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
Where do you hire models these days? It used to be that you could just go on modelmayhem but that shit's been dead for years. Presumably there's hoes on instagram or whatever, but you can't even search using # anymore, so that's no good either. So what's the scoop?
>>4468535Yes, you adorable Zoomer. On ModelMayhem, mentioned by the OP for example, you could literally just message a girl to see if she wanted to collaborate. No money would be exchanged, it was all done on an honor system basically.
>>4468473>Real photography of naked women feels too much like a productbecause it is a product
>>4468549Yeah, I know it’s a product lmao. That’s the point of the post - it feels too much like a product to be horny about it, where shitty amateur pics feel like something a girl would’ve sent me in college. >>4468548Huh, wild. Didn’t know what I was missing out on until now, damn
>>4468535They still are if you already have the portfolio they're looking for.I have never once paid for a nude model, ever. On nudes, this current generation of guys just wanting to see tits, the model being nude has to add something to the image that cannot be replicated if she were clothed, so all these guys shooting naked women in the woods or in bedrooms "boudoir" are all horny GWCs just trying to have spankbank material for later.>>4468452this is also a very good way to find models because they're already expecting to get naked and most of them will gladly do it especially if they don't have to put out later. Did it once.>>4468531Skill issue.>>4468548Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
COOMERS BTFO
color science editionprevious: >>4466576
>>4469027>They rather focus and amazing camera bodies and lenses with best craftmanship, quality and tactile premium feel. https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/382130-frameline-selector-almost-fell-off/https://prosophos.com/2023/10/30/leicas-m11-problems/https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1807261/3https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-ahqXTK3sULeica is like porsche. They say they make something amazing but after your cars 2nd year in the shop (measured in time spent on the hoist) it becomes clear you just got lied to by a german (many such cases - they are the russians of western europe)
>>4469019Pure cope. Sony is a fine system if you only use native lenses (of which there are a great variety to be sure, being the most catered-to mount in the industry). There's really no need to cope so hard about Sony bodies being pure horseshit with adapted lenses because you have no reason to have to adapt lenses in the first place.
>>4469031Asymmetrical vignetting is caused by an out of spec $12 chinese adapter sony hate schizo
>>4469032The lower corners have just as much optical vignetting as the upper corners. The upper corners appear to have more exposure falloff only because they contain sky. The same effect is visible in the SL sample on the left.
>>4468045discussion about coil motor af and eye pain as focus hits anyone
This is the post for stupid questions that don't deserve their own thread.
>>4468942>buy overpriced colorchungus when pantone samplers are freeRedditors everyone
How difficult is it to develop firmware updates for different cameras on the same processor? I want to know if it's a financial decision to not bring the Z8 update to the Z5ii or if it's not possible/too much work. I don't want to get a new body if it can't do Maximum Aperture Live View like any camera should be able to.
>>4468996entirely financial reasonscompanies are aware they cant compete with the used market and aggressively fuck people over. you can not prove they can add it in court because their expert witnesses can defy common sense.
>>4468996>I don't want to get a new body if it can't do Maximum Aperture Live View like any camera should be able to.Silliest of cope>>4468969Oh, it you mean actual client galleries, then your own website / gallery serviceYou should absolutely be able to condense a 2hr concert to a top 10, and then you can deliver the larger gallery to the client as neededWhat do you see other concert photogs doing? Most I see post 5-10 of the best on socials for a given concert, and then the rest to the client. I don't see many of the concert photogs I know just posting full galleries, that's something usually left done to the organization / venue / whoever hired you.
>>4469026>Silliest of cope>It's not in my usecase, therefore it's silly!Stop defending bad design choices that they themselves can easily add.
previous thread: >>4432315contribute
>>4467780Awesome
>>4468827Thanks.
>>4459269are white borders considered cheat?
Insta threadWill follow anyone>horgen_fotoHad anyone got tips on how to find less popular content?The algorithm is just feeding me terrible tiktok reels with millions of views all day long.
Hey I don't care you follow me or not, I just want feedback on my pictures. https://www.instagram.com/jaymalick
I must say - after that "adventure" with IG being blocked twice after I made account, I'm honestly afraid of posting anything or even posting account name here. Made few posts with multiple photos in each (I think it's called carousel), couldn't even post link to my site with actual galleries because IG only allows adding links in phone application (I refuse to install one) and honestly don't know what to do now.
>>4468872What did you post to get blocked? Skin?
>>4469009First I was blocked hour after making account, probably anti-bit system. Second, after adding profile photo and making 4 posts. Added 5th later but I'm afraid of adding more.
>>4468804Not a fan of flowers, sorry.
>you take a photo of someone on the street and you get this reactionhow do you respond?
>>4467356shut up faggotliterally added nothing to the conversation
>>4467358Why? It's just a camera and we can do whatever the fuck we want with it.
>>4467338>I prevent this by lifting weight, wearing headphones and walking awayThis. Try looks and gym maxing. They'll be too focused on your good looks to even care about your street photography.
>Interesting thesis. How are you going to stop me?
>>4467483>we can do whatever the fu-
How do I get over the fear of using my camera in public? I got a fancy camera but I've never taken any shots with it because I'm too scared to go outside with it and use it
>>4468350Because you’re trying to steal their soul
>>4467597I'd walk around with this setup and deliberately snub women looking for photos
>>4467597>That trigger discipline
>>4456713just grow up or take your meds if you're already an adult
>>4456713Whip out your dick so that nobody notices camera. Plus you will get Wingograd vibe photos
Are there any other photographers out there that have similar or better work ? Unironically used to love his style.
>>4468966Too big for its intended use, they're tightly packed inside with all the electronics. Feasible if it were film though, almost every disposable out there AND the Yashica T proof have flashes and are still small. It's funny that what now gets shilled as medium format was once considered vest pocket material.
>>4468968Stop fucking dogs
>>4468966Why would you build-in something which you can sell separately for more money. Its the Apple method.
>>4468983the iphone has a flash built in
>>4468667man of great taste, (You) and Coulson
Dipper editionLast thread >>4452845
>>4468794please tell me you dont actually do this
>>4468737Cool
>>4468336Just spent a couple of hours applying my own advice, the kingfishers kept zooming left and right but stayed away. Of course the moment I removed my camera from the tripod, turned it off and folded my lens, that fucker came on a branch 7 metres away from me, and fucked off as soon as I could get all my stuff ready again. Fucking kingfishers, why do birds ALWAYS come at the worst times and have to show us how much of a bunch of losers we are?
Please post film photos, talk about film photography, film gear like cameras, film stocks, news, and tips/tricks in this thread.old thread: >>4460704I just copied and pasted the old OP because no one would bake a new breadThread Question: To what extent do you digitally edit your film scans?
>>4468886based as hell, thank you
>>4468791I find tmax to be quite a bland and often muddy looking film, but I have seen very very good results from it. Way too expensive in 8x10 compared to ilford films that give me great results.I knew this old master photographer that would shoot tmax 12ish stops overexposed, develop it in a secret way, and then use enlargers with a dimmer switch so it took 3 hours to expose printing paper. Unbelievably incredible results from tmax, but he never told me how he developed, and I never got to see any of his negatives. I moved away and he died from fucking covid. I have his photography book somewhere at least.Steve carver. Really good dude and I learned a lot making prints with him. Rip.
>>4468990Another one. I think it took him over a decade to make his book of cowboy/western pictures. He would have famous western actors/actresses pose for them in his studio. All the sets were designed by him. Very cool to see his studio.
>>4468990>>4468993>So, I opened up my own photography lab called The Darkroom in Venice Beach. And I started working on doing replicas off of old negatives. These were old, thick negatives. When a picture was taken in early times, certain images were recorded as time exposures. Because the film was so slow, the photographer would actually walk into the frame to fix the tie or the hair or whatever, and during the exposure would walk out of the frame. When these negatives were printed, the emulsion would be so thick because of the time exposure, that you wouldn’t see the photographer who walked into the frame. >Now, when I would get these thick negatives and print them, I could actually make several prints and they would be like motion pictures. Let’s say I would have a thick negative of a portrait of Abraham Lincoln, and let’s say he blinked while the photo was taken. When I would develop the photo, and I would look at the paper, he would actually be blinking while it was developing. He would appear to be alive. It would be like a motion picture, because there would be several pictures in the negative. Using this technique, I would be able to get the ghosts out of them. That’s why it’s called ghost photography.>But then I got busted, because I did some famous replicas that were sold as counterfeits. They tracked them down to me. I was able to talk my way out of it, by showing them that I specifically sold them as replicas. sounds like quite the dude, rip
>>4468994Yes! I remember him telling me about that! He figured out how to replicate those old school dense negatives with his super pulled film and extended printing times. I think he told me it took him like 10 years to figure out his development recipe, which is why he wouldn't tell me lol.He had some insanely cool prints hung up around parts of his studio. It was always so cool going over there.
old >>4465181
>>4468856Goddamn, how much boost did you give that thing? 5 stops?
>>4468858I just maxed clarity without touching exposure, thought it would be creepier.
This one (>>4468145) is better than this (>>4468134).I can barely tell what i'm looking at in the worse one. It's visually incoherent to me.
>>4468370Nice photo. I like industrial stuff.
Are there any practicing occultists on /p/? There use to be a big overlap between /x/ and /p/. My question is that how do you incorporate occult theory into photography? I know William Mortensen was a practicing Christian occultist and did took fantastic photographs and embraced the imagination, manipulation and artifice. But I would like to see what are some occult practices within straight photography. How would Chaos Magic manifest itself in photography?
>>4468785Any examples?
>>4467807>There use to be a big overlap between /x/ and /p/.cinefag is a known /x/ yetifag, but he also fucks dogs
>>4468943Cinefag has been extremely clear on this matter. He does not fuck dogs. Dogs fuck him.
>>4468943>>4468954>still pushing this slanderI'm for reducing the reproduction of so called coloreds, aiming for a low CRI if you will. If so called coloreds fucking other beasts is what it takes then so be it.
>>4468967>drops trip>nooo mods dont ban my trip! i never said that!pathetic dogfucker
So is everyone using Lightroom or what? I already have Affinity 2 and would like something with a permanent license for library as well.
>>4466237>>4467805stop spamming you fag
>>4467805Yes, this is clearly the work of a true processing master. He sure knows what he's doing!https://www.instagram.com/timonkaech.photography/
>>4468048If you buy a NAS box (myself, I have one of the cheapest single-drive Synology), it simplifies setting up file sharing.
I use LR Classic, IrfanView and PS 2015>Paying for ((((((((subscriptions)))))))))
>>4462455I quit Photoshop forever ago and haven't had any difficulty moving on from it. I use the Canon DPP and the other included raw tools. There is Affinity 2 if I need more than DPP.
What is it with people that shoot on film?Film is expensive to film, develop and scan.Yet what do they do? They film the most mundane bullshit.Traffic lights. Or some mediocre bullshit to some obscure indie song.Why do they all do this?If you're gonna spend hundreds of dollars. Atleast film something good. But it's like they think the vintage aesthetic will make their shit good.It's like they just want to see what their mundane boring life would look like on film.
because it's fundid you guys forget that photography was supposed to be fun?this is one of my favorite systems I own and it makes everything look like a vintage postcard, I don't care I can do it in digital, this is more fun. people always ask you about it and it's a great conversation starter. go outside and enjoy shit you fucking spergs
>>4468940>did you guys forget that photography was supposed to be fun?This entire board minus the maybe 6 or so anons I've noticed, they all would rather bitch about gear than actually enjoy photog. This is a gear board and nothing is going to change that as long as the mods refuse to add more rules.The most fun I've had with photography is when I forget this site exists. Posting shit here is ancillary, and it's the only healthy way to treat this board.
>>4468940A naked chicked swimming in the river asked me what my view camera was. I think she got uncomfortable when I told her it was a camera. It was on a tripod without a lens.
>>4468950Missed opportunity
>>4468952I was with my gf. She loves my photography, but that would have probably been crossing the line lol
