Since I'm unlikely to ever get any kind of Xpan camera, I thought it might be interesting to post some wide crops from two cheap digicams and a phone (Fuijfilm J20, JX500 and Nokia Lumia 520) taken over the last few years. The JX500 has a scratched lens but nice colours and I think it does OK.Some of these I've posted before, some I haven't.
>>4501043that's eye candynice one, anon
>>4499342>>4500558I like these, tooseriously, keep 'em comingI would enjoy a whole thread of these
>>4495287maybe 2:1 is the king of aspect ratiosthe atmosphere is great, besides
>>4514640Thanks.
>>4514643Thanks.The whole thread is just my experiments in getting an XPan look from old, broke (and often cheap) digicams and phones. The Nokia Lumia 930 I'm now concentrating on has a Zeiss lens and can give DNG (Raw) files. Someone who understands editing could get a lot from these files, but even with my limited skills, I can get them looking better than their standard jpegs.I've also printed some of these photos and they look OK. I'm not someone who cares that much about the technical quality of photos (I sort of share the philosophies of Daidō Moriyama and Dmitry Markov and a number of the early pictorialists).Digicams had their moment. I wonder if cheap camera phones are next? Still plenty of good deals out there for early Android phones (and some iPhones).
Recent foto thread
>>4512765
Early morning fog, a doe keeping an eye on a beaver.
Picture of my gato :)
>>4513978Cute cat, anon. He's a photogenic boi.
Insta and whatever else thread for wherever anons post their photos.https://www.instagram.com/mondatta.photography/Do any of you tend to go for certain themes and styles? Or just try anything?
I got into photography fairly recently, although it's something I've wanted to do for years. I've been trying to shoot and post at least one new photo every week on Instagram. I made the account specifically for photography.The problem is that I only have a handful of followers, mostly friends, so my photos don't really get seen by anyone. It's a bit frustrating putting time into it and getting almost no feedback.How do people actually get their work discovered on Instagram these days? My account is public, but unless someone searches for my username, I don't see how anyone would find it. Also, with instagram statistics, I can see that my each photo is seen like 70 times, and only 5% are not followers.Also, do you know any communities, websites, or platforms where people might be interested in this kind of work? Most of what I shoot is in France (street photography, cities, architecture, landscapes, etc.).Also I'm not posting my IG here because I'm not really interested in follow-for-follow. I'd rather follow people whose work I genuinely enjoy, and have people follow me because they actually like my photos.Any advice would be appreciated.
>>4513622>It's a bit frustrating putting time into it and getting almost no feedback.no one owes you shit, idiot. network, like and follow OTHER people and if you are lucky they will engage back.
>>4513622Social media is fucking dead my man.There is no point unless you're already established. I don't even bother, it's all this narcissistic attention game, attention is literally a currency. That's why F4F is so common, that's why the only way to grow is to be an annoying reply guy and hope that baits some attention.It also turns social media into a positivity or toxicity (see twitter) jerk off fest depending on who you're trying to attract.The other option is to have tits because then you get a bunch of retards who think you'll fuck them for social media complements.
>>4513622post in /rpt/ or on reddit if you actually want your photos to be seen, there's really no point posting on instagram anymore. some anons have dumped instagram and got personal websites instead or just solely post on /rpt/ now.>>4513924this anon is right too, taking photos just for the likes and attention just ruins your mind.
https://www.instagram.com/dark_indigox/
Soggy Bottoms 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: Do you even cook?Previous thread: >>4507347
>>4514978>never have to go to a film lab ever againdepends on how much you value your time,b+w is easy enough to do at home, but I fucking hate scanning. c41 i get dev+scan at the lab, and if they do I bad job with the scan I know i can do it again at home if I really need to
>>4514980I'm looking at maybe 1.5-2 years ROI for the jobo film processor purchase vs the prices of my local lab processing excluding gas cost. It will pay for itself with around 500 sheets/rolls of film.The jobo will let me do 5 sheets of 8x10 at once, which is mainly why I got it. It will also do 10 sheets of 4x5, 6 rolls of 120, and 5 rolls of 35mm at once with the limiting factor being the 1L chemistry bottle size. It can also do up to 16x20 RA4 processing.I feel like it's going to be a worthwhile addition.
I recently got a telerokkor lens for cheap at a flea market that had a good amount of mold in it. Thankfully, the glass cleaned up pretty well but there’s this pitting in certain internal parts that is left over. Does anyone have any suggestions for a coating that I could use to refinish these or should I just not bother? I checked out some astronomy forums and saw that people use some Krylon ultra flat black paint as a budget option for coating the inside of their telescopes but I am not sure how this would work for a camera lens.
>>4515150Yeah you should definitely repaint the inside with a matte black paint. The internal reflections will kill your contrast if you dont.
Anyone try scanning film with a dslr with a 50mm prime and macro extension tubes? I'm going to give it a try before I spend the big bucks on a real macro lens.
>photography hero grows oldIt's not fair bros
>>4512988I hear some people say Tumblr is better than posting on Instagram these days so maybe there's still a market to be had on there for art hoes to see our shit
>>4512047his photography is dogshit. I had to laugh out loud when I saw the lightroom presets he sells: just upping saturation, brightness and contrast. Lmao.
Hello its jared polin and today we genocide panastin... I mean hasselmmas
>>4513974He's not very talented, I don't understand how he's managed to get this far. Most of his pictures are just basic point and shoot, he'll then slap a black and white filter over some of them for reasons I don't understand. I love that his presets are labelled TOP SECRET in his videos so you can't steal his dogshit settings. Also the audacity to charge $120 for 58 presets is hilarious
>>4514557and they are always "on sale".
In korea.Pic rel is 1st winner.>'Aesthetics of Light' Photo Contest Announcement■ Contest OverviewXiaomi Korea is hosting the 'Aesthetics of Light' Photo Contest, which expresses various moments and emotions using light through photography.Please share moments captured through your unique perspective, utilizing diverse lighting techniques such as light and shadow, backlighting, and night photography.■ Submission Rules- Entries must be photos taken with a Xiaomi smartphone or a Leica camera.- For the smartphone category, only works taken with Xiaomi's flagship lineup will be accepted.- For photos taken with a Xiaomi smartphone, only images containing the Leica watermark will be accepted.- Entries must be original creations taken by the entrant themselves.■ Judging Criteria1. Interpretation and Expression of the ThemeWorks that clearly interpret the contest theme and express it creativelyComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4508247phone have had been aislop generators for years now
>>4508186They all look kinda yucky
>>4508286>phone have had been aislop generators for years nowsource of the image he posted:https://www.sony-semicon.com/en/info/2025/2025112701.html
>>4508186Was the face AI'd or some shit? It doesn't look right compared to everything else.
>>4508186Not good>>4508187Kino>>4508188The fuck is this? It's like a holiday snapshit or a screenshot from a travel video.>>4508189Really kino
starting a new one since the last one is reaching limitI recently bought myself a new softbox, the exact one in pic, and it works surprisingly well. The issue is that it won't stay open all the way, so I need something to prop it open. I've found that using a credit card and ID card work pretty well, but I don't plan on using that for obvious reasons. Anyone have any suggestions to help a retard like me, something light and small?
>>4515014Actual good car photos are usually the result of hours of work combining daytime captures at different times of day with some from the later afternoon and night.Regarding your phone you need to be shooting RAW, with manual settings, perfect focus (no auto focus) and a tripod and preferably a polarizing filter. You can build a little filter box for your phone out of cardboard with a cutout for a circular or square polarizer and rotate it as needed to reduce glare.The second most important thing is to know that the average car scene has over 100 stops of dynamic range (shadows to reflected direct sunlight) so trying to capture that in just 10 is a waste of time. At the bare minimum you should be shooting an exposure bracket of 5 shots in 2EV steps and merging for HDR at a PC later. You're never gonna get all the contrast into a visible file on any modern screen but capturing more information means you get a better image, and giving yourself room for highlights to roll off instead of clip harshly and the ability to brighten shadows or reduce contrast without excessive noise is what bracketing offers you. You would be doing this with a real camera, the best camera, a hassleblad even. Not doing it is laziness and it's more important the worse your camera is so it is completely mandatory on a phone.The only time single-shot captures are acceptable for cars is when the cars are in motion.
>>4515039> shooting RAWAndroid phone, not sure if it can? I see a HEIF option, turned off. And an HDR option turned on>with manual settings, perfect focus (no auto focus) and a tripodgot a table-top tablet holder that can serve as a tripod> preferably a polarizing filterthere are cheap filter sets intended for phones on A, are those a good idea to start?>The second most important thing is ...Not doing it is laziness....this .. seriously breaks the simplest thing to learn i'm afraid. your knowledge base must be skewing your answer...
>>4515055>Android phone, not sure if it can?Depends on the model.What phone do you have?>got a table-top tablet holder that can serve as a tripodThat can work fine. Tripod is more versatile and easy to move around though, not requiring a table, but you can definitely get started with a simple holder. Anything but hand-holding it.>there are cheap filter sets intended for phones on A, are those a good idea to start?Those can work, the goal is to not let them get lit from the sides though so depending on their size and how close they can fit to your phone you might want to rig up something custom if needed.>this .. seriously breaks the simplest thing to learn i'm afraid. your knowledge base must be skewing your answer...Once set up, AEB actually makes the capture process way easier and retard proof. It's all about data gathering.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZaK9cA58Q4You can use HedgeCam 2 in the bracket mode to do AEB. When set, you set a shutter timer and point the camera at something and press the capture button and it captures the image sequence for you without you having to worry about exposure.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Do you guys think a 1200D + 55m lens is good enough to scan books or should i rather get a 100$ scanner? Epson/Canon stopped making mid/high range scanners so the only way to get something good is a DSLR
>>4515129do you already have a 1200d?it depends on the 55mm lensthe micro-nikkor 55/2.8 is perfect for flat plane document copying but you'd want a nikon, not a canon
First post on 4chan. Not really a photograper, and is exactly underqualifed to be called a proper "photograper"Call me a faggot because this picture sucks or what ever, just tell me of its bad. Call it shit, ass, retarded I DON'T CARE. JUST SAY SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
>>4512280clouds are overexposedthere are no shadows nor much contrastI would like to see the men along the bank up close but this is obviously not possible with the lens you haveit seems like you took this photo with your phone
>>4512306>From a technical perspective, your image is too low quality to observe those people by the watersThey are clearly there and their postures obvious, so your argument is wrong.
>>4512578...
>>4512579Yeah, he's Broly squatting, so what it's not illegalPoint still stands, the subjects and their thematic contrast are clearly visible, and will be even if shown in a semi-detailed exhibition format of 8x10 seen at a 50cm distance which is 20ish inches in muttric system.Attached is an image sized 7x10 if you are seeing it at 96PPI, 960px vertical side, 768 horizontal side would make it 8in but in this case due to crop ratio it is 672ish, so a 7in.The example inside of a so-called broly squat, black framed, is a normal exhibition size of 5x7 if seen at 96PPI, that might be a bit too small but OP might print it at 8x10 anyways as it is doable at 300DPI, he's just 20 to 25 pixels shy of the 2400x3000 pixels needed if he opts for the cropped version provided before.
Did this monkey attempt any more photos?
I have way better gear but this little fucker has become a great companion for vlogging, even with all the drawbacksDo you have a favorite flawed piece of gear?
>>4473524picrel, or maybe my Exacta Varex which is overengineered and cumbersome but goes with some great lenses.>>4493499God, I WISH.
>>4493840And now GoPro has their own version.
>>4501594Like a phone?
why dont you guys post photos you took with them?
>>4514411for >>4473543
Be a doer not a dreamer otherwise you will end up old and looking out the door at the world you lacked the courage to take by storm.
>>4514372lmao nothing more trustworthy than someone stating unprompted that their actions were "not illegal depending on jurisdiction"
>>4514376no, the point is not everyone in the entire world agrees it *should* be illegal to take a photo of someone on private property. they’re not in the middle of a private, intimate act, it’s hardly voyeurism. if they don’t want to be seen (or be photographed), they should put blinds up. there is no such thing as freedom from view, not where I live. if you can see a person or someone’s property from a public place (the road, for example), it’s fine to take a photo as well. people have a responsibility for their own privacy, as much as any right (any right to privacy is also subject to your jurisdiction).
>>4514380can you be more gay ?
>>4514372Level not legal. I doubt the canted picture was an artistic choice
>>4514405Kek a lot of posters speak less english and more of their native language (ie: hebrew, spanish, russian) these days. I’ve noticed ESL fuckups and obvious overlooked recomposition errors are on the upswing.
Any cheaper hobbies to replace photography?Photography was a reason I'd blindly go walk into a nature reserve, I don't want to lose that without some form of alternative.
>>4513733>paranoid schizo momentso anon, can we have your word you wont be triggered next time someone correctly states nikon Zs autofocus is kinda shit or fuji cameras are overpriced junk?
>>4513737>repeat, repeat, I must always repeatSad
>>4508439If you want a good camera, the best for your buck, only buy canon or sony mirrorless or canon or nikon DSLRs. Don’t think of a DSLR as a second rate camera. Top quality FF DSLRs are more robust and reliable than all mirrorless and better than non canon/sony mirrorless in terms of image quality and continuous autofocus usefulness. Everything else is kind of the ford chevy hyundai and kia of cameras. On paper the specs look ok and online fans hype them up and insist there are no relevant deficiencies. After all, they still drive, and go in a straight line. But if you own one and know what a good camera is like they are instantly recognizable as unreliable half baked garbage no matter how much money you throw at them. Yes, this applies to leica (m, q and sl) and hasselblad (cfv and x series) too. Phaseone is the only really good MF brand. Hasselblad is horrible to work and their lens quality is fuji tier. They are a budget MF brand. Might as well shoot FF.
>>4508439Painting, specifically watercolor painting
>>4514044I do this but with oil.It's fun but if you are not completely isolated, people will see you and they will want to talk to you.Besides it's also challenging but once you 'get it' it is actually a very enjoyable and rewarding hobby.
Do you ever gift gear to newbies or friends or family who want to get into photography? I sent a 50mm Canon EF lens to a friend because he likes photography and photo editing, but he’s got a shit zoom kit lens. It’s really soul to have a bunch of gear laying around so you can give it to someone else.
>>4505174yeah, I gifted my old EF 18-55mm (aps-c lens) to my photography friend. Who shortly after stopped photographing due to not having enough time :/Now he is just my friend.
>>4510188Oh, and I gifted my old Zenit with the Helios lens to my best friend a year ago. He never even touched it… What the fuck am I doing wrong haha
>>4505174I've gifted X700, Rebel 2000, and a Nishika N8000
>>4505174Yeah I gave my mate an Olympus lens because he gave me such a good deal on a 1Ds2. I gave another friend a Pentax Zoom WR90 to get him started out on film.
>>4505174I am the newbie.
The "Arts" EditionPreviously: >>4509594
>>4514144kinoI need to get to some demonstrations and protests again
funny horse
Goodnight /rpt/
Spring 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 >>4493514Quick FAQSComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Saw this at a bar. No one watched it and it was used for background music. Videography looks decent and on an expensive camera. Goes to show that story and captivating an audience is most important in filmmaking.
>>4514281I wish 4chan did not rotate the image...
>>4514281No clue what point you’re trying to make.
>>4513720No he doesn't
bump limit reached, new thread>>4514476
Posting kino by photographer, Diane Arbus.
these photos feel weirdly predatorylike oooooh you look lower class I will capture you I guess she was doing it to make money but the "look at all the circus freaks" vibe just feels exploitative and grossI guess the stated goal here is "capturing candid reality" but it feels more like mocking those who are different.
>>4513350It’s degenerate AND they wanted big bucks, and thus took the shortest path which isnt exactly deeply thoughtful shit. Its like photography had a marvel/dc film moment. >wait, the works of art make less money than the simplistic childish novelty? and all we have to do is heap some postmodern nonsense on later? WELL THEN *unzips leica*
>>4513352It's like you know nothing.
>>4513338>Butthurt copeStart arguing anytime lil bro>>4513352The feeling you mention is derogatory called "misery porn", the consumption of someone else's dog days so you can feel something.
>>4513631I'm not arguing with you, I'm making fun of you
