I will share some of my work
>>4386939Ngl, it looks tight even for a 24mm
The last one for now.I've got lots on the SD, but that means I'd have to re-edit the RAWs
>>4386938yeah he is (or some name variation those words), he has excellent taste in subject matter hehe
>>4386946Cool, I'll search him!Thanks anon
/film/fags have found us 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 >>4372038Quick FAQSComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
How do I learn framing and subject selection and "visual storytelling" and symbolism and and *sobs*
>>4386868Simply watch all the movies.Also there's a very decent learning portion on this thread's OP.
>>4386868Can’t. You either got it or you don’t.
>>4386868look at some fucking art you pleb
>>4386868You gotta make a lot of shitty videos to learn, thinking about making them won't be the same
photos that convey movement editionPrevious thread:>>4380134/fgt/ daily reminder (courtesy by anon): one stop per decade is (generally) bullshit>negative film ages better than positive>black and white better than color>slow films better than fast>storage conditions (dry/cool) matter more than years>Negative film is shot 1 or 2 stops overexposed and then PULLED in development so that you build more density in the exposure and develop less such that the fog is limited>slide/positive film is shot at box speed or overexposed and pulled.>if you home develop you can also use benzotriazole as a restrainer for the the first developer in E6 processComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4386876>XX[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelEZ ControllerCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 14.0.1 (Windows)PhotographerBrooktree Film LabImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:11:20 14:07:39Color Space InformationsRGBUnique Image ID10102769807
>>4386877>tri XIt was a fun trip, I wish I had had more opportunity to go out alone and take some pics. But that’s one of those things when you have kids I guess.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelEZ ControllerCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 14.0.1 (Windows)PhotographerBrooktree Film LabImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:11:20 14:05:15Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width2416Image Height2380Scene Capture TypeStandardUnique Image ID10102768875
>>4386880>>4386877>>4386876This was my first time using “f8 and be there” mindset. Since I was carrying my youngest I couldn’t really do much fine adjusting to shoot on a smaller aperture. Surprisingly it was a pretty solid system with me never missing focus. However I can’t help but feel it’d have been almost impossible to use in doors unless I was pushing to an insane iso.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelEZ ControllerCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 14.0.1 (Windows)PhotographerBrooktree Film LabImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:11:20 14:06:29Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width2416Image Height2380Scene Capture TypeStandardUnique Image ID10102769167
>>4385152I hate foma so much. Thin negatives, have to shoot half stated iso, curly negs. Not that much cheaper than tri x
>>4386852As far as I know Banglas have accommodation in some container shacks at the edge of town which take a long time to reach and then they have to leave to make it for their next work shift. So they prefer to just plop down and sleep wherever it's legal to do so.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePlustekCamera ModelOpticFilm 8200iCamera SoftwareGIMP 2.10.6Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution44 dpiVertical Resolution44 dpiImage Created2024:11:20 20:46:45Image Width6695Image Height10175
Post your phone pics, what phone do you use, etc.The best camera is the one that's with you!!!
>>4384756Thank you anon! That was sort of my goal, so I'm glad to hear I managed to deliver in that regard.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareFIMOImage-Specific Properties:Image Width4000Image Height2666Image OrientationUnknownImage Created2024:07:18 22:09:53ISO Speed Rating200Light SourceUnknown
>>4384756>random nonsensical thought>>4385518>that was my g-goal, honestThis place is retarded.
>4355631>4358124>4358127>4358143>4358148>4359583>4366904>4371726>4371734>4375908>4384752I like these>>4359438excellent>>4362607Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakesamsungCamera ModelGalaxy S24 UltraCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.3.1 (Android)Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.4Focal Length (35mm Equiv)115 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:03:28 18:13:07Exposure Time1/35 secF-Numberf/3.4Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating2000Lens Aperturef/3.4Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length18.60 mmColor Space InformationsRGB
>>4386573>>4368388oh shit thanks, I didn't know this thread was still up. I honestly didn't expect anyone to even acknowledge my post, so I'm glad you guys liked it
Post your questions here that don't fit anywhere else or are too short to deserve a separate thread. Dumb. Smart. Snooypy. We got'em all.1. Generally, don't be a fuckwit to someone asking a question unless it's deserved.2. Gear topics are fine so long as it's a question3. Read the /p/ Sticky[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:09:21 12:45:36White Point Chromaticity0.3Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/10.0Lens Aperturef/9.9Exposure Bias0 EVFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width6000Image Height4000RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>>4379687Unless you compare digital and optical zoom new flagship phones significantly outperform 1” point and shoots. You just need to be savvy enough to shoot with a non-smearing camera app.
>>4386878You wrote quite an essay just to be wrong, lol. Phones use the computational crutch to cope but they still get turbomogged by Saturday Night Special APS-C cameras with kit lenses both in dynamic range and resolution every time they astroturf how great they are with comparisons that only look good to the untrained eye that can't tell real quality from amplified contrast and sharpening. Enjoy your AI smears I guess. At the end of the day the phone has less photons reaching its sensor and a massive amount of gain applied because of this very reason. They use computational photography to blend several exposures into one because the SNR is so bad at short ones.
>>4386894Phone to aps-c is a few crop factor steps too many even for equivalence beatingWe’re talking 1” sensors which are only a step or two from the better phones. Computational cope is literally additional photon gathering in multi exposure devices, and finer color sampling when the gfx BTFOs fool frame despite aperture whiners like yourself. Oversampling alone is enough to pull equality with 1”. Most PNS cams arent even 1”.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1410Image Height793Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>4386896Sensor size matters less than aperture size. You could do bursts and blend in post with those cameras too, what the phone offers is just convenience with passable results for viewing on small screens.
>>4386898Sensor size and aperture size are tossups depending on sensor technology and typical shooting conditions. It matters very, very little if you’re within one stop or have a res gap like gfx100s vs typical ff or a huge tech gap like phones vs 1” slop. High res quad bayer alone fucks your crop coper theory wank.
Hey lads, I need actual advice for a genuinely tricky shot.I have this idea for an album cover that I'm doing which involves having a bird to perch atop the scroll ("headstock" for you guitarists) of a violin or cello. I live in Australia so we're hoping to use one our more iconic species (blue wren in pic related) which are quite tiny but plentiful.Now the question is, is this something I can realistically do or should I just photoshop it? I live next to one of the biggest bird sanctuaries in the area, so there's no shortage of birds. I do wildlife photography all the time and understand these birds quite well, but I can't just sit here for hours every day for a month, I would need some sort of strategy.If I do photoshop it, how do I make not look awful?
>>4385602You can't even comprehend how over it is.
>>4386685Can you make it a cyborg-bird and electric violin?
>>4386685I mean, it all looks obviously AI. Maybe that doesn't matter, but to some people it does.It's like the goyslop of the creative world.
>>4385561Good luck getting the wren to do anything you want, they only eat flying insects as far as I'm aware and are usually pretty skittish. The magpie on the other hand, I've got some that just walk on into my house to see what food is in the kitchen. It should be easy to get one to sit where you want if you're feeding it.
>>4386698I have an album that I love, but the cover art is hideous AI shit and I despise looking at it. Some of my favorite albums I display prints or vinyl covers of their art, but I'll never display this one no matter how much I enjoy it. Pic related, great album but fuckugly cover.>>4385602F Joe[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Comment1.86.0-Z572VHUTOCPESUAUAPVFE2AXRI.0.1-3Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1200Image Height1200
What's your favorite animal, /p/? Mine is the frog.Here are some snapshits from a fair I went to. My dad gave me a Sony A6400 which was really fun but I think I did something wrong with the colors so I've just gone and turned those off.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6400Camera Softwaredarktable 4.6.1Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.6Focal Length (35mm Equiv)75 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:10:21 00:46:16Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating6400Brightness1.7 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2995Image Height2000RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalGPS StatusMeasurement InteroperabilityGeodetic Survey DataWGS-84GPS Differential CorrectionNo Correction
overcooked deer
>>4381167>funny little creatures that don't wear any clothing and have extra limbs.Mods! This man right here.
>>4376127what distance to get a shot like this? I saw monkeys recently but they were high up in a tree, could only get far-off shots.
>>4380613nice DoF, I find it so challenging to use large apertures like this and not end up cutting crucial parts of the composition.
Recently got a film scanner, so I started digitising some old negatives from my family.Most rolls are from the 90s, but there is a box of slides from around 1962. First shots are from Mauritius and were shot on AGFA Vista 200.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePlustekCamera ModelOpticFilm 8200iCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.4 (Macintosh)Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:11:20 17:49:38Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4386722cute copper>>4386723noice
>>4386763Yepp, that would take ages. I do appreciate the quality your scans shows, but I guess I need something in between quality and speed.
>>4386815I'm converting to positive in negative lab pro, and so scanning the frames as RAW positives in the scanning software, so you could potentially save on time by scanning at a lower DPI and inverting them in the software included with the scanner.Other than that the only faster option I know of is DSLR scanning, which can be more or less expensive depending on how you do it.
>>4386718>waterPool linerNice pics
20, 21, 25, 32, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 48, 54 are the best ones imo. Some compositional flops but that's not something worthy of judgement from casual holiday pics obviously - and honestly most of these are better pics than what most people would take today. Either someone in your family has an eye for photography, or film just made everyone a lot more considerate of composition and taking shots that are actually worth taking as opposed to random garbage
Any video cameras that emulate film yet? I haven't researched since like 2017 but back then there wasn't shit except for some expensive digital bolex
>>4382565kys
Use old lenses, it's that simple really
>>4380429unironically FPBP in this caseas sumbody thats been looking into it for some years it's eitherbmpcc ogor canon cameras running magic lantern crop moodbest option probably 5d mark iii to account for raw capture crop, ud get about 1.5x "super35" field of viewsmaller sensor canons you would have to crop in more and gives u mft field of view, if you are okay with that get a t5i cus of the flip screen or a sl1 for how small it is and you can probs rig it into a small setup for cheap
>>4386778by far the camera that most looks like film when shooting digital files has been these two options
Thompson viper but nothing prior and nothing since and working with one is like putting your balls in a vice
Got any great stories? I haven't found any massive scores, but I am quite consistently able to get somewhat sought after vintage lenses for cheap when bundled with with cameras and other gear. What about you guys?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareGoogleImage-Specific Properties:
>>4385573> flippednigger
Found a lot of deals in the last year. Scored a Nikon FM with a 28mm f/2.8D and a 50mm f2 AI for $75 at a local thrift shop last month. The lenses had dented filter rings but was able to bend the 50mm back and the 28mm is plastic so filter still screw on it.Got an "untested" Nikon Coolscan V for $200 on ebay and it works perfectly.And I buy broken lenses on ebay a lot, usually ones with simple issue like stuck zoom or stuck AF. I'd say I've had an 80% success rate on fixing them. Was able to resell a few for 3x the price to pay for it all.Got 28-70mm 2.8D, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Sigma Art 24mm f/1.4, 24-85mm 3.5-4.5G VR, and 85mm 1.8D all for probably less than $200 combined after some resales.Nikon glass is the gift that keeps on giving, especially with their unpopularity in the mirrorless world and muh gearfags.
>>4385864>> flippedIt is the only sensible way to make money from photography.
Scored a GX9 kit for $350 which I am shamelessly gonna sell for twice that.
and a LX15 (LX10 for you amerifats) for $135
Micro contrast is not real. 3D pop is not real. Well, they may be real phenomena of an image, but they are not imparted by certain lenses due to certain optical designs. Anyone who supports the idea of 3D pop, Zeiss pop, or micro contrast is an anti-science luddite or a grifter. Watch any of these people try to explain what 3D pop or micro contrast is and their bullshit is self evident. If a phenomenon cannot be described using scientific language and measured objectively, it isn't real. Every time you see an A/B test for 3D pop or microcontrast, the tester is using different camera bodies, or the composition is different, the color grade is different, different exposure levels or the lighting has changed. The only other area that has so much peasant level superstition has got to be pro audio.
>>4385754Distortion once corrected in software does not affect depth cues. Only corner/far edge resolution at max pixelpeep.
>>4385755>Changing the apparent depth does not affect depth cuesUhhhhh
>>4385757>distortion>apparent depthYou must not be a shape rotator
>>4380208i dont know about you guys, but i can tell a 3d pop lens from a non 3d pop lens every single timei can just simply see it
>>4381342most accurate would be to watch movies from 90s-2002people werent super obsessed with having blurry backgrounds so you could see depth even when everything was in focus, check for outside daylight shots too where they couldnt control depth via lighting other than maybe couple reflectors and such, tv series mainly
I think it looks awful, personally.Should've used a DJI Pocket 3.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuxssP9vSGY
tm?
>>4362793Yeah because it's not the actual trailer. You suck.
>>4362793>I think it looks awful, personally.yeah, tm sucks and keeps missing the marknot a good look
>>4363180"28 days later" series films were always shot on "new tech" from the time they were releasedthis is the same as that, in current year using a phone would be like using a canon camcorder for a big budget film in the 2000s
>>4362793wait holy shit i hadnt seen this fake trailer you postedanon this is fake and AI generated lol
How do I cope with it? It's impossible to take good photos under overcast sky. How do (You) kope with it?
>>4386234>>4386250Those are the entrance to the dungeon
>>4386262show me photos NOW
>>4383817uv polarizing filters. theyre cheap, get the colored ones too despite their crime rates
>>4386250duende
>>4386234dracula
Hi boys. I want to ask a question about adapting M mount lenses to my X-T4 and noticed there was no /fag/ thread. Does anyone use the Leica M to FX adaptor? I'm also planning on using a 28mm and want the best yet most compact lense I can find.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelX-T4Camera SoftwareDigital Camera X-T4 Ver2.12Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)83 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:10:26 12:19:14Exposure Time1/680 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating320Lens Aperturef/5.7Brightness8.9 EVExposure Bias0.7 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceDaylightFlashNo FlashFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1086Image Height724RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4386583Last one, definitely need to stop-down more often I think. I like Fuji's bleached film for seeing Fuji.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelX-T4Camera SoftwareDigital Camera X-T4 Ver2.12Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.4Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)53 mmMaker Note Version0130Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:11:17 19:53:53Exposure Time1/8000 secF-Numberf/1.4Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating160Lens Aperturef/1.4Brightness9.8 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length35.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1776Image Height1184RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownSharpnessNormalWhite BalanceAutoChroma SaturationNormalFlash ModeUnknownFocus ModeAutoSlow Synchro ModeOffPicture ModeManual ExposureContinuous/Bracketing ModeOffBlur StatusOKFocus StatusOKAuto Exposure StatusOK
>>4386579>appreciate any feedback. (Positive and negative)I think you'd benefit greatly from avoiding clutter in your frame, or from putting more effort into leading the eye towards the subject. I won't complain about center framing because I think it's intentional and you're doing some work to make it right (like framing subject with bushes in second and third photo), but I must say, it took me quite a while to even notice the mountain in third picture, or gate in the second one. Kinda like pic related, I think it's easier without attention-grabbing cars - and then it'd be even easier without the aireal tramway, but I don't want to remove it from your photo because I bet you like it and it also makes it an extremely basic landscape of a mountain with only some minor bushes to distinct it from every other mount fuji photo.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:
I also struggled to find the gate here despite having it dead in the middle, but I'm not sure what could be done to make it better. Maybe postprocessing/film simulation thingy that emphasizes of red? It's cheesy, but it helps with knowing what's where, so that's one idea. I don't think second photo is a bad one though, I like the colors and this odd feeling of scale on those mountains. My mspaint crops and gimp edits are probably not very striking, but I'm trying to somehow visualize the idea of having less things that distract you from the subject.
>>4386659Funny you say that because I took a second shot without the cars or the aireal, but it looked too simple and I didn't like it. Probably could have edited it similar to what you have here, and I agree it looks better without the cars. Hakone was super busy that day.>>4386660I'm with you that it kind of blends, but I really like the muted colors and how it affects the mountains like you said. These are more luck than skill I think, but I was trying to get the center framing with blurred foreground because I enjoy the feeling. The blurred lantern in the first one for example. The lake one was just a spur of the moment shot that I ended up liking. I don't know why the water feels so firm(?) but I like that as well.Thank you for the feedback.
>finally got my x100vi as my compact daily camera>sudden thoughts of trading it in for a Nikon zFoh lord
10 hours in the darkroom hope you guys like it.
Great lighting but why the hippoYou wouldn’t photograph a fat buck toothed white neckbeard dressed up as some anime character, why a fat buck toothed africhinese woman who gets her haircuts from a toddler and dresses like some anime character
>>4381806A bit too dark
Spent so much time on a niggerWere all white models taken for the day or too expensive?
Good stuff OP. black room printing is long but rewarding >>4383908And there it is
>>4383908Rite, innit?
