I want to buy a Christmas gift for a girl and I thought of a polaroid as a great gift for her. My question to you, /p/ederasts, is whether it's worth it and not just a meme
>>4487634ok simp
>>4482274seeeeeeex
>>4482270What's a /p/ederast, Walter?
>>4482270OP I'm just going to point one thing out.This >>4482272>If you want to buy her a camera, buy her a real camera.Pay attention to the wording because it's truer than you realise. If 'YOU' want to buy her a camera.If she doesn't want a camera, then this is a gay ass idea and you're doing the classic trap of buying a gift for someone (You) would like instead of something they would like.
>>4482270Why wouldn't you think it's worth it? Does she pull out the phone camera for everything she eats? Take selfies? If you've seen her bedroom, does she have shit like string lights on the wall?>make sure she doesn't already have an InstaxOr even if she does, there's the also the Wide models, or printers that connect to your phone.
Post em
>>4490132 Fuck this captcha. Fuck my life
>>4490098idk
>>4490236Luv bees, me
>>4490307Shit, wrong pic
What makes pic related so uncanny and unpleasant to look at? Is it the lack of shadows? Why would a photographer go for such effect?
>>4490043>4chan.org
>>4489016I had those printed at max resolution on D size paper and framed on my walls back in my twenties. Everyone thought it was funny to see my nice apt decorated in high res asshole art, until my friends wife popped over to get him, looked around, stormed out and never spoke to me again lol
>>4490219There's a significant percentage of women whose entire self-worth has been based on the market value of their vagina. Nothing is a stonger denial of their self worth than someone who places their poop hole as more important than their life giving slimy hole. Most humans are simple animals.
The lighting setup has been designed to provide maximum coverage from all angles.The photographer likely wanted to work fast and cheap, so he's not shooting this like an artistic shoot. He's trying to get the maximum number of ok shots in as short a time as possible. What you end up with is the very flat 80s Style porn mag look that we see here.
photos
>>4452674Go forbid a /p/ guy catches a person front on. They'd be in bed for a week afterwards with anxiety and panic attacks
>>4490213Would you settle for something from the side instead? Sorry I missed focus.
birds edition
>>4483013Xiaomi phone anon there’s a new blurrymacro attempt for you to mog
>>4490289
>>4490290
>>4490290based I love the vibes
Are CCD bridge cameras the best way to hop into the CCD trend? I don't want to have to get APS-C lenses for a CCD SLR and digital point and shoot seem terrible. Anyone have experience or their own shots to post? TIA
>>4489485>casual poser here, what is the easiest way for me to into trend?
>>4490250>random photog buzzword defenceYou larping idiot, the placemat in the very front of the foreground is in perfect focus, and the apple isn't."Diffraction", like you even know what that means lmao.
raw -> jpeg otherwise no edits than a cropolympus e500 + 50mm f/2 macrolike i said earlier op pick up a 4/3rds like a e300/e500 or e400 (europe) if you dont wanna buy a bunch of lenses. the lenses are rare and expensive for 4/3rds and you'll be <$100 in most cases.just be warned they really aren't good past iso 400, this was at iso 250 f2.0 1/500. the apsc ccds are good until 800 iso from the bigger sensor size. otherwise 6-10mp is enough for social media/4ch anywaysits a fun camera to use...even if it has 3 autofocus points and really needs light
>>4490260i did notice just now the pics tend to take a bit of a blue tint if i use awb, setting the wb to auto in lightroom helps more (this was edited more from raw but it doesn't look too far off from the jpeg honestly)wonder if it would hurt using a 1b skylight filter i have a bunch of those
>>4489488this,I got an ISTD and just share my Tamron lens with my K50 lmao
I don't want to buy a new flagship every two years. I just want to have a nice pocket camera and keep my midrange for a while. My old olympus pocket camera lasted for almost a decade. Preferably nothing more expensive than $700
Fuji X30 slow afCanon Ixus155 20mp ccd sensorRicoh WG-80 water and shock proof
You take photos not camera
>>4489626Are there any under $500 that don't look like a Fisher Price toy?
>>4489933Guns don't kill people, nuh uhI kill peopleWith guns
>>4490075You could try not being poor or just use your phone if you’re gonna whine.
Anything smaller than MF is cope EditionPrevious: >>4485653
>>4490177Now is the perfect time to sell all the m4turds stuff and go back
>>4490255Careful anon, that extra 24mm^2 and additional 200g of weight might not fit in their purse
>>4490234>You just take a look behind the lens mount.I mean before I buy it/when deciding what to buy, how would I tell?>A modern APS-C sensor will outperform a 20 year old FF sensor in most areas except low-light aquisitionIn what sort of areas? Actual image clarity and detail, or? You say "except for low light shooting", but that's really the main thing I'm concerned about, unless camera with a newer sensor would straight up also capture more detail all other things being equal>Yes there are spec sheets for SNR and DR per ISO value, but No, you can't really compare cameras this way. There are too many other variables.If it's quantified and I can find that information, why isn't it useful to compare, provided I'm also looking at other variables that matter like full frame vs crop sensors, resolution, IBIS, etc?Can you explain what SNR and DR here mean in reference to ISO so I know how to read those values?>>4490218>>4490225Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4490273A 5DII is about half a stop better in SNR than something like an A6600, yet if you're shooting stationary or slow moving subjects then the latter can gain you up to 5 stops with IBIS. Also the A6600 has more dynamic range across the whole ISO range. And it will be able to focus faster and more reliably in low light. And finally being a mirrorless camera with an EVF you'll actually be able to see what you're taking a photo of in dark conditions without having to resort to using the rear display (and if you do need it the newer crop body has an articulated screen versus the fixed one on the 5D).SNR = basically how much noise you'll get at a particular ISO, the signal to noise ratioDR = the dynamic range is the range between the darkest and lightest areas of an image that the camera can capture, with a low dynamic range you'll get shadows appearing as pure black and highlights as pure white where as a higher dynamic range will get you more detail in those shadows and highlights
>>4490159posts like this are making me think that the most prolific posters on /p/ just come here to larp as an auteur, while completely ignorant to the technical details of digital photography
Random photos you took at night
Previous Thread Image Limit Reached: >>4474697Incidental Northern Mocking bird outside my balcony. Didn't have a picture of one yet.
>>4489881Looks to be a species of grackle. Not sure which, there's a handful of black variations depending on region.
>>4489817How does it look better than m43 ISO 800?
>>4489875Great shot desuI don't know much about color blindness, but if it's only affecting the perception of colors it shouldn't be an issue regarding fixing what I pointed out on the previous shots - which is only related to tonality (underexposure). But I'm not colorblind so I could be wrong
>>4490118Not sure if gearbaiting, but better dynamic range because FF is 3-4x the sensor size so noise is amplified.Anything beyond the 2 stop DR difference is due to ETTR (more signal to overwhelm the noise. High ISOs from any sensor can look pretty much fine with sufficient light.
Those little chirpsters defy gravity
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.
What is the best export setting for this piece of trash website? It burled the fuck out of my photos. I uploaded them from website and they were fine but phone they look like they were taken on a fucking potato FUUUUCCCK
>>4488603Zuck will ask you to send him videos of your butthole. Contact the insta team asap
>>4488784That's not due to any export setting. Instagram often just likes to not show the full (Instagram) resolution of images when you view them. Sometimes it "pops in" after a short while, but it has nothing to do with your local connection. It is insta deciding not to give your images bandwidth.
>>4488784I had the same problem. Instagram seems to be optimized for phones (as it was originally designed to be a platform for phone pictures) So if you use high format pictures those appear bigger and in higher resolution on the phone. Anything else will get compressed to shit and only be shown very small naturally.
>>4470877gomoseksualist.
Goodbye photoshop.
>>4484670>flexes getting duped like a foolEspecially if you have money it even more retarded to spend it on software, lmao.
>>4490037What should we be spending money on? Why is buying software bad?
>>4490037>>4490146Buying things is fine. Reasonable purchases are the hallmark of a functioning capitalist society.The more docile take is that Adobe hasn't added anything meaningful since CS5 and uses a predatory and overpriced model to squeeze consumer dry while offering few reasons to upgrade or subscribe. Since you can't (legally or through first-party channels) get a hold of older versions for less money, new users are stuck in this late-stage shithole that is Adobe subscriptions.>inb4 buying things badBuying terrible value products is bad.
>>4490151>The more docile take is that Adobe hasn't added anything meaningful since CS5Sounds more like early versions of Photoshop are fine for normies, but they have definitely added a lot since then. Their pricing model is cheaper than it was historically, like with CS5, and more accessible now. All things considered, it's still relatively cheap for how much time I use it.Older versions were more expensive. The only price increase for me has been within the last year, going from $10/month to a whopping $15/mo. If it's bad value for you, don't get it. But saying it's bad value in general is very silly.
Thank you, Shantanu Naharayaniyenu.
So I see some absolutely beautiful sunrises at work this time of year. Realistically what kind of gear would I be looking at to get better than my phone camera (iPhone 14). Not sure on what I’m looking for, but I would also like it to be capable of low light exposure/ night time for aurora. Literally have no idea on what I need and the options available out there are worst than trying to figure out what caliber you need for accuracy out at 300 vs 1,500 yards. Is the iPhone just good enough for my amateur needs?
>>4489472>>4489473>>4489474proof that location + eye are more important than gear
>horrid looking sunset snapshits>DIS IS WHY QUALITY EQUIPMENT SUCKS AND CAPITALISM IS WRONG AND PEOPLE WHO SUCCEED ARE ACTUALLY LOSERSget a job and buy a 5div
>>4489585>DIS IS WHY QUALITY EQUIPMENT SUCKS AND CAPITALISM IS WRONG AND PEOPLE WHO SUCCEED ARE ACTUALLY LOSERSWrong thread.
>>4489583no these photos look really bad5d+24-105 f4 = photography solved
>>4490162>5d+24-105 f4Yeah, a used Canon 5D (any model really, with shutter count under 250k) and the cheapest Canon L lens (24-105mm is a good guess) will be ok for your purposes. They can take the weather and have enough dynamic range for your sunset needs.>>4489541>>4489550>>4489553Photography is actually a really fun and exciting hobby, but /p/eeps are like this so OP you should just scram away as fast as you can
Should wild subjects have privacy?
This is one of the reasons why I appreciate photographing insects. People care a lot less. There's like a million of them.When we have like 4 owls in that one patch of woods and there's 50 photographers going after it (exaggeration) I can see where the issues start. So much attention will disrupt their lifecycle. And when there's so few individuals...
>>4481665A dog will lick its cock and ass right in front of you. Privacy is exclusively a human need
>>4486605The dog is just making a statement
>>4481746oh deer
>>4486605I mean, I'll do it in public too, but then they put me back on the house and make me take meds...
Which camera bag do you currently own? Does anything currently compete with the McKinnon Sling in terms of price+quality+features? Trying to find one of a similar size that will be comfortable enough for moving around.
I know 2-3 people in the last /bag/ liked my camera bag setup a few months ago, good news is I just saw it show up for sale on buyee. The 80-320mm is a decent tele too for the money if its in decent shape if you're a Pentax shooter but the 24-105mm it comes with looks moldy.Shipping will kill the deal but at least the lens its coming with is a nice bonus if you're a Pentax shooter. https://buyee.jp/item/jdirectitems/auction/l1201632331?conversionType=jdirectitems_auction_DirectSearch#group=nogroup&photo=0
>>4485788I mostly use the 500AW and my sigma 150-600 also takes up most of the space. But I can still fit a couple of other lenses plus some other shit like a small bottle and gloves. It's quite heavy though, the bag itself already weighs 2 kg. I also have the 350AWII but it's too small, my D750 doesn't even fit in height with an L-bracket attached.
>>4487072I have Billinghams that are 20-30 years old and the leather is still perfectly fine. The trim on the new models also seems to be of the same quality in my experience. Just treat it like you would any other leather item (light greasing once in a while) and it'll last pretty much forever
On a related topic, I'm tired of these pleather lens pouches that start to flake whenever you actually start using them, like pic rel. Any tips for replacement?
>>4487599I have the 350-II, holds my Zf, Z50II, 180-600, 28, 35, 105, 50, and 28-400 with extra batteries, tripod, and pocket light...
