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.)
The problem is that you're watching gearfag youtubers rather than educational youtubers.
>>4488387>educational youtubersit's funny that normies need three dozens videos explaining exposure triangle lol
>>4466377>why don't people who post on an anonymous hair curling forum to protect their anonymity want to go to a meetup irl and break their anonymity?Because the niggers that go to them are as stupid as you?
>>4481131I kinda like James Popsys desu. His videos are always well produced, he doesn't obsess over gear, and he at least actually takes interesting photos in interesting places. He also doesn't do the annoying YouTuber voice thing that I can't stand and generally doesn't do annoying clickbaity videos.Gear review channels are the absolute worst though. I was looking at getting a Sigma 20mm F1.4 lens that is pretty purpose-built for astrophotography. Every reviewer I looked at was using it to take boring, generic photos of random shit around their house. That or focusing entirely on the "amazing bokeh rendering" you can get at F1.4, again showcasing boring photos of flowers and random objects in their yard. I don't think anyone even bothered to take it out at night.
>>4463763>and the ones that aren't are tutorial videos that only appeal to beginners.beginner videos are honestly some of the best. Every now and again theres something really really simple or a cool trick that i just had never gave much thought too and they end up making me play around outside of my comfort zones with the cameras that i do have. A lot more than ones aimed at "higher skilled" photographers and the feeling of the video is>have at least 20k in gear to try this first>how to let editing do 90% of the legwork instead of taking better pictures
Continuous LED lights are terrible for photography.This is an approximate $2400 600watt continuous LED light.At a distance of 2 meters, it can manage 1/60 iso400 f8 at full power.That converts to f4.8 iso400 1/200 if you wanted to get up to a barely usable photography shutter speed.And if you want to go down to iso 100, you are now around f2.8So $2500 gets you something barely usable on your lowest settings at approx 2 meters, any further distance and it wont work.And if you want to use any modifier at all its all over and you wont even be able to have enough light for a photo.In before just shoot at iso 1600, no thanks, im not spending $2400 just to have to use iso1600.
>>4488580welcome to the video world, enjoy your stay
>>4488580Did you need a YouTube video to tell you this?
>>4488580Anon, do you realize how retarded shooting at f/16 equivalent is in most circumstances?Also what's the deal with this IQ-test-like captcha?
>>4488585>this is a video hat thread nowFor me, it's David Lynch.
>>4488580LED in general is fucking nightmarish. The sharply directional nature of them makes it really hard for me to balance portraits and light things in a soft and pleasing way. Its so easy to make someone look sick or have a fucked up skin tone. I do a lot of concert photography and in smaller places i get filtered fucking hard with the fixtures and just shoot in b/w so i can worry less about blue/red/purples fucking my shit up as much. Incandescent feels like easy mode comparatively. Even my drunken snapshits in my basement come out better than im able to get in one or two venues. I know its a skill/semi gear issue but i find it magnitudes easier to just move some floor/table lamps that i put dimmers on around until i get what i want.
Welcome to /m43/general!m43 sisters, we are known to be adventurers at heart. While Wormfags and Snoybois debate mtf charts and x-trans rights, we go out and explore the world around us. Capturing its beauty within m43's infinite depth of field. In this edition: I am back to m43. I've sold my huge bulky Nikon Zf after realizing that I'm way too feminine to lug around such a huge piece of Japanese technology and I got meself a brand new OM5 Mk. II.I also got a GX9 to live out my closeted homesexual street photography urges. Picrelated is my sane financial choices in one picture. Enjoy!A list of m43 youtubers you should totally watch if you hate yourself:Landscape (leaves and rocks):Guido v. (OM1) - https://www.youtube.com/@GuidoVanDeWaterHenry Turner (OM5) - https://www.youtube.com/@HenryTurnerphotoWaterfall Joe (OM1) - https://www.youtube.com/@WaterfallJoe/videosIan Worth (OM1) - https://www.youtube.com/@ian_worth/videosComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4488647>he shoots APS-CuckJust admit it anon you are as pathetic as these micro poor turds and can't afford a full frame like we do. >>4488651>like Nikon and Canon also make APS-C cameras and they're quite good.Meh Nikon Zfc is pathetic meme camera no wonder it's now selling for $600 on Ebay. same with other apscuck Nikons. A used Z5 can be had for $700 and below. Don't get me started on Nikon DX lenses both on their DSLR or mirrorless. Nikon pretty much gimped all DX lenses. A cucked system imo.
How is the G3 as a stills camera?
>>4488738great. every camera made in the past 15 years is great. photography has been solved long time ago - that's why it's all about 4k120p and other video bullshit now.
>>4488738Pretty shit. Like super shit. IQ comparable to a phone. You may as well get a digishit, or step up to an entry level DSLR like a d610 or cheap used d7xxx/d5xxx (avoid canon, shitty sensors until the 5div and 90d)
>>4488738a pocket cam like a canon s95 will have image quality that is every bit as bad but actually fit in your pocket unlike a $150 lumix g3 with a $500 f2.8 prime labeled as f1.4 to fool poorfags
Anyone else here working a regular job/day job as a photographer? I've been working as a real estate photographer for a while and still do side jobs for things like corporate portraits/events, and I'm curious if anyone else on /p/ works in photography too.
>>4485450There’s this cult on the internet that tells people>u haf to be a profeshunal If they dare want gear that doesn’t easily get mogged by a phone more than 2 stops past base ISO so sadly people keep trying to enter this shitty oversaturated fieldIf you like portraits do those as a side gig. Nothing else. No one here likes social climbing and all the narcissistic and sociopathic games it involves so forget fashion and "real art". Photography is a hobby first and foremost.
>>4485455>shitty oversaturated fieldThis applies to so many fields that people would "love" to work in, and photography is a great example of it.It's oversaturated because being paid to take photos 95% of the time requires nothing more than "click the button, anon". I'm starting to think any moderately interesting field/job draws these mediocre morons to them by simple viture of the fact they they're unqualified and unskilled but want something other than a retail job.Photography is a hobby that supplements other hobbies/events* that you go through in life. Even if you claim to like tinkering with manual cameras or developing film or whatever, they're seperate hobbies. Photography itself cannot be sustained on its own.
>>4467257Why the fuck would I want to ruin a good thing by going pro? I already did it with digital arts and in 10 years ran into ground what I once loved. I hate it now. Fuck no. Never. PS. Wedding photographers have to be the biggest bunch of self-hating masochists out there. Why can't you just love yourself and be good to yourself? Let it go, you're a worthy human. Stop it.
>>4488726best advice on this board. never turn your hobby/passion into a career. you will fucking hate it (with a passion lol). been there, done that.
>>4488755It's funny how so many gurus and people in your life say to make your job your hobby. Same thing with cars too, I knew a guy that loved cars and then fucking hated them and never did shit to his own car ever again after he started working as a mechanic. He let his car pretty much rot because he couldn't stand doing what he already did for work as an after work project.
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>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.
>>4488002Cool post other than the latent belief in the progressive theory of history
I would like a small, retro style camera for hobbyist / snap shitting type photography. Image quality is important to me, but not the end all, be all. I do not want a full frame type camera such as the ZF. I already have a D850, and actually owned a ZF for several months, before getting rid of it as the lack of grip and overall hugeness made it very unfun to walk around and shoot with. Between the OM-5 and some Fuji cam, which is the best choice?
>>4488729>>4488680He's alive he posted on /k/ a while ago. He has a Z7 and keeps shilling H&K.>>4488731Better cameras are also fun, spastic ESL bro, not just the em5iii re-re-release. Nice buyers remorse doe.
>>4488729Accusing better photographers of being zoophiles is rude. Poor 8x10 eggGod gets the same treatment. Is it all you?
>>4488669I don't think his tests were scientific enough.
>>4488737I member >dog didnt move>indoors>t-the lighting changedLarger pixels having better shadow recovery and more sensitivity was already known to real niggas anyways
>>4488745>shadow recoveryeither you're too retarded to get a proper exposure in camera or you're retarded to think that shadows need any recoveryit's a sign of the autistic mind to try to show everything in a picture
was this image taken on film or digital? https://files.catbox.moe/9jjcnu.jpg
>>4488728obvious film>multicolored grain>missed focus>no shadow density
I was the anon thay said i fucked up my first roll of film like 2 months ago. Well, I got the roll of film back, and the light had only ruined like 8 photos so, 16 were pretty ok, besides looking like shit because I'm new to this. I especially liked this photo, but it looks kinda retarded.
>>4488685Prove it.
>>4488687im giving you more education than your parents ever did here. say "thank you for the advice, anon" first.
>>4488688Woah no need to be so sassy. Thank you for the advice, now show me some of your work
>>4488688Stating the obvious is not advice, snapshitter.
>>4488689This
New color film!!!lucky 200 has finally dropped.Anybody shot it yet? waiting for my order to arrive.
>>4488584Yeah from what I can tell their B&W Lucky 400 is worse than Kentmere 400 or 100 and it's more expensive than either.Maybe if this stuff was like $8 a roll then sure, but I dont see the point.
>>4488583yeah its alright, shot a roll so far
to think lomography sold literal garbage rolls (some even marked with letters and codes on top of the image) for $20, and still do
Damn I expected chinaslop to cost less than Kodak Gold
>>4488601>>4488638>>4488641its cheaper if you are from a third hole shithole, a roll of Gold cost 15 usd for me. And Lucky its just 9 USD so yeah.
lemme see your shots for the moon!this is mine btw captured with canon 2000d 55mm i can not remember my camera settingsi gave it some edit with lightroom this is first time with DSLR
>>4477184k i n o
Mars (left), waning crescent Moon (over Lumen Field, Seattle), Venus (up, right of Moon) rising Sept. 11, 2015.Nikon D5200, kit 18-55mm at 55mm, f/8, 2sec, ISO-1000
>>4488213Oops. Sept. 10, 2015.
ZV-E10 + SEL55210 taken last week iirc, obviously cropped
If you had a time machine, what historical event would you shoot?
>>4485966Well soon more people will start paying attention to the fact that everyone who knows anything about anything has been increasingly pointing out that it's overvalued to fucking bejeezus and back, & then you'll get your chance.
>>4484962The yearly Rothschild sacrifice parties in Antarctica
>>4484967fpbpIf I had a time machine, I would have gone back and shot more portraits of my brother before glioblastoma took him.forever 30
>>4488402mofo was ugly like a sin lmao
>>4488402Sorry for your loss. Hope you still have a few of him. Death is just another stage in life. Stay strong Shuggie
Random photos you took at night
>>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.
>>4487466I assume diffraction spikes dont take much of the image so a simple fix would be take the same composition exact to pixel at a much wider aperture, and then blend the layers in photoshop, it would be a tad hard but nothing impossible,
>>4488406Some cropping will also be required if the lens exhibits any focus breathing. Modern software is pretty good at correcting for moderate amounts when stacking, but it needs to be taken into consideration when composing the shot as well.
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".
Are bikes allowed...
>>4488365Comfy>>4488418Sure I don't see why not
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
>>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
This was shot on a Canon 5D 12mp and edited in LR 3.5 on a Pentium 3 1ghz Dell c610 laptop with 2gb of RAM running XP SP3 on an IDE 40gb 4200rpm spinnydiskYour arguments, all of them in this thread, from all of you, are invalid.
>>4488401based blind man
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
