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
Summer 2026 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 larger) 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 >>4499500Quick FAQSComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4519710I ended up convincing my parents to give it to me on the condition that I digitize some of the tapes they had.The tapes play back perfectly in the LCD but when I plug it in to my TV via a composite connection the video is really shaky and jittery. Do you know what's going on there?
>>4523402>Might be worth downscaling to 1440p, but also have a look at chroma subsampling; TV broadcasts overwhelmingly (at least used to) use 4:2:0. This may fuck with your red channel, so review the footage after compression.Any recommendation for settings? I've tried Handbrake and ShutterEncoder, but some of the filesizes end up ridiculously small and very obviously lose quality, no matter what speed or CRF/CQ I try using on either.>4k for social media is slightly overkill. Not that you asked, but 80% of your traffic is likely on phone screens no bigger than 7".For sure. There is some stuff that appears on laptops and at times on larger TVs for presentations. I also have some personal projects in the works like a travel video but I don't want the filesize on that to get out of control either. I realize quality is important but when I look at how some videos are with only 10-20mbits, they look truly good enough to me even on a TV.
>>4523406you can save space by reencoding with h265 or x264 at medium or slow. VBR is going to be more efficient than CBR but isn't as easy to target filesizes with. You can get away with low bitrates for talking head stuff but if you have a lot of fine detail like rain and foliage, 10mbps will be bad and 20mbps will be marginal. imo, you should just buy some hard drives and not waste time with compression
>>4523402 (me)>>4523404I havent had to do this in a good while so I don't remember specifics. I would shoot LOG 4k60 then downscale to 2k60 or 2k30 and use RF 22(? iirc) I would get files that were around 30-60Mbps but a lot of that was slow-mo footage where most of the frame was easily compressed and it still looked pretty good. It really does sound like your scenes are just too detail rich and compression is doing all it can. At some point you need to draw the line and if you're unhappy with how the footage looks using 4:2:0 20Mbps then unfortunately you're fucked. Just gotta deal with the bigger file sizes.This >>4523420 anon is correct in saying that VBR is better overall, and trying to target a specific bitrate is more suitable for low-bandwidth applications. If you were ripping long-format to single layer BD-R, for instance.
>>4523423>4:2:0 20Mbps>file sizesI'm just using Hi8 analog videocassettes, and I was playing them back on a period-correct CRT TV with a composite video connection.
Only A Sony Is Good Enough™ Last time sony won: >>4522451
>>4523344>Look into Lumix compactsI did and the reviews aren't great, with most people calling them vlog cameras and not really good for stills. It's disappointing since they have a good price point and size, but that's perhaps part of why they're negatively reviewed.>>4523379I honestly don't bother with DPreview anymore.
>>4523379And I'll ask again, elaborate on how exactly Sony's functionality seems "untested" to you.
>>4523384I found thishttps://watermanatwork.com/blog/panasonic-lumix-cameras-fail/
>>4523291>/p/ has never wanted you on it, clive.Who the fuck is Clive?
>>4523432From what I've pieced together over the last few months from other anons, he's some autist that got banned on some camera forum site over his Snoy hate campaign and would get banned whenever he returned to that forum, so now he posts here since he doesn't have to make a new account every time he wants to post. Two different reasons I've seen is that he's a Panasonic fan and that makes him hate Sony (how Sony relates to anything Panasonic is beyond my understanding) or that he's actually a Sony fan and is trying to use his hate campaign as a way to make them put in changes he wants (though nobody knows what those changes are). Either way, he's unhinged and reminiscent of some /g/ schizos. He gets banned here sometimes and the Snoy posting stops for a while but he comes back again eventually with the same posts as always.
would it be technically possible to control ISO and shutter speed (if electronic) on a per pixel basis?
>>4523318I can't think of a single useful application for that, but technically it'd be rather easy to implement and it wouldn't ruin DR either unlike the other anon said
>>4523322>I can't think of a single useful application for thatFor still photography, there's at least HDR capture without temporal bracketing. Spatially varying exposure gets you extended scene DR in a single frame.>it'd be rather easy to implement Define rather easy.Starting from a global sensor, per-pixel exposure would be "rather easy" but it's still more circuitry and more computing per individual pixel.For per-pixel gain, PGA and ADC reference are column-parallel by architecture, so the only real in-pixel gain knob is a switchable conversion-gain capacitor giving you two or three discrete states (double or triple conversion gain architectures). A continuously programmable per-pixel amplifier is not "rather easy".>it wouldn't ruin DRLet's say we make this an evolution of global shutter sensors. Because you pretty much need a global shutter architecture for this anyway:The storage node and its extra transistors eat area on top of the per-pixel control logic you want to add. Two area budgets competing for the same silicon. More switching near the diode means more clock feedthrough and coupling, and active logic adjacent to the photodiode. This means more heat, more dark current, therefore more read noise. Dynamic range is full-well over read noise, so a raised floor is a direct DR loss.Current global shutter charge-domain photosites have a smaller full-well capacity than voltage-domain ones on non-GS cameras, which means lower DR in any case for now.
>>4523318Yes, it is called CID sensor vs the global gain design of CCD and CMOS. Most laboratory spectrometers use it.
>>4523327Modern CID sensors are CMOS, only CCD have global gain. Still no per-pixel gain control on CID doughbeit.
>>4523326>Spatially varying exposure gets you extended scene DR in a single frame.You'd still need to take two photos, one to find out how to correctly expose the second one. Between the photos there'd be a break of tens of milliseconds for computing and programming. At this point you can just do regular exposure bracketing.>For per-pixel gain, PGA and ADC reference are column-parallel by architecture, so the only real in-pixel gain knob is a switchable conversion-gain capacitor giving you two or three discrete states (double or triple conversion gain architectures). A continuously programmable per-pixel amplifier is not "rather easy".Varying the gain is an antiquated approach anyways, but it'd absolutely be doable to chang it between each pixel given enough readout time budget. You'd generate the voltages with a low number of fast DACs and then 'copy' the voltage output with local sample/hold buffers. >Because you pretty much need a global shutter architecture for this anywayNo it would be much easier to start with a conventional rolling shutter sensor.
REDRUM EditionPlease post film photos, talk about film photography, film gear like cameras, film stocks, news, and tips/tricks in this thread.Also talk about darkroom practices, enlargers, photo paper, techniques like dodging/burning, tools, and equipment related to enlarging, developing, and printing.Thread Question: RC or fiber?Previous thread: >>4516071
>>4523416>30 years old slide film>medium format>home developed >for product shots>"on my website to sell meat"Anon, have there been any missing persons reports in your area lately?
Fuji 200
>>4523418I usually do b&w and they need exposure, contrast, and levels editing. Ill get exposure set roughly after inverting and then set my black and white point with the levels slider. Afterwards I will fine tune using midtone slider on the levels tab, contrast, highlights, and shadows slider. I don't usually need to make any sort of curves, and I haven't spent too much time working with them, so they don't work well for me, yet.The slide film was edited per rgb channel on capture one. Changing the color temp does almost nothing to change the colors on this film. It's incredibly annoying and took me a lot of practice to start figuring out a workflow for working color film per channel. Basically I set my black point and then work through each color channel sliding the midtone slider until I get a solid, pure black. Same with white. Then I look at the actual colors in the image and modify brightness, and sat. Moving those sliders will throw off your rgb balance, so I go back to that and work through each channel until I get somewhere I like. Highlights and shadows slider can also be handy.Please note that this may be the most retarded way to edit color film ever conceived, but it works for me just enough to get close to something not terrible.Is there a better way in C1 that anyone knows? >>4523419All my pork, short or long, goes through a USDA certified slaughter facility and is packaged in a USDA certified packing facility. We strive for the three Es of meat production. Excellence in flavor, ethical farming practices, and environmentally conscious land stewardship at doghair/Rockwell farms.The punchy saturation of e100vs actually gives of psychotic vibes. I got a 50 pack of expired 4x5 e100X that should hopefully produce more buyer friendly images. Maybe I'll post a couple when I retake these.
>>4523405>>4523407>>4523411If I opened a website and saw these I would wholeheartedly believe they had long pork available
>>4523426Really, all its missing is companion photos of random people wearing colors matching the wall and >photographer name: nathaniel rothschild
Eclipse editionFormer thread: >>4519819Took this one in Paris as the eclipse was winding down. Spanishbros, post your eclipse pics.
Remember when everyone would come to this place to post fun photos and critique each other? We can and WILL have fun photo generals here again and not just another gear threadYou do actually take photos with those expensive cameras you're buying, right anon?
Bridges EditionFormer: >>4517511
>>4522821Absolute kino. I feel I should have hopped into the car to drive to the sea, must have been amazing to see such an eclipse sunset over the sea's horizon.Made a new /rpt/ thread as the current one is over image limit>>4523061
>>4522368what even is this
>>4523081Pretentious as all get out and a shallow use of Christian iconography
Where the hell do you get models these days? It used to be that you would just go on Model Mayhem or find some chick on instagram and shoot TFP but those days are over. I wouldn't even mind paying for a chick's time, but even that seems difficult these days. Not a lot of chicks into "modeling" these days, no websites dedicated to it, etc. I guess they're all doing onlyfans or something. Any way, anyone got some tips?
>>4519752become a dollfag
>>4523253Dollfags are sexually attracted to their dolls, you cannot convince me otherwise.
>>4523345as much as photographers of human subjects are sexually attracted to their models
>>4523348Do you shoot lewds with your dolls?
How can a portrait represent something about someone other than mere appearance? Can you draw out an internal character or trait from compositional elements?
>>4523222Depends. If they've been posed or told to have a certain expression, it doesn't express who they are.
>>4523222Everybody has idiosyncrasies, ways to move or do things in a manner that is specific to them.They can be real tell-tale signs of a personality.A good example is how people sit.
>>4523222How can actors act and be anything other than themselves??
>>4523335Demonic possession?
A $120 camera is all you need
>>4522382uncs dont like phone cameras
im thinking of buying polaroid or instax mini or some other shitty camera. the shittiness is nostalgic for me.
>>4522370I’m buying the newest sony insteadZoomers seething>but i cant even afford daily doordash!!! truuuuuump! i hate jews!
>>4523274B-but, I DO hate the joos! And orange man IS bad! And I WILL keep saying snoy because it's funny. But I'm 35 and shoot Canon.
>>4522370I like the 40€ PowerShot A800 I bought new to mod for IR. Other than shitty screen it's nice and solid plastic blob. I kind of wish I had an unmodded one.(780nm IR pass mod. 90deg rotate and color channel swap, no other edits.)
Previous Thread: >>4408437My astronomy club is doing an outreach on smart telescopes in a few more months so I decided it pick up an S30. Its been delightful so far; setup is a breeze compared to my primary rig. Think it will be a great little thing for more casual imaging. We're not in the best time of year for my FOV, but I was able to get a little time in on M5.
>>4523058Explain how?Single photo or staked. settings of camera etc
>>4523077>>4523077I meant a cumulative 10 minutes of exposure of 3s frames
>>4523078Untracked, so stacking was used. 215 light frames, 60 dark frames, 60 flats, 60 dark flats. All files stacked into a single .ser file in PIPP and then the output processed through Autostakkert 4, with further enhancements of the resulting tif in Lightroom for some dumb reason because it was 2.30am in the morning, I'd slept 5 hours the night before, and my brain apparently became too retarded to put the image in more appropriate software.Settings on the A7iii, which I remember off the top of my head because narrowing them down was such a pain in the ass:ISO 2500.6" shutterShot in interval mode as batches of 30 at 1 second intervals with a 3 second start delay to account for any lens shakeThe camera and lens were mounted in a cage with 15mm LWS rails and a Y-bracket to support and stabilise the lens (it's a loooong fucking lens), sitting on a fluid-head tripod to allow for very fine positioning control when trying to keep the planet in frame; the little fucker moves fast so if you're wanting to keep it reasonably close to lens centre for maximum sharpness (this lens is about as sharp as a ping-pong ball) you will need to readjust after every 30 second interval shot.Infodump over. There, now you have all the info you need short of me actually coming to your house and doing it for you. You can fill in any missing details yourself using Google.
>>45231540.6s isnt that too slow?Wouldn't saturn moove and get blurry photos
>>4511591very cool
Aura.
our boy ken has branched out into youtube shorts (he needs the revenue for his growing family) and in a 30s short he gets his name in three times. that's the sort of brand dedication i expect from Ken "I paid for the sliders i'm going to use them" Rockwell
>>4521284>he needs the revenue for his growing familyWait, he still only has 2 kids and...ooohhhhhh
>>4521196The REAL unedited version
>>4522203Stunning bokay
>>4521280optical illusionthe gentleman on the left isn't under-exposed, he's just black
So when are we doing this again?
>>4504277Indy if anyone is out here
>>4522740I still laugh at how the /pol/ meetup was more racially diverse than /leftypol/'s.
>>4515379calm down incel
>>4523161Calm down incel?
>>4523171I guess he doesn't like it when someone has insight about women that he does not.
This zesty guy makes a call like he drank too much, "uhzahhh!"
>>4522646well some of us shoot nikon and the lenses wiggle all over the placei use a blackrapid strap. I foot on the left so i can pull it up to my eye easy. threading some kinda strap through the metal slots on the collar itself would probably be better but i havent tried it.
>>4522702>This. >I came here to say THIS,>Le reddit UPDOOT for this.My own faggotry aside, this is good advice. Distance is your enemy and reducing it always results in better photos. Longer lenses are primarily for filling more of the frame with smaller subjects (beyond 100mm anyway). Old men in ghillie suits and infinite paitence can get amazing shots with their 200mm f/4's.
>>4522702>>4522784Okay, I ended up ordering the 100-400mm, now I just need to find a good price on the body. There's a bird sanctuary a few blocks from my house, and I've got darktable figured out, so I will start contributing soon. ty anons
>>4522798Instead of Darktable I would recommend RapidRAW or RAWtherapee. Or just get a pirated Lightroom. Darktable is just ass with ass results and ass UI
