>>4312332
he reminds /p/hotocucks who still believe photography is le art and that one day they're gonna make it big with photos the world will surely admire and care about that photography is just another business that's also getting only harder to keep yourself attached to with every passing month

>>4312332
I don't hate him, I hate you for purile shitposting

>>4312349
Work on your run-on sentences.

>>4312365
*works*
next time I'll CRUSH you even harder

Go away Jared I'm not watching your latest vid

>>4312332
He’s the archetypical photographer the world doesnt need. First in line to be replaced by a drone with a snoy. And yet he thinks he has all the right opinions

Just so you know, any photographer with a clue about gear stopped caring before they even got a career. Listening to this guy is like listening to a taxi driver about racecars when you can ask an f1 champ wuts gud and get
>doesnt matter learn to drive

>>4312349
Weird, I watch his videos and I get the impression that’s the opposite, that he knows he’s a gearfag and shill and embraces it and he doesn’t seem to get too wrapped up in the bullshit mysticism of “le photograph” that other Jewtubers seem to. But I don’t know YouTube is kind of just on in the background for me.

>>4312400
yeah basically this

jared polin is a taxi driver talking about sportscars
he talks like he knows everything but the only laptime he ever posted was 20 minutes around the nurburgring, counting the crash and the crying session, and one time he almost spun out and went over a cliff while attempting a "togue attack"

the extent of his photographic knowledge is setting up back button AF, bitching about autofocus and comfort when using 1200mm zooms, and applying lightroom presets. he cant even frame a shot or use appropriate exposure settings. he shoots with his shutter speed 2 to 3 stops higher than it needs to be, cranks the ISO, and misses the shot entirely anyways and has to crop it to save it. some people shoot for a crop and that's ok but he cant even center a subject sometimes.

>>4312408
>he knows he’s a gearfag and shill and embraces it and he doesn’t seem to get too wrapped up in the bullshit mysticism of “le photograph”
that's exactly what I meant and that's exactly why he's hated on /p/ by some
sorry if it wasn't clear, working on my run-on sentences rn

>>4312332
All RAW elitists should be shot. Simple as.

>>4312567
Film cameras only shot raw. Negatives have more editing latitude than some cameras raws, actually.

Jpeg is a degeneration. Like being stuck with one film stock, lab, and scanner with your camera and having to buy a new one to make a significant change.

>>4312571
mostly thats because all cameras not named leica have really bad jpeg engines

yes even nikon and fuji. x100vi jpegs look worse than an iphone. Z8 jpegs are just shit.

>>4312332
Becuase he is into promoting himself and being famous more than being a good photographer.
>hence the annoying spastic videos made for zoomers
>hence the ridiculous hair

I only shoot film, have never owned a digital camera.

>wtf is raw?

I know it’s some format but why is it supposed to be so good?

>>4312332
Pros:
-Happy to talk about negatives of any brand
-Real-world reviews actually give a good idea of how cameras and lenses perform in appropriate use-cases

Cons:
-Terrible personality. Very American
-Claims to be in the gym every day but has arms like a 17 year old who's been training for a month
-Photos are ok but if he wasn't reviewing gear, he wouldn't have a channel based around is skills are a photographer.
-Editing skills are heavy-handed and pretty awful
-Presets also look awful. What he calls 'Skittles', I call oversaturated garbage.

>>4312608
Not sure if you're serious, but if you've really only shot film, you may be.
Raw is essentially the entirity of the information the sensor has captured without any noise reduction, sharpening, contrast or saturation added.
It's basically your film negative, ready for you to process however you want to.

JPG or whatever other HEICs (high efficiency image codecs) are out now just apply all those settings for you and save the file in a compressed format with less specific colour information per pixel. Very limiting if you want to make any changes to it after taking it.

>>4312407
go back to pol loser

>>4312612
>without any noise reduction, sharpening, contrast or saturation added.
In an honest world.

>>4312612
Why would the raw style image not have been the default from the get go? Digital seems overly confusing and processed to me.

>>4312777
i bet a lot of things seem overly confusing to you.

>>4312777
raw is the actual exposure / source file, like a negative
jpg is some interpretation of that raw, like a print or scan

>>4312785
I bet you only shoot auto too

>>4312777
It was, but most people/companies realized the benefit of digital was convenience.

>>4312777
Because storage used to be expensive and most computers were too slow to edit raws. That’s it. Only an idiot would waste their time shooting jpeg. Its lower than accepting lab scans - the lab still does exposure and color balance corrections for you.

He had a very good video about how to use my camera model specifically and what all the different settings and options did that was better than the manual. I tried watching one of his other videos and he just comes off as a guy that has to suck himself off and present himself as someone that gets constantly sucked off to win clients. Idk. He's a product of what sells in the industry.

I'll tell you why I'm indifferent to him
.
But I need to tell you about my shitty LUT presets.

When the RF 100-500 came out, his review complained for over a full minute about how the zoom would slide out from gravity, and said Canon should have made it tighter. That lens has a ring to make the zoom do exactly that to user preference. He couldn't even bother to look at the lens he was reviewing.

He's not worth your time getting angry over. Move on with your life.

>>4312332
Like every member of his group, he avoids work and prefers to profit off the backs of others. He is a liar and phony, unable to create anything meaningful or beautiful on his own he turns to the skills and achievements of others off which he becomes a parasite.

The group I am, of course, referring to professional photographers.

>>4313022
you scan you film, don't you?

>>4313140
No. Enlarger

>>4313142
Fucking rekt kek

>>4312332
He’s too old to still be acting like a retarded 20-something putz. Then again perhaps he knows his audience and its all performative for them to relate to. jfc

>>4312573
>um guize i like throwing all my color & detail out and keeping a jpeg.
>some cameras do rly gud jpegs
No they sure the fuck don’t, thats not how jpeg works at all. Ken Rockwell go crawl in a hole and die i swear to monkey fuck.

>>4312623
Not really. The raw or .dng (digital negative) file just contains the data off the sensor. But the sensors data, just like a film negative, is not an accurate finished image that perfectly resembles the orig scene, it still requires developing to get it to that point, and along the way the image-maker must make all the choices of how they want the final image to look. Without going into technical specifics, trying to view an undeveloped film or digital neg is silly, bc they were engineered to be raw materials ready for more processing, not for your eyeballs to read as photographic truth. There is no such thing.

>>4313257
shooting jpgs is for people for whom having a camera is about lifestyle branding, not photography. Shooting jpgs means their intent is to never print. Their photos go directly from the sd card to their instagram. They would be happy to use their phone, but a camera says they are 'artistic' and 'mindful', they truly appreciate a moment and have a vision. They describe themselves as a "creative".

Shooting jpgs is to photography the equivalent of what being the guy who shows up at parties with a guitar is to music

>>4313259
>doesn't understand the post he's responding too
>doesn't actually know what he's talking about
>still thinks he's an expert
classic /p/ post, welcome aboard newfriend

>>4313259
>Without going into technical specifics,
Nope. U didnt post everything there is to know about the subject in one post, therefore u no nuthing. u r so stoopid, i smart, not u. durr hurr hurrr heeeeeehawwwww

brand over substance, feeds the gear machine that youtube photographers fall into, doesn't really add anything useful, ie he captures rather than creates value, his paid reviews of peoples work are often simplistic and he fails to grasp intent in shots and only sees what he would have been looking for. Gets wrapped up in old projects or photos he took that genuinely arent that impressive, and stumbles into specialised fields when reviewing and misses key info or techniques. Oh and his recent film posts on insta have been fucking horrific. Several of the baseball clubs in MLB have people doing what he's doing but better and more often, without the wanking, cause its just sports marketing at the end of the day

>>4312612
raw files should be obsolete at this point. HEIF has a lossless profile that could compress all the data with zero modification.

>>4313279
T. Cope

>>4313260
You're right.
Shooting jpegs is fun, and devoid of any friction.
Just shoot and enjoy.
I love my fuji for that.

>>4313142
doubt.jpg

>>4313279
Nope, HEIF contains an order of magnitude less data. This totally fucks you if you are an actual photographer who does retouching and dodge and burn. I know the fujislug/digislug cope these days is you shouldn't but if you believe in photographic reality you are a clown. Photographs have never been reality from the moment of exposure. And if you are a "camera operator" winogrand style purist who only cares about location and timing - you aren't an artist, you have no soul. You are a ceepy voyeuristic goblin or go back to square one - snapshitter who might as well use a phome.

Anything short of 14 bit raw is unironically worse than film
And I'd prefer 16 bit raw and medium format digital or 45/61mp FF because a thorough scan of quality stock like portra 160 is still dangerously close to a 14 bit 36mp FF RAW, and sometimes it exceeds it if the fine detail happens to be one of the many general patterns bayer and xtrans can not cope with.
>inb4 digicope about color gamuts and scanning film properly being too hard/"enlargers cant resolve le fine detail" (false, get a job and buy a good one)
yes, CFAs have a wider color gamut than film layers, but this does not actually matter unless you are using medium format digital+pixel shift to scan real art ie paintings and historical frescoes

Ι don't hate him, he is the realest one out there.
Photography is a dying art and too many promote themselves as photographers simply for owning an iphone.

>>4312609
>Claims to be in the gym every day but has arms like a 17 year old who's been training for a month
not everyone wants to bulk up though
he's not fat
maybe he goes to do cardio and basic maintenance to not get fat
all he has to do is hold cameras and lenses up he isn't a construction worker hauling heavy loads so idk what you expect

>-Editing skills are heavy-handed and pretty awful
>-Presets also look awful. What he calls 'Skittles', I call oversaturated garbage.
kek
I want to buy lightroom and his presets and apply skittles to skittles then get a refund when they no longer look like skittles
but I don't use adobe software so it's too much work
also LR is rental only so fuck that

>>4313333
Checked, photography will be relict of past.
Something like medieval swordfighting or smithing, only autist will remain.
Soon AI will be good enough to stitch multi-exposure photo from multiple smartphone sensor, with perfect imitation bokeh and all the shit you will want.
Will it be truest representation of realiy? ofc no, but most people won't care so it will win in long run.
Maybe small larp single lens cameras like fuji x100 will remain, for zoomies to have fun.
But photography is done for.

File: REVERSION TO THE MEAN REV(...).png (266 KB, 1718x968)

266 KB PNG

>>4313370
"Photography is done for, this consoomer shit is good enuff" has been repeated countless times for the past 20 fucking years but it's never actually been done for
Because it's never actually been good enough except for the normie-minus class that is incapable of being discerning. Their brains function at a lower level and basically filter the additional info out - if your theory of mind can't comprehend this, imagine a jar of beans. Highly intelligent people will make a more accurate guess regarding the number of beans in the jar. A worker-breeder class man who thinks a phone is good enough or even the same as a camera has a stronger filter in their mind so the jar of beans is a single unit.

What actually died was standalone normie visual-notetakers and you normies and sub-midwits have been lamenting it every day every year and calling that shit "photography", but "autists" are a larger percentage of the population than you think. Because when you say "autist", you mean people 1SD+ ahead of the avg IQ. These are the cultural ubermensch. The people with discerning taste. The people whose brains are running smoothly and quickly enough to notice the little things and conceive of abstract aesthetic values.

These people are never going away, so "real photogaphy" isn't either. We CAN'T go away - at least not without everyone suffering greatly. Society depends on the midwits+ class to run basic services like education, healthcare, the justice system, government, advanced manufacturing, etc. Society depends on the midwits+ class to progress. It encompasses the genius class, but also people you probably never thought of - the hordes of undergrads, techs, and assistants that help make genius ideas into practical reality.

Also, high end cameras are a glorified offshoot of industrial and medical imaging so the R&D is always going to be there as long as we have a decent civilization.

inb4 normie minuses post jealous hatred and mockery directed at the midwit pluses

>>4313374
"midwit pluses" get so neurotic and insecure about not being geniuses that if anyone is mocking them it's the burnouts among them being perpetually salty about not being first place

>>4313370
You do realize medieval swordfighting is an olympic sport for rich sons and daughters of PhDs now correct?

Photography has a lower barrier of entry than that. Its a 105+ IQ thing. You’re not into high IQ photography until you have 5+ strobe studio work.

>>4313374
>We CAN'T go away - at least not without everyone suffering greatly
Who is John Galt?

>>4312332
His personality is a little bit obnoxious. I like the old version of him who was a little bit more humble and quiet. He makes good video though. I watched two of his camera guides with Todd Wolfe.

>>4313385
Elon Musk’s secret idol.

Reminder to doomsayers: Dip nibs, quills, reeds, fountain pens, bottled ink, papyrus, and vellum are still produced on an industrial scale.

>>4313402
>builds short lived overpriced “cars” with remote killswitches and explosive power cells that can be triggered using the cars own systems
>markets them to the collectivist liberal elite
>provides internet service to russian troops, as a joke
jej

>>4312332
I've only seen one video of his, I don't like his attitude.

>>4313358
>not everyone wants to bulk up though
>he's not fat
He's not fat but he flexes and talks about his 'guns' pretty regularly.

I've never touched lightroom but I do everything in Adobe Camera Raw. My work pays my Adobe subscription though. I woul;dn't pay it.

File: channels4_profile.jpg (214 KB, 900x900)

214 KB JPG

As much as I hate him, at least he's genuine in his shittyness.
This guy on the other hand, doesn't have a single genuine bone in his body.
And it got so much worse when he hopped on the film trend (at least 5 years too late, mind you) and went on to hail himself as the film photography messiah after speed running the hobby right into a Leica M6.
Absolute scumbag that I wish nothing but the worst on.

>>4313976
His recent videos clearly show how done he is with photography. He's bored, doesn't really care anymore and wants to escape this niche so bad. Understandable.

>>4313976
To this day I have no idea why peter is so popular. He's an average youtuber and while his photos are great I just don't know why people worship him. Is it because of his faux deepness?

File: PXL_20221118_165758669-1.jpg (904 KB, 3072x4080)

904 KB JPG

Tippytoes

>>4314398
What the actual fuck is the purpose of this
stitching for MAXIMUM resolution?

>>4314455
it's necessary to take a picture of just ONE of my balls

>>4314579
Impressive
Do you have an OF so we can see

File: 1.png (243 KB, 804x555)

243 KB PNG

>>4314398
neat

>>4313142
Based