[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography


Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


4chan Virtual YouTuber Contest - Submit Designs Here

Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks Make sure to check your spam box!



[Catalog] [Archive]

File: _DSC2002-Edit.jpg (1.01 MB, 1024x819)
1.01 MB
1.01 MB JPG
Instead of spamming rpt, I figured I'd make my own thread.

All of these were shot this weekend.
10 replies and 6 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3358759
>>3358763
i can agree on these, much more balanced
>>
File: _DSC1929-Edit-3.jpg (4.14 MB, 2400x1600)
4.14 MB
4.14 MB JPG
>>3358750
>>3358759
>>3358763
Thank you for your feedback.

I'll get back to you in more detail later, but I'm in a hurry right now.
>>
>>3358786
I obviously posted the wrong file here. Didn't mean to post a 4mb file.
>>
>>3358750
>>3358449
Okay let's get to it.

So the reasoning for the inclusion of so "much" foreground detail is because it perfectly mirrors the sky formation above, at least that's what I was thinking when I shot it.

Regarding the rest of the shots they're fine exposure wise on my screen. But I have a shitty TN panel at the moment, so the brightness etc might be very off on other screens. I shall have to investigate. Thank you for taking your time to respond.
>>
>>3358786
it's word salad, anon

File: Nikon Leaves Brazil.jpg (67 KB, 796x413)
67 KB
67 KB JPG
>60% tax on electronics over $50

Why is this? Anyone on /p/ have to deal with insanely high taxes on camera gear in their own country?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2018:09:17 20:42:05
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width796
Image Height413
39 replies and 3 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
File: IMG-20180808-WA0005.jpg (255 KB, 1280x1280)
255 KB
255 KB JPG
>>3359852
>Zona fraca
It directly translates to "weak zone".

It's actually named Zona Franca, but the accidental irony is actually pretty nice.
>>
>>3359738

>Do business
Using publicly subsidized electricity, roads, water, healthcare, education and social security.
>Be good at it
Thanks to publicly subsidized electricity, roads, water, healthcare, education and social security saving you a FUCK LOAD of money.
>Make profit
Because the publicly subsidized electricity, roads, water, healthcare, education and social security allowed your business to thrive by not needing to spend dickloads of money on every single aspect of your life.
>Here comes the government
>>Gimme this amount or I'll put you in jail SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THOSE SAME SERVICES TO OTHERS.


Jesus fucking Christ it's like you morons have literally never read a book in your shitty lives.
>>
File: _DSC01816.jpg (629 KB, 1000x667)
629 KB
629 KB JPG
>>3359945
Here is an interesting case, these small villages in Vietnam are supposed to pay like 5% income tax, and it turns out that's more than enough for electricity and roads.
(In practice they probably pay 0% tax, because who is going to collect taxes from someone who sells their homegrown bananas at the local market next door?)
Anyway, roads is like a non-issue, everywhere I went had decent roads.
Electricity is cheap as hell.
Education works just fine with being partially funded, and partially user-paid tuition.
Water? They just collect the rain season in massive jars in their backyard.
Social security? Apparently not all that expensive either, just avoid immigrants from the well-known most violent countries on the planet.
Not sure about the healthcare one.

All of this is handled by a baby tier 5-10-15-20-25-30-35% progressive taxation.
These types of essentials you mentioned aren't actually all that expensive.

Most of your taxes go to your corrupt politicians who wants to earmark certain projects to their friends and families.
And to a corrupt military system that has a need to unload all its bullets and missiles against Israel's neighbours every 4 years or so.

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
>>3359781
They could if they tried, but if they never try it can absolutely never happen.
>>
File: 201761615580_lt.jpg (36 KB, 400x261)
36 KB
36 KB JPG
>>3360061
>>3359781
Low taxes is what works.
For example Olympus built a new manufacturing plant in Vietnam.
https://english.thesaigontimes.vn/Home/travel/movies/1426/
Why did they do this in Vietnam instead of Brazil?

Low taxes.
Orderly conditions, low murder rates.
The locals don't chimp out and set their cities on fire in riots(I'm looking at you Berkely and Ferguson).
Emerging generation is educated in engineering and other practical STEM subjects instead of gender studies like in the west.
Wages are probably fairly low, but decent compared to other local jobs.

File deleted.
Ricoh GR 2 or Fuji x100s?
1 reply and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
>>
x70?
>>
>>3359847
No those are too expensive. Both the Ricoh and Fuji in op are around the same price used.
>>
>>3359848
used x70 is maybe even cheaper than grII in my country, i got it for $500 with filter adaptors and shit; x100s is almost $600 used, also is not pocketable in my opinion
>>
>>3359838
threadly reminder that this is dumb and you should stop posting it
>>
>>3359834
GR2 or even a GR.

Fuji AF still isn't that good.

File: halos.jpg (63 KB, 359x469)
63 KB
63 KB JPG
What causes these circular splotch halos around light sources when shooting wide open (in this case f1.8)? Is this normal and expected behavior?
>>
Could be coma, could be lens flare.
>>
>>3360018
Just "spherical aberration". It is a result of too much refraction. Normally, the aperture blocks light from the extreme edges of the lens which prevents that.
>>
File: Explanation.png (9 KB, 512x512)
9 KB
9 KB PNG
>>3360018
Pretty sure its a by product of having a light source larger than a singular point. You can image lightwaves as ripples in a pond, but that isn't quite right. Ripples travel straight away from the impact point. Light will travel in any random direction away from its origin (until it is reflected or absorbed). Light originating at the top of the light source has the ability to "splay" out to the point where is is visually bellow the light source. The halo appears brighter because it technically is. It is able to be hit by light originating from any visible point on the light source.

The size of the halo would depend on the circumference of the light source and the distance from it. The further you are from it, the larger the halo. The larger the light source, the smaller the halo.

Pic related is a half assed attempt at drawing the above explanation.

All that said, I could be wrong. This is just me trying to remember some youtube video explanation a heard awhile back.
>>
File: despondent_pepe.jpg (81 KB, 400x387)
81 KB
81 KB JPG
cataracts

I need help. I have a little picture date with a qt3.14. And I don’t know how to properly pose them among other things. Does anybody have any tips (photo unrelated but I took it)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS Rebel T6
PhotographerArturo
Lens Size18.00 - 55.00 mm
Firmware VersionFirmware Version 1.0.2
Lens NameEF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2017:12:07 18:00:35
Exposure Time1/50 sec
F-Numberf/4.5
Exposure ProgramShutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating400
Lens Aperturef/4.6
Exposure Bias0 EV
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length30.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1920
Image Height1280
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Exposure ModeTv-Priority
Focus TypeAuto
Metering ModeEvaluative
SharpnessUnknown
SaturationNormal
ContrastNormal
Shooting ModeManual
Image SizeUnknown
Focus ModeOne-Shot
Drive ModeContinuous
Flash ModeOff
Compression SettingFine
Macro ModeNormal
White BalanceAuto
Exposure Compensation3
Sensor ISO Speed224
Color Matrix135
>>
>>3359294
There are thousands of YouTube videos on this subject.
>>
>>3359294
Please post the photos when you're done. I want to see how poorly they turn out. The OP image is terrible
>>
File: u4mwktsyrwm11.jpg (359 KB, 1242x1215)
359 KB
359 KB JPG
>>3359300
>Just go to youtube and watch thousands of hours of video. Here: I won't give you any suggestions to start out with
You are cancer.
>>3359315
>Ha ha, this schmuck asking for on-topic beginner help looks like he's a beginner
You are cancer.

>>3359294
Some quick tips:
1. Make sure she does something with her hands. It barely matters what, but don't let her just dangle 'em by her sides. That almost always looks bad. Stretching up; one arm on head, the other on hip; behind the back; touching her face; all of these look a lot betters. If she feels like her hands look corny like she's trying to act like a model jokingly, that's often an indication that it actually looks good.
2. Two good ways to have the face: Eyes towards camera, face at a 45 degree angle away from it; Face towards camera, eyes looking away at a 45 degree angle.
3. Have her bend one of her knees a bit during standing poses. It helps accentuate the curve of the hips. Pic (not mine) related.
4. Pay attention to her chin. Especially if you're shooting from a slightly low angle--which you probably should be doing, especially if she's shorter than you, so all your photos don't have the towering-over-a-qt3.14 perspective--make sure she's not looking down at you and giving herself a double chin.
>>
>>3359319

Thank you I will try these out
>>
>>3359294
I use this guy's method for posing a model.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z58EcVPhFAw

File: s-l1600.jpg (125 KB, 1600x1600)
125 KB
125 KB JPG
Anyone got the Zomei Q666C or Q666?
I read in a few threads that it would do pretty fine as a first tripod. Dont know if I should go with the carbon or aluminium version (carbon is 25 usd more).

Or is there any other good chink tripods in the same range (like 85 - 90 usd) ?
7 replies omitted. Click here to view.
>>
Do i need to get the carbon version, or is the aluminum one good enough? Every q666c on aliexpress is good 25-40 euros pricier than q666. I wouldn't be using heavy loads on it anyways (a1 with 50 1.8).
>>
>>3357407
where did you find the carbon version for 60$? the cheapest I find on aliexpress is $105.
>>
>>3358344
It was on ebay, the seller had one left and it was called "sl-288c", but it's exactly the same as the q666c down to the cardboard box and the ugly ass camo bag. Ali sellers are basically dropshitters too so it isn't always cheaper than ebay. If I were you I'd type "tripod" into ebay's search, set the price between $50 and $70, only search for new items and just sift through all the trash until you find something that has the same product pictures as the q666c and is being sold by a reputable seller. It could be called any arbitrary X-YYYc name, as long as it has the same pictures and the seller has a good rep it should be fine. Also check the description very thoroughly because the chinks will try to fuck you over every chance they get.
>>
>>3358726
that worked. thank you anon. snagged one for $73.50.
>>
>>3357412

I've had two Zomeis tripods. Once you remove the one leg to use as a monopod, it will never be tight enough going back onto the tripod.

File: 7artisans-35-12.jpg (66 KB, 560x420)
66 KB
66 KB JPG
I'm thinking about buying a 7artisans 35 f1.2 for my fuji.

Any opinion?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeGoogle
Camera ModelPixel 2
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time24963/1000000 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
ISO Speed Rating388
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length4.44 mm
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
65 replies and 7 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3359879
Correcting distortion, flare and CAs has nothing to do with the capabilities of the one using the lens in the end.
Someone here wrote that if you just shoot for fun, almost any lens will do. I'm totally with that statement, but saying the cheaper lenses are on par with Zeiss/Leica, or even Voigtländer is just wrong.
>>
>>3359878
People turn into dipshits whenever there's something that "comes close" to Leica

Like look at this (JCH) review's conclusion and then compare their own sample image and tell me any reasonable person is going to go buy the $3000 lens over the $300 one.

>The 7Artisans 35mm is a very decent lens and at that price point, there’s no real reasonable complaint another than needing to fork out extra for a lens hood. Is it the coveted “pretty much a Leica lens at a fraction of the price” that we all hope actually exists? To that I reply, “close but no cigar”.
>That being said, you only really notice when comparing head to head with legendary glass worth 10x the price. Contrast and sharpness are quite nice; just the line renditions are a smidgeon thick to my eyes. But for the frugal minded M-mount user looking for an entry 35mm lens, it’s a solid performer and worth consideration.


>>>just the line renditions are a smidgeon thick to my eyes.
fuck outta here
>>
>>3359881
Yep. The Leica looks noticeably better...

...but not $2700 better. $2700 will buy a heck of a lot of travel to interesting places you can photograph.
>>
>>3359881
Look at the two photos, especially the foliage at the left and the cage. There certainly is a difference. I bet by f/8 there is barely any difference, but you don't pay more for a Summicron to shoot it at f/8 only. Wide open, the Summicron is likely to beat the 7A. This is to be expected and it would be strange if it was otherwise. The resulting question is if you're willing to pay that much for a lens that does only few things better.
It's a good lens for beginners, those who want to test that focal length and those who are on a tight budget, but not to those who expect great results.
>>
>>3359881
Fished out that review for some pixelpeeping, and they've really weird samples. Summicroms files are 1.09mp while artisan's are 1.9mp. What's the reason behind this?

Hey guys where is people who is liking boops?
>>
>>3359958
that's some nice boobs. Can you show more of the wine please?
>>
>>3359961
Yea, I'm also distracted by the blur on the wine.
>>
Unsound amount of ambrosia still left in the bottle, and that lace isn't matching at all with sweatpants. I'd work on these two first.
>>
I think it's shameful that your using a flash but you still can't freeze the motion.

File: Untitled.png (1.77 MB, 1136x1100)
1.77 MB
1.77 MB PNG
Fuji X-T3 Raw Comparisons are out on DPReview's test lab. Do the colors look worse than the X-T2? Looks yellow and saturated.
>>
>>3359946
Is this normal that sony at 100iso looks sharper and has more details than fuji at 160 (I mean they cheat with ISO, so it's basically 100 as well)
So that noise reduction in raw that you can't turn off is real right?
>>
>>3359948
That's not the NR
Crop is just not as sharp as full frame.
Some lenses are sharper than others right?
That means the lens is the limiting factor to actual resolution, not the sensor megapixel count.
If you view images at equal size, like in this example, the crop camera has a much smaller "canvas". Just like in real life, if you blow up the size of a painting or drawing, you lose fine detail.
Implying crop can ever equal full frame for actual sharpness and resolution is implying crop lenses have access to a super secret stash of ultra high quality glass.
>>
>>3359946
I wouldn't trust Dopey Review as far as I could throw them. And I don't give a rat's arse about petty Fuji v Sony trolls either. /thread

File: 1531774877937.jpg (1.36 MB, 4032x3024)
1.36 MB
1.36 MB JPG
im bored and i love developing neg
13 replies and 6 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3356867
Red light would heavily fog the red sensitive layer of film which might or might cause green happening.
>>
>>3357123 or might not*
>>
>>3356306
Green negatives is not a Fuji thing. I've shot 400h and dont get green negatives
>>
>>3356867
>2018
>Not still shooting orthochromatic film
>>
File: j neg.png (112 KB, 335x570)
112 KB
112 KB PNG
cropped neg

File: borkeh.jpg (278 KB, 2047x2338)
278 KB
278 KB JPG
we borkeh now

seriously, I'm considering to get a Xs just to take these cool ass bokeh shots with the price of a good f/1.4 lens
62 replies and 6 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3357118
D E E P P I X E L S
>>
File: s-l1600.jpg (135 KB, 1600x900)
135 KB
135 KB JPG
just buy a radioactive pentax 50mm and the cheapest m42 slr you can find.
>>
>>3359537
This was the camera I learned to bokewhore on
>>
>>3356787
People who aren't subhumans also leave a break between paragraphs for ease of reading. In case you're wondering how long I've been here - Jesus Christ it's a lion.
>>
>>3356785
HTC is doing this, badly, for years and years.
Almost every phone have has the same thing.

File: straydog.jpg (941 KB, 3543x2380)
941 KB
941 KB JPG
Which Moriyama's book should I get first? Which would you recommend most? Which won't ruin my budget?

Also - photobooks thread?
6 replies and 2 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3356221
don´t get the compiled portfolios, i think with daido´s photography his books are the artwork and not the single pictures, there is a lot to his way of layout and paper choice, and his images make way more sense when viewed as a series
>>
There are some free Daido and Araki photo books here in PDF form.

https://reflexamsterdam.com/books/
>>
>>3357915
What kind of film does araki use to get those insane colors.
>>
>>3357969
>https://reflexamsterdam.com/books/
>What kind of film does araki use to get those insane colors.
Technique?
>>
DAIDO MORIYAMA - VISIONI DEL MONDO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwMlE6ydKqE

File deleted.
>there is no photographic effect or aesthetic that can't be accurately replicated with software

As a photographer, how do you cope with this feel?
>>
>>3359837
Why exactly should I care? You can also replicate any photographic effect or aesthetic with paint if you want. The fact that an iPhone cam make fake bokeh doesn't make me enjoy photography any less.
>>
>>3359837
You're wrong. Bokeh, starlights, graduated nd, polariser...
>>
>>3359840
This. Gearfags treat photography like it was some assembly line work rather than enjoyable pastime.
>>
>lowqualitybait.jpg
>>
>>3359837
unironically kill yourself
sage

File deleted.
>I love photography
36 replies and 10 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3357658
>we
cringed hard
>>
>>3358013
good job bumping a shitty thread
>>
>>3354796
I have autism and don't have an internal monologue, I think in images. The thought of having a second voice inside my head freaks me the fuck out.
>>
somebody help
I'm sitting here in my car shooting a star timelapse and I am bored
>>
>>3358059
thanks

File: download.jpg (7 KB, 259x194)
7 KB
7 KB JPG
I'm not sure if this is the right board to ask this, but it is photography related. I've done very limited pictures, nothing special, but I've been tasked with taking "professional" (I'm by no means close to professional, but apparently the boss thinks I'm better than everyone else) of clay works. Not painted clay, just matte white clay objects. They're moveable as far as I know, so the background could be just about anything, but I'm pretty sure he wants the clay to be sharply focused. What is the best way to go about taking a nice looking photo with a white subject? Is there a best background color to use? I sure don't know. The only rules I have are no b&w and needs to be somewhat neutral/pastel, no bright colors.
I haven't seen these myself, so just relaying what I've been told.
If this isn't the right place to ask please direct me away.
Thanks.

pic unrelated, it's just clay.
5 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>3359621
>>3359557
instead of seperating trough dof you could also seperate by contrast, eg using a solid colored background. Then you could also use a closer aperture, making the whole subject stay in focus and be sharp.

Will have to use some soft light though to not throw a hard shadow on the background.
>>
>>3359565
You go for longer focal distance (longer zoom) to get good separation then. Stand back from the subject and 'zoom' in as close to it as possible, your aperture will be larger as opposed to using smaller focal ranges, but distance will offset this. Make sure to stabilize your camera in some way, at longer focal distance you'll introduce a lot of motion blur to the shot otherwise, and picture will not look sharp. Experiment a lot with this until you find good enough results. Then work on positioning the work and background.
>>
>>3359713
Forgot to add that you do all this at closest possible focusing distance. mf mode and focus on the nearest distance.
>>
Thanks for the help everyone. I'll watch this thread till its done so if anyone else has tips send away.
>>
>>3359695
Dual aperture ones kind of do it.




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.