Help me out, I literally don't see a difference in aperture or depth of field when I change my settingsI theoretically understand how they work, but actually changing them in the camera I don't see anything different
>>4485942holy fuck that level of cope when fool frame suddenly is the baby sensor
>>4485943Are you actually, genuinely retarded? Go use a LF camera then get back to me.
>>4485945get fucked sensorlet
>>4485946I accept your concession. Thank you.
>>4485945>asking if a rapefugee is retardedHe is literally a bioweapon meant to lower the IQ of europe
why do you guys all not like ken rockwell?he seems cool and his photos are prettyi dont get itplus he has good advice on his web-sitemaybe we can appreciate him in this thread?that would be nicei will post my favourite ken rockwell photographs
>>4480999>Just one of many superior photographers /p/ drove off because he was objectively better at this than themstfu ken.
>>4480999>husky>corgi>doghair>superior photographerswowmany background blursso full framesuch dirty car windowbokeh dogesuch artmany fur on negativewow
>>4485746Correct.
>>4481223Negative film blows highlights to white all the time wtf are you talking about? You can recover some of that in a scan but if you want a properly exposed photo of anything that's not in direct sun on a sunny day your sky is going to be white (just as an example)
>>4485746>shoots through window>still sharper than fujifilmbased snoy dog
Can someone tell me what lightning equipment I would need, to recreate either of those photos?
>>4484812the continuation of any species is an extension of its reproductive drive
>>4456338they talk about technicolor and kodachrome here so
>>4436289I'm not being facetious. Annoying people is a big part of art.
>>4485502No one wants your shrimp
make love not warring
Film photography is better due to low sensitivity in dark areas. No one needs to see what is in dark areas most of the time. Just imagine this photo with unnecessary crap in shadows.
>>4470768Hello Zach, do you mind putting your name back on so I can keep filtering your posts? Thanks.
>>4485330>No. Resolution (refinement of detail) is related to contrastNo, it's related to smallest unit of information. A smallest subdivision of a storage that is the lowest limit and you can't go below it. Contrast has nothing to do here.
>>4469575>Film photography is better due to low sensitivity in dark areasdigital kicks the shit out of film for low light capture . try again retard.
>>4485559Try what? You both said the same thing.
>>4485559Yeah OP is claiming the lack of shadow detail is good because we normally wouldnt be able to see that much (in well lit scene) so it reflects realtiy in that we tend to ignore less obvious visual information.Anyway learn to read, you ESL Bangladeshi.
So, which of the big companies is going to be the first to offer an affordable 100mp camera?Fuji is obviously already out there, but this thing is Eight thousand dollars. I suspect that when it happens (eventually) it will be Nikon. I feel like historically they are the company which has introduced high end features at a lower price.
>>4482703> 6x7 is clearly 80mp>645 is 100+mpWhich one is true?Yes, this guy in his clinical lab tests using extremely fine grain film stocks managed to get crazy resolution out of 6x7. Do you shoot 6x7? Can you provide me with a scan with 50mp of resolved detail? I doubt you can. I doubt anyone in this thread can, because as I said, those numbers are not attained by 99% of medium format shooters.
>>44827826x7 is 80mp on an old ass drum645 exceeds 100mp with modern scanning equipment
>>4480592>So, which of the big companies is going to be the first to offer an affordable 100mp camera?if you want 100 mp you are retarded. learn what pixel pitch is.
>>4480592Theres a bigger chance of the next iphone hitting 100MP than boomer mirrorless cameras
>>4485650100 mega pixels of ai slop and other assorted computer gimmickery. No thanks, I'll stick with the "boomer" mirrorless, even though mirrorless cameras only came about after the boomers had already started to die off.
The pursuit of being in the right place at the right time to capture the perfect sky no longer holds its former value when that very sky can be synthesized from colored pixels. When a dramatic reddish dawn or an approaching thunderstorm is conjured with a few strokes in Photoshop, or when a telephone receiver in a model’s hand is seamlessly swapped for a sneaker using Adobe Firefly with context-aware lighting adjustments, the photograph was, at best, merely raw material. Even the need for initial raw material is obsolete, as AI can generate sophisticated images entirely ex nihilo.Even the tangible, physical nature of the print offers no reliable refuge: A picture developed on photographic paper from a negative, held in the viewer's hand, might still originate from a digitally generated negative, or the photographer might have used analog means to re-photograph a digitally produced and printed image.In sharp contrast, painting remains a sanctuary of authenticity. Within a painting, the physical labor and the direct interaction of the artist with paint on a substrate are inherently stored and visible. The viewer holding a painted image recognizes the unique signature, the texture of the applied color, and the clear intentionality of the human creator behind it.While robots can wield a paintbrush, they cannot yet fully simulate the human touch. The immediate, non-reproducible trace of the human creator in the finished work remains the key differentiator. Traditional, handcrafted creation is reclaiming its significance.This shift in perception is already evident at art fairs which do not show specifically photographs: Visitors often walk past photographs but pause thoughtfully before paintings. In art, people are not seeking the perfect illusion; they are seeking the visible, verifiable, and therefore authentic trace of another human being.
>>4485261I would reproduce with her if you know what I mean
>>4485169I print in darkroom only, so sounds like not my problem pal
>>4485169yes photography is deadyou should stop doing
>>4485169>schizo rantdidnt read lol
No refunds editionLast thread: >>4482008
>>4485499I started with the A6700 and handling an A6000 feels like shit. I think dedicated platforms should outperform phones by a large margin, and yet this shit feels horribly handicapped.
>>4485577Don't DSLR's have the shutter closed all the time unless they're in live view? Why do mirrorless shit the bed like that?
>>4485499Was in the same situation as you 2-3 months ago. Switched to A7C2. The body itself is almost the same weight as the a6700 and you get FF with it. Downside, is that lenses are bulkier. Upside is that you have all the benefits of fool frame (like zoom lenses actually being sharp), tons of IBIS, etc. Pretty happy with my decision and wouldn't have upgraded to a6700 personally. It's way too heavy for APS-C.
Is a Minolta 300si/AF 50mm f/1.7 shit or am I just retarded, even on a tripod instead of shaky hands my shots on Ektar 100 look kind of blurry at the best focus I could get and in some night shots some lit up signs have weird flipped double images on the other side of the frame. Some shots (mostly indoors) have orange tints/gradients but I'm guessing that's from leaving the film in the camera for a year in fucking hot florida rather than a leak in the camera. I don't really know what I'm doing or if I should just use a point and shoot
>>4487790>in some night shots some lit up signs have weird flipped double images on the other side of the frame.Can you post it?
Can UV filters help to reduce purple fringing?
>>4481608>Doesn't understand T-stops or why they exist
What even causes that?
>>4485444Fringng? Lack of optical correction which allows aberrations. What are aberrations? Normally different wavelengths of light bending at different values which means red and purple hit the sensor in slightly different areas and so on.Vintange lenses will normally exhibit some strong fringing since they didnt quite get there yet in terms of optical engineering, but it's also why modern superzooms or teles or even your wide aperture normals are like twice the size of vintage stuff: extra elements and better engineering that requires larger glass surfaces will aid in reducing aberrations at the cost of, well, cost and size. Purple fringing seems to be the most common but I never looked into why, just that some photography software has inbuilt adjustments specifically for it.
>>4479561based Darktable enjoyer. Raw chrom ab also works great
>>4479561also if you go into >lens corrections and then manipulate >tca override to align the red and blue channels in the RAW, you can actually eliminate almost all fringing entirely, it's an incredible feature that I randomly stumbled upon watching a DT youtube tutorial
This thread is dedicated to close-range photographic captures utilising macro-optical imaging configurations to achieve greater reproduction ratios. Got it? Good now upload some shit. Last thread: >>4376661
>>4484609>underexposed>could have fixed it in post but didn'thow do you live with yourself?like, really, how?my eyes had to see that and you probably didn't think it would be an issue but it is!
Tamron 1:1 90mm ff or laowa 2:1 65mm aspc on aspc camera?
How to manual focus stack properly with minimal size distorsion. I have a af lens x 0.5mag and trying to do manual focus stacking trying the fwd and back rocking method but i end up with the subject movement and change in size.Any advice?
any film macro people have experience with olympus' 80mm f/4 macro lens? thinking about picking up a good condition used one for my OM-2n as an upgrade over the close up focus rings I use currently. comes with the extension tube as well I think.
>>4484609nice photo anon, i like it.im gonna go take some pics with my extension tubes
If I ask some college students to help me model for my photography do I have to pay them or is giving them the pictures for the instagram enough? What is your guys experience in this?
>>4485103Based on the fact that you have to ask such a question instead of simply trying it out I don't think you have the social skills required to have good looking college girls to work for you for free.
Just advertise what you want to do and they will come because girls are posers
>>4485272You are right I have no social skills I use Claude AI to write my responses for me it's working out so far already got 2 girls on board but I haven't discussed paying them so I just wanted to be prepared incase they ask
>>4485103the less you offer, the more you have to offer
>>4485307unironically deep. thanks
I have an iPhone 13 and I've been wanting to take photos of my CRT. Currently the only way to get rid of flicker has been recording on the blackmagic app at the right shutter speed and screenshotting the video which seems odd. Surely there's a good camera app that lets you take photos with options for shutter speed.
>>4485306get a real camera, stupid faggot
>>4485306Anything where you can control the shutter speed. Other than that it doesn't matter. You just need a slower shutter speed to stop the flicker. Maybe a tripod too to make sure your images are sharp when using a slow shutter speed.
hi what do you guys think, i shoot only really abandoned locations, and i feel this is one of my best photos -- abandoned church in PA
>>4485223I really like the colors here. Did you get a clear one of the painting in the bottom right corner there? The one of the angels.
There is too much even lighting. Need more depth in that aspect. Besides that these are dope. Dont give away the location though, dont disrespect the hobby like that.
>>4485223Looks great. Even as a Christian theres always a great feel to abandoned churches. Keep it up
>>4485314>as a Christian:|
>>4485314Kwab
Why do people shoot terrible, generic hotel artwork landscapes? Why do we want to be Thomas Heaton instead of Robert Adams?
>>4485181You put a lot of thought into imagining other people doing things. It’s comforting to imagine that other people are dumber, and easier than imagining you’re smarter, isn’t it
>>4485177The rare good post from a namefag
>>4484802yeah i see it now
>>4485290wrong
>pretentious loser finds out he's not as special as he thinks he ismany such cases, sad!
>We are still continuing sensor development. However, we are still in the "technology development phase" and have not yet begun actual sensor design. We are currently working on pixel architecture design.>To be honest, the development project is a little behind schedule. This is because each time we prototype wafers and manufacture a prototype sensor, we discover new technical challenges. Since we have never designed a sensor independently before, we are currently learning through trial and error.>While the Foveon team was previously at the forefront, the project is now primarily led by the engineering team at Sigma's headquarters in Japan. Fortunately, technical issues are gradually decreasing, and we feel that the challenges are gradually being narrowed down. Once we are confident that the sensor is technically feasible, we plan to officially move on to the sensor design phase and begin preparations for mass production.How confident are you Sigma can make the full-frame Foveon happen, anon? Even if they can get it to market, how likely are you to invest in it?
>>4478742what are you using 15 of them for?
Why do they need to stack the sensors? 3 chip camcorders solved this problem decades ago with prisms.
>>4485189The worsened color accuracy appeals to dum dum photographers that cant make a LUT and retains better pixel peeping quality than other inaccurate cameras like xtrans and ancient ccdsGearfagging is basically the same hobby as an electric guitarist that collects boutique pedals, guitars, and amps to do the job of a $50 12 band EQ
>>4485190>worsened color accuracyt. buyer's remorse snoytard
>>4485222Here’s one now, projecting its own sour grapes (inability to get stand out colors with common cameras) onto othersIt will now complain about “hours at a computer" like 30 min to make a preset to use forever is worse than paying thousands for a shittier camera with marginally nicer jpegs (but only SOOC with no settings changed, otherwise any camera can get the same jpegs but thats CHEATING)But it still shoots raw anyways (gotta crop, rotate, and fix its white balance misses)Foveon is truly pointless. Just buy a 40+mp camera, downscale, and fuck up the colors yourself. PS:https://www.photoxels.com/sony-strikes-another-5th-news-agency-win-reuters-decides-on-sony-a7s-iii-and-pxw-z280-as-their-journalists-main-shooting-kit/https://www.photoxels.com/britains-pa-media-group-selects-sony-alpha-full-frame-mirrorless-cameras-and-cinema-line-camera-fx3-as-preferred-equipment/https://www.photoxels.com/fourth-win-sony-strikes-deal-with-the-canadian-press-to-be-its-exclusive-image-products-provider/https://www.photoxels.com/gannett-usa-today-selects-sony-as-exclusive-imaging-product-provider-for-their-photographers-and-journalists/https://www.ap.org/media-center/press-releases/2020/ap-to-equip-all-visual-journalists-globally-with-sony-imaging-products/
Autumn editionPrevious thread >>4479021
>>4484969>>4484974>>4484914These are really nice
>>4484571Thank you! I appreciate the time you took to write that. I have tried embracing reflections as part of the composition, but nothing that comes together especially coherently. I do love shooting mannequins but no kino yet. If it isn't reflections, it's a dirty ass window.
>>4485059happy to do so anon. I like your pic, the poses are fun and sure the window is a bit dirty but I think this is pretty close to being a really really good photo. the reflection here could easily make the story - is someone looking in hoping to get the job? is someone walking away, perhaps rejected? or even just the excitement of the mannequins could contrast with the normalcy of the street outside. give yourself some credit, because (to me, anyway) it seems like you're approaching things from the right perspective and just need to work on some of the finer details. I'll be on the lookout your next shots
