What's your favorite lighting, /p/? My favorite lighting is golden hour.
The one you have with you
>>4497411Mercury vapor.
>>4497411Low. Less exposure less visible the suck.
Single softbox
>>4497642I've done dawn shoots but I live in Phoenix so it's the only time in summer that's cool enough for portraiture.
2025 Halloween in Itaewon and Hongdae, Korea10/31~11/1Out of focus edition1/100And if you have some from the halloween you would like to share, please do.
>>4487585hah thanks
>>4480507Stop being mean.
>>4480135why is her hairline so far back?
Cool
Show me your glass /p/.
>>4494927Glass on fire
Oh I get it, the topic is asking for GLASS photos! The OP posts a photo of a GLASS object, but photographers refer to GLASS as their lenses! Now I get it!! Haha so funny, so queer! What a hekin gud thread OP!!! HAHAHAA SOO FANNNY! HAH HAHA
>>4496949Love going to the Tacoma Museum of Glass of my wife. Went there on our holiday Moon and before that I won a second that they've made by answering a skill testing question about Arnold Schwarzenegger's first big film
>>4494815
>>4496948>>4496949Wow Seedance 2.0 is truly impressive
What's a man got to do to optimise prime lenses here? I want to take reasonably good photos without breaking the bank but I feel like I'm getting bogged down by the maths. Will I always be held back by this unexceptional camera or is it perfectly capable if you're not a retard?
>>4497058>>4497065The 24mm f/2.8 is great for extension tube macro, but other than that I hate it. The 40mm f/2.8 has the same form factor but is way sharper and FF compatible. EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS is probably a good wide-angle for your street needs...
>>4497058EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro is a good all-purpose prime.EF-S 15-85mm is a great zoom with more than average zoom range.EF-S 24mm f/2.8 is an excellent pancake.EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS STM is the best telephoto you'll get for crop.Sigma and tamaron lenses are normally a worse choice except for their late-stage primes and hyper-autist zooms like the 50-100mm f/1.8.
>>4497058Unfortunately, apsc on canon and nikon is just zoomslop. Get the 24mm for general shooting and buy the 50mm 1.8 for portraits. If spend any more on that dead system you're hust throwin away money
>>4497039But I have a modest r6mk3 and a 24-105 f4 kit lens
>>4497069There's no getting back from an actual macro lens.(This one is Tamron Di Sp AF 90mm 2.8 Macro. Older but not bad at all. Main con: operating auto/manual focus switch is almost impossible without changing focus.)
Furry Critters EditionPlease post film photos, talk about film photography, film gear like cameras, film stocks, news, and tips/tricks in this thread.Also talk about darkroom practices, enlargers, photo paper, techniques like dodging/burning, tools, and equipment related to enlarging, developing, and printing.Thread Question: Do you prefer color or black and white photography?Previous thread: >>4489677
My Leica m5 is old as shit and the focus patch in the rangefinder is getting so dull that it's becoming way too difficult to focus. Based on what I read about repairs for this issue, I think it's time to retire it. Does any one have an M mount film body they like that's a little cheaper and maybe even more reliable than a Leica?
>>4497413>Only complaint is the white borderI'm just an idiot and uploaded the uncropped WIP version, but thanks!>>4497425Those edges are a disaster, but I guess that's hardly surprising at that price point. Still a nice shot, good job.I'd kill for a film setup to do pano shots on that isn't a $3,000+ timebomb.Anyone have any experience with any of those jank 35mm pano conversions on medium format cameras? They're interesting a much cheaper than an XPAN, but they all sound like a pain to set up/load properly.
>>4497690>those jank 35mm pano conversions on medium format cameras?I thought about getting one many times but every time I remembered that a roll of 120 costs basically the same as a roll of 35 and cropping is free
>>4497714yeah but 35 is generally longer than 120 so you get more shots per roll
NEW:>>4497863>>4497863>>4497863Hooray for image limit reached!
Why do some old photos have a certain "look" to them that modern photos don't?
>>4497745The lens has more of an effect than you realize, but also like >>4497749 pointed out theres a vibe to the way people dress and pose that dates an image.Buy a really cheap vintage lens, something Japanese. If you take pictures of subjects that are less likely to date the photo to now, you'll be really surprised about how old the image looks. Birds and animals are good subjects.
>>4497771show a digital photo that's edited to look like film? what good will that do, it simply follows my statement that the reality it was shot in digital will skew your perception that it's never like old film. But if you're looking for a blind test, there's plenty out there you can search for. Some tests compare exact same composition, with exact same lens for instance.
>>4497811Just post the photos bro. No excuses.
>>4497768Faggot-chan, thanks for clarifying that we can imitate the look of film by:- using digital camera presets- editing digital photos- using a camera with a ccd sensor- generating the picture with AI- painting digitally or on a canvas - wearing yellow-tinted glasses indoors Who asked?Yes, you can spend hours editing digital images to make them look like film... You can also carefully take a shot with film so it look like digital... Why would anyone do that? >>4497811I took the bait and searched. I could not find any that would put two high definition color images side by side. I don't think it's a coincidence.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4497745shoot on a film camera with an old lens
With the AI boom, it doesn't matter if your camera is good or bad, you can just ask the AI to transform your flat iphone photo into something much better.With a Light Field Array camera, you can take photos that AI can't replicate.People will need new screens too, screens with 3d depth.
>>4497754Why is there a mans head inside the camera?
>>4497756it's a vital component so that AI cannot replicate it
>>4497756When you look into the Light Field Array camera, the Light Field Array camera stares back
>>4497756They need his glasses lens for efficacy, and his thoughts
>>4497756dodgy chinese workplace safety measures and dubious quality control
why is this composition so funny
cuckold car
weird foreground ball on stick, awkward red car, big machines doing something unknown, red machine is doing seemingly nothing and is in a weird-looking position, clotheslines in the midground look weird, mostly its the fact that there are absolutely no humans whatsoever despite it seeming like people should be in the frame doing things, controlling these machines probably.
>>4497748You might just be really autistic.
>>4497748LMAO
>>4497748I have to admit, my eye actually did travel around in this image.Starts at that bright white ball, then tries to figure out what the machines are doing, then looks into the windows of the building, then finally ends at the orange car.There is just alot of visual stuff all competing for attention and all the colors fit together nicely which kind of holds it together even if its really chaotic.
Think about it logically.The A7C series, despite its warts, is:>responsible for a massive portion of E-mount adoption>bestselling>revealing of an enormous market for compact yet usable full frame stills MILCsWhy hasn't anyone else copied the concept? inb4:>A7C bodies are e-waste trashYes, that's why I want somebody else to try it.>Sigma, Panasonic, NikonThey all pussied out hard and catered too much to videofags. The fp could have been perfectly fine if they had traded the heatsink for IBIS and made the EVF solution less massive (ergo, added a hotshoe and copied Leica's Visoflex). Meanwhile, the bf is the fp but even less functional. The S9 caters to vlogfags above all. Without a viewfinder you're more or less fucked if you want to manual focus. Same for the ZR.For this to work, these faggot product engineers need to get real. A small body, ideally 61MP, with IBIS, reasonably sized grip to not have to skimp on battery life and SD card(s), and a modular tilting EVF. It's really that fucking simple, and Sony has proved that it's not only technically and economically feasible, but also a very good business move. So why haven't they done it?
>>4497670>works for freeAt least we know the value of your work.
>link to archivesobsessed schizo kekTake your meds
>>4497671kek
>>4497672Poor fella is so angry, seething, malding, and salty all at the same time he can't even take a joke.>>4497671>tried to work for free, but work was worth less than freeKek
I'd love sony aps-c to get good instead.>>4496892At least they let Fuji have their newest aps-c sensors exclusively, for like first 5 years before also putting them into their own aps-c cameras.
Rank the Trump Portraits
>>4432114insane, insane, insane, shit himself and insane.
>>4432114How is this thread 7 months old and still not archived out?
>>4495461Oldest thread here is from September, and there are 5 /rpt/ generals in the catalog.Board is molases, anon
>>4495461It's 4chan who the hell is posting frequently in photography?
>>4495461I saw an Instagram thread last for almost 10 months. /p/ moves really damn slow compared to other boards.
Could anyone give me a noob intro to editing and color grading photos?I have no idea what I'm doing.
>>4494087opposites on the color wheel for shadows and midtones.for highlights ill tend to not give them a color or do it in the middle of the opposites
i feel like i definitely went to photo editing 101 by professor rockwell and i deep fry the fuck out of my photosleft is unedited sooc jpeg right is me hitting auto in lightroom to get myself 90% there and adjusting the sliders to suit (adobe color profile?)
>>4497575>deep fried catChinese perchance?
>>4494087The exposure slider is by far and away your most important color grading slider hence why its first.The white balance slider is 2nd and is not surprisingly the second most important slider.If you get those two correct, you should be 99% done.Then just add a tiny bit of contrast.Always have a folder of ref images you compare you photo against to make sure you are not doing something dumb with your colors.The colors in the scene you photographed are 99% of the work.And finally use capture one, it produces far nicer colors than adobe hence why it is the undisputed industry standard raw converter for the last 30 years straight.
>>4494087just shoot film
I was taking photographs of some demonic ritual while vacationing in Varanasi, India, when suddenly the shutter of my Sony A7 IV camera snapped. The kilometrage on that camera was around 23k photos at the time, but I wouldn't rule out demonic interference as the actual cause.Anyway I couldn't take anymore photos that night and almost had a panic attack (tfw you get stuck in India and can't even take photographs) so I went back to my hotel to try and fix it, but nothing seemed to work so I ripped it out (picrel) and changed the settings to electronic shutter.What's the difference between a mechanical and an electronic shutter when it comes to quality? Is there a difference only when what you're shooting is moving very fast? Also how much does it cost to replace the shutter plus the work? I'm considering just buying the A7R IV and keeping the current one as reserve.
>OH N-
>>4497493>Did you use the shutter closed when off function?No, but like I said I'm pretty sure it got fucked up because of demonic possession. Not any other reason. Picrel is where they burn bodies all day and all night, so that's probably where it happened. There was a very strong presence in the air. When you think about it a camera is a pretty reasonable target. It has circuits running through it, electrical components, a power source, etc, so maybe it's not "alive" in a true biological sense but it's not completely dead either.I'm going to get the A7R IV or V next month even though I can barely afford to eat. If I can't take high quality photos I might as well just die. Also 61mp sounds fucking insane.
>>4497328>kilometragewtf lol
>>4497518>No, but like I said I'm pretty sure it got fucked up because of demonic possession. Not any other reason.weak b8. if not, take your meds
>>4497649>if notThis is not a demon?
How do I become a Magnum Photographer?
I wanna get into Nat Geo so bad, I'm tired of driving a truck I just wanna get on some frigate and go to Antarctica and shoot penguins or seals or some shit. I am flat out tired of being a number on a spreadsheet.I would blow 50 black dudes in an alleyway and give myself AIDS to shoot with Nat Geo I'd fucking do it for room and board I need to break this cycle.
>>4497528>get on some frigate and go to AntarcticaYou need an ice rated hull. Maybe some cruise ships do it out of Patagonia? I know there are people who have flown to the Chilean arctic claim but bet it costs a fuck ton. Could always try get up to Svalbard.You can always live vicariously through blogs by boomers:https://youtu.be/WkLSaZ7FJnw?si=b9LKS-Td7xRWNnyUhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtG6niRiRXkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_w0ueHjsYkSadly the world is now so interconnected that there isn't really anywhere to explore, nothing is novel or exciting. Every dipshit with a phone has spammed a million photos of everything there is to see.
>>4497528It really does suck that there's just nothing left to explore and document. It's like the magic is gone and the only thing left is squeezing the life out of everything through optimization.
>>4497550>Midwit trap
>>4497497
I have never created a piece of art that I like. I never came back to anything I did months later and thought to myself "hey, this is neat".I can't use my hands to create shit. I can draw geometric shapes. I have nice handwriting. I can play open chords and bar chords on guitar. But that's where my physical skill set ends.I picked up a camera because my hands are no good. Only to realize that it's probably not my hands, it's my brain. I have little to no visual imagination. I can memorize rules that make photos look more pleasing, but I can not get beyond that in terms of intent with my photos.Over the last ten years, I resigned to the realization that I can't create anything because I have nothing to say. I have no personality. I have no opinions. I have no stories. Just things I point my camera at.
>>4495983>maybe your problem is you're literally taking photos of dirt>>4496033>You make it sound so grand when really it just means.. doing better than taking photos of dirt and brick wallsNothing wrong with taking photos of those things.
I'm probably a better photographer than 95% of people on this board. No, I will not post photos. You can take photos of whatever you want with whatever gear you want; it doesn't matter unless it helps or hinders in attaining your vision. Individual photos can be mediocre but add to a set in a way no other photo could, but you still need to able to produce individually strong photos. Photography can be an artform, but that's above the /p/aygrade of most here.You don't need to post photos because thruth speaks without them.
>>4497545Post photo or your entire claim is invalid. I'm a much better photographer than you and no I won't post any because truth speaks without them.
>>4497545>I'm probably a better photographer than 95% of people on this boardevery time someone says they're great but won't post i'm almost 100% certain its fucking huskyfagit always co-occurs with his usual takes.lotta ego for a mediocre freelance event photog
>>4497548Nice shot.
Why are photography YouTubers so shit? They mostly churn out boring nontent while dressing like a copy of a copy of a copy of someone who thought he might closet cosplay Ansel Adams. Who are they aping?Almost all have the cadence and tone of a best buy sales associate either slowly conniving a golden HDMI cable sale or postponing their suicide on a Sunday evening only since their parents are still alive; with no in-between.I meet smarter and more interesting people IRL at camera club or local stores, so it's not as if this hobby is exclusively for people prescribed Klonopin and SSRIs.Half of them are just talking head slop direct to camera talking about what gear to buy (micro four nerds)The ones that do teardowns and repairs of gear are usually fine, but those aren't exactly photo videos at that point.The only guy that does the "video of taking photos" thing I can stand is Nick LoPresti since he doesn't talk like he's constipated, but lately the lack of constipation has become a problem since he's been diarrhea-shitting up my sub box with low-effort commentary videos sitting in front of a green screen. Idk who he's aping there, 2016 twitch? Don't like it, especially one where he and his wife are politisperging about shit like how "they can't use Google search for inane things because it'll track you" for what feels like several minutes.Snappiness may be my second favorite even though he looks and talks like a queer (he has kids so I guess he isn't technically). At least he does ridiculous things with cameras that are more interesting than "I walked and took a photo of something and had some ennui about it".Also, I hate gxAce with a passion, dead horse of a gimmick beaten into dust at this point. 80% of his videos serve no purpose to the modal viewer since they're just a rain-dance to the corporate marketing teams to get them to send him gear. (Also combining sloppy wet deep-throat glazing prose with an aloof tone is uniquely excruciating to listen to.)
I like that John Branch IV chap. He does have courses he sells and stuff, but he has an absolute goldmine of advice available for free and I don't find him Youtube-Persona annoying. He's very nice, relaxed and doesn't waste your time.I find a lot of those wedding photographer videos is a wealth of knowledge because these are guys who are out taking thousands and thousands of shots every week.A lot of them seem pretty chill too.
>>4494697TRVVVVVVVVVVVVVKEEE
>>4496585Photography isnt a hobby, its documentationSo a boudoir photographer is actually just someone who likes to awkwardly look at but not touch naked women, ergo they’re never chads are are always weird, jewish, and greasy
>>4464231i hate the word creamy so much. people should just say dreamy instead, it makes more sense and isn't repulsive.
>>4497536You'll never be the cream of the crop like Randy Savage with that attitude
