Go /p/ro.Want:• Expect criticism regarding your uploads.• /p/ is for photos: so feel free to post them as often as possible, even if "image unrelated" to your text. • Use "Recent Photos" threads if you are shy or only want to post a small number of photos. • Raw Files which can be collectively edited for discussion of post-processing techniques are encouraged. • Please check the catalogue for similar topic(s) before creating a new thread. Do Not Want: • Go to /wsr/ or /r/ for specific Photoshop requests. • Gear threads are discouraged but permitted. Keep in mind that many users simply hide these threads. Want to learn more? • The /p/ Wiki
Barnes and Nobles editionPrev: >>4485000
>>4488364Mist filter?
>>4488381I believe slop like this goes in the other thread >>4487411
>>4488190bitchin'
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.)
>>4483912Have you seen his gf? Woof!
>>4487613ex gfshe left him and took her money with her. now he's struggling to pay for hist shit
>>4487615Is this confirmed or just based on him being extra moody?
>>4487613His new gf is a dog? I guess he is from 4chan
The problem is that you're watching gearfag youtubers rather than educational youtubers.
Anything smaller than MF is cope EditionPrevious: >>4485653
Every time I look at sony a7riii photos the colors especially skin tones are puke. Not worth 5% less noise.>THE COLORS ARE SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE!That doesn't mean pleasing. Human eyes aren't scientific measurement devices. They have a bias and the way you see skin tones is not the way an ideal computer sensor does.>YOU HAVE TO EDIT RAWS! EXTENSIVELY!Funny canon and nikon dont have this problem>REAL PROS DONT SHOOT JPEG ANYWAYSFunny canon and nikon dont have this problem>STOP SAYING BAD THINGS ABOUT SO-https://www.dpreview.com/news/0261142298/lensrental-discovers-cracked-sensor-mounts-inside-some-of-its-sony-a7-series-rental-fleethttps://kolarivision.com/sony-a7r-iii-weather-sealing-examination/
>>4488353Own and use both brands. I use low, and mid models and have never had an issue.Been using a Sabrent V90 card lately and it has been rock solid as well.>>4488354>>you wot m8>it's an actual snoy pajeet, neatoI'll have you know the Indian population of Australia is only 43% of the nation. But yeah, this guy shouldn't have passed the citizenship test.
>>4488263>Canon Rebel cameras... with a 18-55mm lensAre good entry-points into actual cameras. I wouldn't get one older than 2015 at this point though unless I was on a shoestring budget.Full frame cameras can do better when starved for light over crop cameras, but don't kid yourself, there's no replacement for having enough light. Dark scenes are going to look either dark or riddled with noise, althought yes going to full frame absolutely improved the ratio of noise to light (or as you'd say, SNR).>something which can do better in low light conditions without me needing to pump the ISO or Depth of Field up would be nice.Technically speaking as 5D MkII would fit this criteria but might be a bit old for your liking. Take a look. EF lenses are cheap and plentiful, and a big boy sensor is going to make photos look nicer overall.>As I understand it, people tend to favor mirrorless cameras these daysSort of. Mirorrless has made bodies more compact which appears to be the main driving factor, but your overall size is still mostly determined by what lens you mount. My super small mirrorless camera is 85% the same size as my old 60D once I slap my 70-200mm on it.EVF vs OVF is a nothinburger; I use both an SLR and a MILC and both have ups and downs. You buy a MILC for quality of life features, or having the most up-to-date tech, that's about it.>am I really better off looking at other cameras?For a relatively small kit, not really. I will say though as someone who goes to musuems regularly, the main factor in having a good shot is mostly how well the lighting is done in the building, and if there's glass involved bring a CPL.
>>4488340Looks like raw NR. Sony added more than star eater. Natural noise is speckled because its error pixels. Not soft and smeared. Overall the snoy looks worse like they added raw nr to the shitty a7rii.
>>4488263Correct exposure is correct exposure, no matter the camera. Assuming working light meters and non-tricky metering situations, if camera A says the correct exposure is EV 5, then camera B will say the correct exposure is EV 5 as well. How you expose for that EV is up to you- do you open your aperture? Your lens may not open far enough, and you may not want that shallow a DOF. Do you slow down your shutter speed? You may not have a tripod or image stabilization to prevent shake, or you may be introducing too much motion blur. Do you increase ISO? You may be introducing an unwanted level of noise. This is all science. No camera can magically produce a correctly exposed image at a light level of a given EV outside the constraints of the exposure triangle.Here is what you CAN control: Lens aperture. A faster (lower f stop number) lens can open up more to let more light in. Faster lenses are generally more expensive than slower ones for a given level of quality.Image stabilization- this comes in three flavors: IBIS, which stands for in body image stabilization (stabilization of the sensor), OIS, which stands for optical image stabilization (stabilization inside the lens), or physical stabilization, such as mounting the camera on a tripod or setting it on a table or the ground.ISO performance- different cameras exhibit different amounts of noise as you increase in ISO. Some look terrible by 3200 ISO, some can salvage something useful out of 25k ISO. This is another area where all other things being equal, high ISO performance can cost more. All other things are, of course, rarely equal.Sensor size- this one is kind of adjacent, but it is worth noting that the size of your sensor has a practical effect on your depth of field. In general layman's terms, the smaller the sensor, the greater the depth of field for any full frame equivalent focal length, and the larger the shallower. I'd explain why and give examples, but post too long
Thread theme: https://youtu.be/QR75ti4mN_A?si=N-UtB79FhGkJOuBO
>>4488365>only one interior photo in the threadAre car interior photos just not really a thing?
>>4488380Well you see anon, you likely need to *own* the car to do that. (Or have a mate with a nice car, or be at a show that lets you into the cars)Also, interior shots normally need pretty wide lenses which not everyone has access to.As opposed to the highly ubiquitous "hey look at that car over there".
What's /p/'s opinion on one of the most viewed (online) photographers?>Sex And Takeout is an ongoing viral series on the unnecessary and unkind social boundaries and cultural taboos forced upon women’s bodies. By indulging in sex and junk food, Bahbah proposes a celebration of the self. Inspired by her personal battle with disordered eating, Sex And Takeout is a declaration of overcoming guilt and shame. Through this series, Bahbah unpacks expectations of femininity and challenges her own standards of beauty.
>>4488210>"nazi">"shoot up a fuckin school"Not helping your case, schizo.
>>4488210>Mental problems on sleeve: Promiscuity and gluttony are immoral behavior and glorifying them degrades society. This is just women emulating male vice instead of setting an example. And no wonder this is pushed, companies profit excessively from selling products that support and compensate for unhealthy lifestyles. I wonder why companies are so immoral? All the people who own them look kinda related....>Perfectly sane and mentally stable: you ignorant, paranoid little nazi fuck. Eventually you will either get medicated or removed from this world, depending on whether they get you before or after you shoot up a fuckin school. idgaf which, but have you considered inserting large vegetables in your anus instead?
>>4488296You speak to the sort of goblin that says asking why jews are exempt from ukranian drafts is antisemitic
>>4488296It’s all the idiotic shit you just throw in casually to try to make your point, between your cringe Nazi rhetoric is the part that I like. Apparently in your absolutely fucked understanding of this species, gluttony is a male problem and women are just imitating it? Bc bitches don’t overeat and have eating disorders & turn into whales? You do alternate between sounding like a total fucking moron and like you’re one realization (that education is a Jewish conspiracy brainwashing the children) away from being featured on the news face down.
>>4488370Gluttony as a glorification of the self IS a male vice.>I am the manliest man here. I can eat more, and worse, food than anyone else. I eat pizza every day. I eat burgers for breakfast and steak for lunch. Beer is my water. Whisky is my blood. Salad and quiche are for gay fucking bitches. I'm having a great time. Et tu, BITCH?This is distinctly male. It's a masochism ritual adjacent to eating whole hot peppers raw. It's a low grade pain/eating bitterness test. It is distinctly masculine.And regardless of what it is, it is BAD FOR EVERYONE INVOLVED AND SHOULD NEVER BE ENCOURAGED.>that education is a Jewish conspiracy brainwashing the childrenOh, certain facets of education are absolutely jewish conspiracies. Critical race theory and modernized equity (each maintain jews as a people who deserve to remain distinct and privileged) are distinctly jewish concepts. They are mandated by jewish religious belief. Another jewish aspect of education is framing all american wars as for global peace when they only advance israeli interests and establish central banks which inevitably tie back to 100% jewish families that owe their wealth to charlamagne. You know jews exist and aren't a boogeyman right? They are the white privilege you heard so much about.Until they're sick of non-jews, then they're not white. They're oppressed.
"Merry Blobmas" Edition.Previously:
>>4488345adorable little jay
>>4488292If you're referring to the black borders, I think it frames the picture nicely. although I think the edges are a bit too straight, if that makes sense.
Previous Thread Image Limit Reached: >>4474697Incidental Northern Mocking bird outside my balcony. Didn't have a picture of one yet.
first time out with new cam
>>4488301
>>4488316
Random photos you took at night
>>4487257Noice! Australia?
>>4488201Correct. You can tell from the constellations alone?
i'll toss another one ine>>4487329playing? you're not even holding the controllers>>4487466rounded aperture blades maybe ?
>>4487466>Focus stacking and lower exposure in post?Not a bad idea if you shoot static scenes.A strong diffusion filter will soften up the sun stars, but the end result is messy and probably not what you're looking for. Finding an optimal lens for the task is another option. Like the anon above me suggested a lens that has rounded aperture blades (dedicated portrait lenses often use those to prioritize shape of bokeh balls) might be of use here. I'd just add that increasing the number of blades creates a similar effect. Lenses that have a high number of blades are better at keeping the round aperture shape as you stop them down.Some kind of a slow, wide kit zoom will also have decent depth of field wide open, though might not be up to standard in optical quality .
>>4487466>Focus stackingOnly good for anything that doesn't move. Can still produce some weird artefacts. Try it but be prepared for either some fucky nonsense you hope isn't obvious or to put in some work in post to make things look better>Lower exposureIn theory yes, because you'd reduce the brilliant points of light to regularly-exposed light. Doing this is going to make your scene very, very dark without HDR bracketing which causes its own headaches similar to focus stacking (and you'll still need to edit out the sunstars on the brighter frames for the stack).I vote you look for a slow aperture lens with rounded blades. I used the RF-S 18-45mm for a short while and while it was optically meh, it has these features and is a decent example of what you'd want. Since it's a whopping f/6.3 @ 45mm, you could theoretically get your whole scene in focus if you were far enough away. HOWEVER, there are better lenses suited for this task, this is just what I have some relevant experience with. Lots of modern lenses have rounded blades wide open for better bokeh, but sharpen intentionally stopped down to get sunstars on purpose.>https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dof-calculator.htmYou can use this to rough out your DoF if it's any help in picking what kind of focal length is useful. If you were say 20m away from your focus point and shooting at f/11 with the mentioned lens, you'd end up with a 60m DoF. You'll probably still get some faint, shitty sunstars at f/11 though.
Last days of 2025 editionAll video related questions and discussion is intended for this thread. Here we discuss techniques, gear and anything else related to capturing video footage. Please don't pretend to be an expert if you don't know what you're talking about. Kindly leave your ego at the door.Posting short films/scripts or other work you've done is encouraged.We tend to use and recommend DSLRs/mirrorless cameras because they provide phenomenal picture quality for their price, have large sensors (ie the same size used in high-end cinema cameras and higher) and have interchangeable lenses.In contrast, consumer camcorders often have much smaller sensors and a fixed lens.>STICKY - https://text.is/QZ1J>Helpful guide, additional books and more in-depth FAQs - https://web.archive.org/web/20200926115310/https://pastebin.com/kG0gRmTZ>NO ONE CARES WHAT AN EXPERT YOU THINK YOU ARE. IF YOU’RE ASKING BASIC-AS-SHIT QUESTIONS, YOU CAN’T BE ALL THAT GREAT. SEE ABOVEPrevious thread >>4467259Quick FAQSComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4488218Yeah, my great grandfathers 8mm films that start in 1936 and end in 1980 are my favorites. Everyone I used to know as a little kid is on them, their whole lives, them as young ppl, hanging out at every age, marriages, etc, it’s all in there, and I’m the first person to open them up in 45 years. But ngl I wish he had spent more $ on a 16mm cam instead of the 8mm. 8 is rough.
>>4488218>what's important are the memories you captureYou can't deliver an executive video package with memories and feelings, you need specs to justify the product under the eyes of suits
>>4487820Mission failed, We'll get 'em next timeI should probably start with super8 or a bolex
>>4488327Since the fuzz questioned me about my crypto profits I can no longer buy cool gear like that. ;-( I guess I’ll go back to using my phone. Lenses and tripod and support shit make stuff like that super expensive. I wish nobody questioned me about my crypto money. Getting gear and toys was super fun, but (for me) it’s over now.
>>4488327$5000 on a 16mm film camera in 2025 is not well considered. All you’re going to use it for is holding the lens in front of the film and running the shutter, and everything else you’re gong to do much better, capably, consistently and practically instantaneously in the software editor after developing. All that beast gives you is a regular service bill high enough you could buy another bolex with the money instead.
Should dishonest photography be shunned?
>>4488290>I must have missed where you suggested it was something else causing the distortion?I didn't, what I cared about was dispelling the fiction that the lens was distorting the shadows.
everybody taking about the moon itt needs to be executed also what the fuck is dishonest photography? any image at all could be considered dishonest because it is a single view of a single instant of a subject or event, its like how people talk about how much they hate "bias" or "indoctrination/propaganda" when what they really mean is they dont like it when others treat a perspective other than the mainstream perspective on a topic as truefor example: >teaching kids in school to be liberal capitalists = cool and normal>teaching kids that liberalism and or capitalism might be bad = evil indoctrination and brainwashing literally every perspective is biased and its the same with photography literally every image could be considered a lie based on the intentions of the person framing the imagei think the only thing that could actually be considered dishonest is how people use an image to make their audience feel, if i took a photo of a dead Palestinian killed by an israeli JDAM and the zog used the photo to say it was actually hamas who killed the kid or to say it was somehow the kids fault he god the bomb dropped on his head that would be dishonest but the photo would not be
>>4488318Capitalism does not exist. It was invented as a strawman to propagandize neo-feudalism aka the unending struggle towards real communism. And its greatest triumph is convincing americans that its real and business are the equals of the state or else the entire country is logically obligated to go full commie. You will also find this “jedi” mind trick in other debates. And not just lefty insanity like veganism and population replacement either. It is also used by the right wing. You must adhere to ____ or your world will end if you ever stop being a hypocrite, and anyone can do anything they want and you cant logically complain. Know this trick. Fear it. Hate it. And remember the more you acknowledge ISM dichotomies the more powerful they become.
>>4488318>also what the fuck is dishonest photography?The Bahbah thread is a great example of it. Photography done with the pretense that it's presenting some deep truth when it's just navel-gazing erotica peppered with some critic bait. The faux rebellious aspect of it is also part of the dishonesty. The photographer is playing it safe while pretending to be some daring maverick. The idea that it's speaking truth to power when it's actually just power talking. It's corrupt to the core, there's no sincerity in it. Another example, hobotography.
>>4488206lol they forgot to shoop in the stars
let's see them
>>4482004That's a 3d render you fucking retarded liar
>>4486936Are you fucking blind? That's clearly AI generated. You can tell by the mist distance effect it pulled from a video game
>>4486936>>4487112Neither of you idiots know how to reverse image lookup? It's built into 4chan. Start with the triangle next to the [Reply] link."Tower of Terror", DisneySea Tokyo.
>>4488202Yeah, that's obviously the location he used to build training data for his AI model. Glad we're getting somewhere
at what age and how did you find that you were into photography/videography?
>>4476808>at what age8? 9? Thereabouts.
when i was a kid and got my first phone i wouldn't really take pictures since i was scared of the camera (parents are conspiracy nutjobs), but i still really enjoyed taking pictures. got my first (shitty) camera at 17 and borrowed my friend's cameras, which were canon's. really loved playing with the settings and stuff. i want to get back into it, and i bought a nikon off of someone a while ago and just havent used it yet.
Id say its really built up over the course of my life though. I took one good shot of my now deceased cat when I was super young and I always thought it really captured her. Have been into fashion and aesthetics in my early 20s, worked on a golfcourse and snapshotted alot of sick landscapes. When I was 25 I bought a Polaroid to snap moments cause me and a gf were hanging out with a music scene crowd, local bands and the like. The final "nail" was a high school buddy's little sister who was a massive poser in everything she did all of a sudden had their mom get her a digital camera and she started a "photography business". I sat there grimacing at her stuff a bit and told myself "if Im gonna sit here and grade this as dogshit I might as well figure out how to do better myself." Bought a minolta x700 in Chicago, moved to Atlanta with some friends and spent 4 years basically running around and learning how to shoot manual, develope/scan, edit. The perpetual learning has kept it fun. Currently working as a school portrait and sports photographer
>>4476851i faked before faking was cuul. man, remember 2017? >gatekeeping on a redditboard disguised as an edgeboard, possibly the least visited and most forgettable board of all time>scenescene/10 would skim again
>>4476808I did film photography in school. I gave a bit of shit, but then didn't bother for a long time. Then my friend bought a camera to take pro looking photos of his car so I got a camera too. I also discovered that you should never get into commercial photography work, since it will completely zap your interest in photography.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/michigan_mister/Based - this is the future of photography
>>4488224The slop wars have begun, the next few years are going to be something else.I dont think this board will even exist within 2 years time as this very topic will destroy it from the inside out.
>>4488225putting your own photography watermark on ai creations is the cherry on top of the slop.
>>4488224I dont think you understand what the word photography means.>photoDerived from photon, aka light>graphFrom the greek word graphe, meaning paintingGenerating an image that was never real is fundementally not photography.
>>4488233The images were derived from light they just had some extra math involved to combine many photos into one creation.
>>4488224holy sovl
What the actual hell is wrong with my editing and photo something looks very wrong in the photo and I can’t decide on what it is I’m trying to get like a vibe Juno claspo but it doesn’t really fit that vibe
>>4485288I love u
>>4485288Your a CHAD WITH 10 girls on u when I tell you I trust your advice, you are the best photographer I have ever seen in my lifetime and I have lived for very long you are the ultimate ultimate chad
>>4485288Your face is so lickable
>>4484922>What the actual hell is wrong with my editing and photo something looks very wrong in the photoGet an OLED screen
>>44849220 dynamic posing, prop use or lighting and you still cant see what's wrong? Just give up
