Just shoot black-and-white. Problem solved.

File: NIK_5392.jpg (1.88 MB, 3585x2390)

1.88 MB JPG

>I can fix that the RAW
>just a lil PP should do nicely

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3400
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	300 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	200.00 mm
White Balance	Auto
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard

>>4328541
Unironically this or film

I don't know how to post process without going full ken Rockwell

No and no

>>4328553
After recently getting into film for the first time since I was a kid, this is such a huge plus. You don't even think about post-processing, you just think about the moment and the composition, carefully setting up to take the shot, then you forget about it until you get it back from the photo lab. So much more relaxing than digital + PP

>Chris got in trouble for the "what up peta-files" intro

>>4328497
source?

>>4328497
I only remember the episode where Chris said is no longer allowed to greet the audience. I don't remember him saying peta files, but that would be funny as fuck. Chris always gave me /ourguy/ vibes.

As a side note does anyone else feel like the corporate shilling is crushing their souls? I loved watching them both on DPReview, I felt like they had a lot of control and seemed happier, the bits were funnier. Now it feels all like stagnant corporate speak "The prefered [x] partner" bullshit and forced, unwatchable podcasts. Everything is carefully scripted and they don't seem like they are having fun anymore. I really wish they had just started their own channel instead going over to petapixel, they don't need the middleman.

>>4328510
> they don't need the middleman.
I get it though, they’re both family men. The guaranteed salary is better than the “potential” of going solo. But as you say, it has its drawback.

>>4328532
They'll go solo after too much corporate comfort makes them break up over some tiny trivial thing
"Work Ethic" is toxic, imo

>>4328508
They don't look cool
I will get absolutely 0 pussy

>>4328496
No skill no deals.
https://leica-camera.com/en-int/photography/cameras/m/m6

>>4328355
I own a wealth of film cameras. None of them cost me more than 220 quid.
None of them have faults aside from cosmetic use from age,
For example.
My nearly 100 year old 6x9 medium format Ikonta still works, Bellows intact, Shutters correct. Lens pristine. Takes beautiful images.
Even came with a real leather case. Cost me 7 pounds bought from some bloke at a car boot sale.

Never pay 200 dollars for a film camera.

>>4328522
*20 quid not 220

>>4328355
>buy 1.5k leica that has been CLA'd by leica themselves
>walks flawlessly even after 300 rolls

What's the cheapest brand you would go with for lens filters?

So I am getting into portrait photography, I try to mix it up outside and in the studio.

Question is, is it expected that I retouch the shit out of the model and make her skin smooth so she looks like a porcelain doll?

I don't like this shit, but the club members at a local photography club are telling me this is the way and it's expected.

What to do?

have any of you gone into the city and went up to random strangers and ask to take pictures? i want to do it to gain more experience but im way too shy and unconfident. thinking of just taking 2 bars and blacking out go into the city and hope the best.

>>4328517
I would imagine they would expect you to make them look the best they can be, both with a combination of photography and retouching. Just like how you could modify your lights to give a favourable look to the shadows on their face you can edit out some spots, stray hairs, make-up clumps, etc. However stick to getting rid of stuff that could have been gotten rid of, don't go modifying stuff that's natural to them like removing moles, scars, warping body parts, smoothing out the skin so there's no texture.

>>4328547
>don't go modifying stuff that's natural to them like removing moles, scars, warping body parts, smoothing out the skin so there's no texture

ignore all that, make every picture look as pristine and perfect as possible

It's what women do and expect

>>4321959
I got a Lomo'Instant Automat for $36 used and this is my 1st instant camera. Did I make a mistake?

Automats seem the cheapest Instax camera you can buy

>>4323103
Mistake? I doubt it. $36 is less than most, if not all, the actual Fuji Instax cameras, so if your camera works, then whatever. Seems like a good buy. Have fun with it anon!

any other instant homies want to be friends, i just started

kaidsnap on instagram

>>4317939
Since everything is getting more and more digital people want to get something they can touch with their hands, and as quick as possible. The image quality really sucks, but let's be honest normies never cared about it any point. I still remember those shitty photos people took with their nokia phones back in the day. Instant film pictures are an improvement on that.

Has anyone tried the Mint RF70?

>>4328323
Yea for sure. Did you work on the creator set too? Or do you just sell accessories to make my camera go vertical more easily on the RS3 Pro TM?

>>4328315
>i can't fap without brands and specs

>>4328058
There’s nothing you can’t do just as well tinkering with the effects yourself. Most of these plugins are just stacked presets using the in-built stock fx of the program in the first place.

>>4328315
Dude, that image is so grainy, you could barely tell he even has a camera.

>>4328539
I love grain

>>4327924
You really have to get your hands on an M camera to really start to see what the fuss is about. You can still not like it afterwards, but you can’t deny how solid and premium the fuckin things feel. Even my Leica CL which is the turbo poorfag Leica still feels like a great camera a step above Japanese cameras of the same tier and same era. There’s a reason the company almost went tits up in the 70s, well besides the M5 disaster and the markets migrating to SLRS, they also refused to chase the mass production cost cutting the Japanese did. At least until the m4-2. For all the posturing and hyperbole by fanboys and antifanboys, beneath it all they really are quite nice little machines

>>4328301
I held a leica once and failed to appreciate how it's any better than a nikon fm3a. They feel as solid as a sony mirrorless only the composition/focusing system is objectively crap for everything period and would have only been excusable in the early days when people were incapable of designing a sub-80mm SLR lens that wasn't a blurry mess until f4

It definitely feels more premium than an ae-1 or an om-2n or other hipster darlings but some later japanese SLRs and the lenses you can get for them are on par.

If you will only use pre-80s cameras then use a leica, viewfinding through a soft 50mm f1.4 on an SLR is not fun
But if you're not a hipster do get a more modern SLR with more modern lenses, when computer design really got good is when "the leica look" (fast lenses that are sharp center and midframe wide open with a little residual aberrations adding funk) vanished from the vernacular of all but leica fanboys, because everyone with an "ok" lens had it

Pentax lx >>>> leica

>>4328301
nah they feel quite solid and heavy but they are anything but reliable desu even the much vaunted M3. The cloth shutter is awful at retaining accurate shutter speeds and the rangefinder can't survive a year without needing to be calibrated if I'm actually using and travelling with it.
Honestly the only superior aspect of the bodies is that the film advance feels like pure sex, which I think isn't even the case after the M4...

>>4326862
I was walking on the beach one day with my canon A-1 taking snapshits and this old jap dude starts looking at me, when I greeted him he whipped out his leica and we shooted the shit about film as much as his shitty english allowed for. He hands me his camera and I give him mine, this is the first time I had ever touch a leica, they are nice, the viewfinder is great and I told him as much. Meanwhile the whole time he's saying nice things about my camera as well. I think if you have stupid money and can afford one like that dude then you might as well go that route, for everyone else the camera you can afford and works nicely for you is the camera you should use.

>>4328134
Good lad. PC building is a bit of a fucked up art where your main goal is to not piss away most of your budget on what you don't need. Understanding all the components and what = cost effective to you can take a little bit of learning, but honestly I recommend it.

The alternative is a Mac and fuck that.

Head on over to >>>g/pcbg and get a proper component list with autists that know this shit inside out.

Literally anything with an intel core or AMD Ryzen processor can handle images just fine. 16gb is also more than enough for editing photos. It's a really light process compared to video.

>>4328173
Gentoo is calling. Darktable and rawtherapee are just tools to learn.

>>4328291
Unfortunately as functional as they are, they are not yet "good". I use RawTherapee for processing my negatives and it's fine, but Switching over to Capture One immediately highlights the flaws of RT.

I also am not willing to put in the work to learning Linux. I had tried it out and could not figure out basic tasks. I am not a computer enthusiast, I don't enjoy using a computer for it's own sake. it's a tool I use to access other things I enjoy. Learning command prompts to access basic functionality is a non-starter.

Unfortunately as much as there's been a push to make linux more accessible, it's still primary developed for and by computer enthusiasts.
Fundamentally Linux cannot be a consumer operating system as it's core design chafes against that. No consumer wants or needs a platform designed initially around multi-user time sharing.

>>4328291
>compile your color science and lens corrections from source

>>4328506
It's not linux that's the problem. The linux kernel is great. It's GNU. GNU is fucking GARBAGE, and dynamic linking was a massive mistake.

yes that includes gtk as well, emacs, you name it, if you can find GNU in the project it's shit

>>4328093
$200, now $700+. What is the cheapest commonly available digishit that I can vacuum up and then make a Youtube video for more than 3x returns after a year?

>>4327920
film-like in what way? film can look many different ways

>>4328222
In this way:

https://youtu.be/AlNQEiqXybE

https://fujixweekly.com/2022/11/27/1970s-summer-fujifilm-x-t5-x-trans-v-film-simulation-recipe/

>>4328286
Ah, you mean looks like expired film on a bad camera, gotcha. Well if you get a Fuji you got the bad camera part down, at least.
Why do zoomers think that film was only ever lofi, full of defects and faults, with shit colours and bad focus? Who gave them that idea? It’s amusing that they also look a lot like the “CCD HACK” type of images they seem to cream themselves over as well. If that’s the case just add a bad colour cast and reduce clarity lol

File: 1685137195315773.png (2.04 MB, 1520x1080)

2.04 MB PNG

>>4327920
OP look - I have a Ricoh GRIII and I used it for about 2 years. Kept it out of my pockets and around my neck. When not in use it was stored in a hard shell case in a climate controlled environment. Doing all of this was for nothing, it still got a huge hair of dust inside that I cannot remove. Avoid the GRIII don't fall for the hype, you have to baby the fuck out of it and it will still get debris inside the lens.
Wait until they release a weather sealed GR and rethink. Seriously I am not memeing or trying to be funny - as soon as I can make it back to the shop I am selling this pos.

File: 1718733530116661.jpg (60 KB, 587x669)

60 KB JPG

>>4328421
speak english you commie fuck

>>4328421
nice blogpost
I suggest signing up for the military, lots of opportunities for advancement there

>>4328421
Cлaвa Укpaїнi!

>>4326993
Does it let you use exposure compensation in that mode? That's pretty neat if so. I've used lots of bodies that have auto ISO available in manual, but still only tries for 'normal' exposure within the range you have set (if available) and won't automatically knock the ISO up or down to reach +/- X EV without you locking the ISO to a single value and doing it full-manually.

>>4326993
So if you set it to manual and then tap the auto ISO button it functions identically to TAv? That does sound a bit silly and like they were just trying to fill up the dial as much as possible. I like that they still managed to squeeze 5 user modes in there though.

I like the idea of having the dial to control the function of the other dial, but you're right those are some odd choices. A focus mode (like different zones) would have been a good one. Is the crop setting continuously variable, like a digital zoom without the upscaling? If so that could be handy, although really you'd want an EVF for that.

Also am I right in assuming the lights behind the screen are intended for seeing the rear buttons in the dark? That's the only thing that makes sense to me. Backlit buttons would have been a more logical solution but it's creative. And I'm guessing the light near the lens mount serves a similar purpose to see the focus scale in the dark. What body even is it? I want to read more about it.

>>4326997
yes
>>4327002
body is a Pentax K-1 (mk1 in this case)
TAv is continuously-automatic ISO, not push a button to calculate ISO, if that's what you meant
>A focus mode (like different zones) would have been a good one
see that's a great idea
and unfortunately they hard-coded the things you can control instead of making half them configurable
>Is the crop setting continuously variable
no it's just those four modes
there is a digital zoom for LV focusing, you just press the OK button then use the aperture wheel to zoom in/out in steps
>seeing the rear buttons in the dark
yeah, backlit buttons would have been a more standard choice
maybe they wanted to do more with the funky screen armature? but it is a downside that you have to extend the screen
on the other hand, the light does end up softer than backlit buttons, and seeing how the K-1 has a heavy astro emphasis, maybe it was a feature targeted at that market

>>4327002
oh and the light on the front is ostensibly for lens changes, but given the astro bit possibly also the focus dial, hadn't thought of that

>>4323817
That's a pity indeed. Nikon z-fc and zf are lack an auto mode on their dials, and their shit grip cancels out the fun of having some nice dials.

>>4328481
the dual gain 24mp sensor nikon uses now mogs everything they had before unless your measure of DR is "shoot everything at base ISO and PUUUUSH" (once you cross the DG level, pushing base ISO looks worse than getting it right in camera).
panasonic's g9ii reads out from both gain circuits in sequence, which is a nice trick for exposures under 2x the readout speed

dual gain models in general and leica's fancy vignetting reducing microlenses were the last great push. everything past that besides more sensor size has been patent trolled and otherwise lawyered out of the consumer still camera industry's reach - and i think this might be a part of why nikon bought RED, since that would have included their supplier contracts with semiconductor producers and RED has 17 stop DR 16 bit raw signal chains on some of their cameras.

>>4328481
>Little difference
Unless you shoot canon

Worst sensors in the industry (STILL. the forced shadow NR is definitely hiding something very ugly since they dont admit to it in marketing materials but every independent reviewer to investigate it has found smearing in the shadows that other cameras don't have - except for the pentax K1-II.)

>>4328473
I'm not american AND a zoomer so I haven't seen that episode, but damn. What a cucked world
>>4328478
Gay earth. Everyone is going to run around with smart glasses and live stream everything they do, from plowing a field to plowing her field, to twitch so they'll always have hard evidence in the court of opinion. Ranked, competitive sex and speed-runs are going to be a thing in my lifetime.

Captcha: M2XDM

File: canon+814.jpg (224 KB, 2000x1336)

224 KB JPG

>>4328488
It's gotta be on film to be real, so everyone will be banging their girlfriend with this bad boy rolling

I am used to never shooting above 800, and I am still trying to adjust to it, as nowadays it's as clear as 100 of the old days.

>>4322170
unironically pretty decent quality. it wouldn't replace an actual camera but i'd use this if i had nothing else on me.

They will never be as good as real cameras.

File: 1703712435476.jpg (497 KB, 3236x1742)

497 KB JPG

Question: why is it that (Samsung?) Androids suck so bad at capturing backlit signs' colors, when iphones have no problem rendering them correctly.
I was at a FNAC shop the other day and checked both the S24 Ultra and the iPhone 15 Pro Max and the s24 was no better than my old S9+...
Ex.: in picrel, the "Connect" sign would just be rendered white with a slight colored glow around it on the Samsung, while the iphone had no problem capturing it in full color without any glow, as in the pic.
Haven't tested other Android phones, so is this a Samsung specific issue or is it common to android phones?

>>4328480
Different auto-HDR algorithms

There might be a setting for this, idk, applel used to have a setting for this and decided to force it to on all the time so store tryout retards wouldn't think their camera was as bad as it actually was

>>4328485
ah, le mandatory ad hominem. totally not retarded pos(t)er yourself, my guy...
anyway, at least it does a much better job at being bad than its direct competition...
linkrel is a comparison between both two phones, snd iphone clearly wins with much more realistic lighting and colors:
https://www.leak.pt/comparativo-iphone-15-pro-max-vs-s24-ultra-rascunho/
now, if only they were easy to jailbreak, given they already got de-AOL'ed in EUSSR...
still, movin g to the RX-tier front, what'd be some valid options (e.g.: as new mark7 for 800€)?

>>4328317
Tons of women are posting their digicam photos on Instagram. I just can't imagine groups of ladies passing the camera around and staring at the photos on the LCD.

File: the abhuman.jpg (621 KB, 1862x2400)

621 KB JPG

>>4328313
>do they really take the time to copy the photos to the computer from a SD card then send them to their phone then upload them to social media?
yes
>but thats an extra step
women woke up to social media apps running 24/7 on phones and spying on them so it would be an extra step with a phone camera too.
>o rly?
ya rly. they think zuckerberg is a rapist on a cosmic scale.

what do you think the photographer was thinking when he shot his portrait like this

>>4328317
Girls are dumb as shit. They’re mindless meatbags with feet. Ever see a squirrel in the road just jumping back & forth in front of the oncoming car with no thought to guide it? Thats how women get to go through life, just influenced by whatever shiny thing is in front of their face. They’re idiots. And 2/3 of guys are so fucking dumb they consider it a lifetime achievement to hitch their wagon to one and aspire to sustain that level of mental activity. I so wish covid were deadlier & dud us all the favor of killing off the dumbest 80% of the species. What a disappointment.

>>4328380
>random woman prefers good aesthetics and working with sd cards and raw files to faster upload times and smeary auto-hdr
>goes on a misogynist rant about how getting laid is le bad
dios mio... los célibe involuntario... el perdedor sin sexo...

>>4325654
If you want RAW support and manual controls go for a Panasonic Lumix LX3.
Otherwise, go for any digicam under 50 euro.

Nothing? I'm good with my Canon T2i.

>>4326278
Then your answer would be T2I. Your reading comprehension needs some work.

>>4326265
No, I love the 50mm 1.8 even on APS-C. I shoot mainly daylight outdoors, I'm not worried about low light.

>>4319249
It might be hard to find both within budget, but I'd get a Canon EOS 5D Mark II and EF 50mm f/1.8 STM

>>4328460
You might be able to do a 5D mk 1 more easily for $250. Either one would be great IMO!