeah, I had another look. the white balance is definitely too cold. oh yeah, I also remembered that you should have moved left (maintaining the same distance from the house) to simultaneously elongate the horizontal dimensions of the house and remove the awkward bit of road in the bottom right. still though, you’ve done well to identify this composition anon. well done.

>>4308074
without a word of advice
you should be ashamed of yourself anon.
>inb4 your advice is shit
>inb4 kill yourself
>after <<don’t you have your own website ken?>>
I’m trying something out of the ordinary. if you believe ken’s style (which I’ve never viewed in detail) is so beneath you, do something better than him or shut up. one picture is worth a thousand words (and I have to reiterate this on /p/, the photography board of all places).

>>4313645
>cryingbaby.jpg

>>4313645
Never posting here again was your advice.

>>4310657
Don't feed dogs with edibles anon.

>>4312912
Judging by the replies he was wrong and got btfo hard.

File: GALAXY-S4-zoom-8.jpg (78 KB, 872x586)

78 KB JPG

>>4313500

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	andoWKS15
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2013:06:11 09:07:07
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	872
Image Height	586

File: Yongnuo-YN455-Micro-Four-(...).jpg (78 KB, 651x442)

78 KB JPG

>>4313500
or what about real camera with phone? (even has built-in selfie camera)

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	651
Image Height	442

>>4313505
Kinda cool
>>4313506
That means I always have to carry my camera

>>4312554
>commodified hobbies
I think I've seen that in a Youtube video essay

>>4310034
Why do these idiots put the antennae close to their head?

I know a guy who does commercials and shit and he gets brought on set even if they dont need him just in case the crane or the dolly cant quite do the job.

>>4310034
in burgerland? it could've been big if most cities and states didn't basically ban them

>>4310444
What would you prefer? In the ass?

>>4310034
Funnily enough I was thinking the same thing. It looks fun to do and I love high speeds. Are there any good resources for learning how to get good at it? Is there a good beginner drone that's affordable?

>>4313479
based good riddance
canon is the walmart camera

>>4313528
your mom is the walmart woman

canon sent a hitman to cover up allegations of the r1 being delayed yet again

>>4313479
She probably worked for boeing

My only sadness is that it makes it harder to know when preorders will open. The R5 II will likely be sold out for months, so preordering immediately is a must.

>>4313330
If you're foreign, shoot without a warning, call me paparazzi.

>>4313395
That has potential to be a great bar. Work it out and put it on a moonman rap

>>4313415
It's part of a Mr. Bond original: "Supa Nazi".
Catchy as hell.

>>4312896
Use at least 50mm lens (around 80mm is best) or you'll look like shit. If shooting with a phone, zoom in 2-3x since the normal lens is usually equivalent to 24 to 35mm range.
If you don't have lights, do it if a cloudy day to get diffuse light. Sit or stand dead on towards light source (eg. window). Try around noon. Don't even think about shooting with artificial lights that are not studio lights or flashes (like household bulbs, especially CFLs or LEDs), it will look like shit.
Or just don't be a cheap shit and pay $15 to a teenager at CVS to have it done semi-completely.

How is this such a burning question that warrants so much debate? Find a white or very light wall. Try to position a light source so that there isn’t a big shadow behind you.
Take a selfie.
If you need to make changes to dimensions or erase shadow or lighten up the wall to white, most basic photo editing software can do this easy.
I haven’t done a US passport renewal yet, but most countries have switched or have digital forms with photo upload options, so you don’t even need to special print the photos anymore.

>>4306644
I think it's a light breeze fucking up OPs stabilization

>>4307518
This, it looks blurry, and some parts are over-sharpened.

>>4306644
I can tell you definitively that this is a shit image, but whether that's due to "ai slop" in your phone or just general overbaking denoising+sharpening applied I can't say.

The ridiculous banding is what jumps out and screams "shit image, shit shit shit, bad bad!" but yes the "fine details" (there are none) are also shit here.
I don't know what to say other than you must shoot RAW, and avoid proprietary "special"RAW formats and stick with regular RAWs.

>>4309798
The fact he managed to line up the eyepiece and phones camera is mildly impressive IMO. Go try it sometime and see how quickly you loose your shit...

File: 612ER6OZ2bL._AC_SL1500_.jpg (96 KB, 1192x1369)

96 KB JPG

Old Used DSLR + Picrel (T-Ring)

File: P1010732-Edit.jpg (4.48 MB, 3968x2232)

4.48 MB JPG

>>4313448
Berlin skyline.
A lot of the detail was destroyed by the fake Ilford XP2. I think if my camera had more than 12mp it would have worked better.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-LX3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:13 20:08:37
Exposure Time	1/1600 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	250
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	5.10 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: P1080529-Edit.jpg (3.87 MB, 3648x2736)

3.87 MB JPG

>>4313449
This is supposed to be Portra 400.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-LX3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:13 22:50:35
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	7.40 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: P1080550-Edit.jpg (3.36 MB, 3648x2736)

3.36 MB JPG

>>4313451
Cat I met while on a bikeride.
Fake portra 400.
This'll be the last photo I share.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-LX3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:13 22:50:35
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	12.80 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4313452
>>4313451
Looks nothing like portra, more like “fujifilm digital superia x-tra 800”

File: P1080528-Edit-4.jpg (4.4 MB, 2736x3648)

4.4 MB JPG

>>4313454
Here's a test with "portra 400" without any of the other processing I do in lightroom.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-LX3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:14 01:19:56
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	80
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	7.90 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: img016.jpg (1.15 MB, 2858x1896)

1.15 MB JPG

another couple that aren't quite as good but are ok. shot on the minolta p&s as well

File: img017.jpg (1.32 MB, 2844x1884)

1.32 MB JPG

arnr

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Windows Photo Editor 10.0.10011.16384
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2022:05:19 10:41:46
Color Space Information	sRGB

imgur link: https://imgur.com/a/6jgzhCw

>>4313213
Not much going on
>>4313214
Frustrating composition (cutoff chair and lady, random thing in top left)
>>4313215
Pretty nice. Maybe too much going on, I might've tried to get the building out of the composition but I like this one.

Keep it up.

>>4313228
life is tumblr