2025 is here 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.
>>4398927I would be a canon shill if the company wasn't so fucking frustrating. The abitrary limitations they impose on their cameras for the sake of segmentation, combined with their price-for-features, makes them no longer viable for the low budget solo shooter imo.It fucking sucks because I think they make the best cameras.
lumix 24-105 f4 or 24-70 f2.8 in front of s5iix for handheld video (in low light also, no gimbal)? 24-105 has lens stabilization, 24-70 doesn't but has larger aperture. Both are supposedly parfocal
>>4398725Nikonbros, what is our response? Can this shit really happen?
>>4398968I use the 24-105 with my S1H and have no complaints, except that it's pretty massiveI've used it in low light plenty without problems, don't do much handheld though
NEW>>4399102>>4399102>>4399102
It's essentially a copy of the PhotoPlug that doesn't cost €35, it plugs into your phone's 3.5mm jack and masquerades as a microphone while using an app called Shutter-Speed. I'll show you how to make it for less than $10: What you'll need: BPX38: https://a.aliexpress.com/_ooNVS3N 3.5mm male 4-pole (TRRS): https://a.aliexpress.com/_okCBOkR 4.7k ohm resistor: https://a.aliexpress.com/_oCb7WGP Instructions: Step 1: Take the 3.5mm plug and bridge the sleeve (mic) and ring (ground) next to it with your 4.7k resistor. Step 2: Your phototransistor has an emitter, base, and collector lead. Snip off the base. Step 3: Solder the BPX38 in parallel to the resistor. Make sure the emitter is connected to the ring, and that the collector is connected to the sleeve. Step 4: Cut off the cable strain reliever and screw the plastic cover back on. There ya go, enjoy not having to worry about exposure guesswork with your mechanical film cameras anymore.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4394539this is awesome, I've been meaning to do some projects lately and I might give it a shot soon. thanks OP
>>4395402>>4395423>>4397115Thanks for not insulting me, I hope the step-by-step tutorial isn't too enigmatic. Reason why I didn't post pics of the innards was because I ordered some absolutely massive resistors, so the wiring is very condensed.
>>4397348and you've used it already and it works well?
>>4398706Yes[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiCommentScreenshotColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1170Image Height2532Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>4398735very nice
How did film directors/cinematographers control their color palette during filming? How much of it was done in post/printing?I've just started with film photography and am fascinated by how differently colors are rendered on film compared to digitalDid they shoot stills with the film stock during pre production to check the color rendering?Are there any good books on the subject?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:12:19 14:01:55Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width640Image Height448
>>4393345This plus literally coordinating colors of costumes etc
>>4393257>>4393505I think we cannot underestimate the importance of lighting here too. With the right light sources you can make magic happen
>>4393296do you know how the transfer process worked?
>>4398709Look up color timing
>>4398714very cool, thanks anon
>Yes, I have thousands of dollars worth of electronics in my backpack, how could you tell? Yes, I am low test and likely unable to defend myself. How do you carry your gear? I don't use a dedicated camera backpack since I don't want to be a walking red flag.
>>4386673get served
Does anyone have a hiking backpack with an easy compartment for camera gear, like the lowepro photo sport 300, that they like? I want to be able to store stuff for a day hike while keeping telephoto, macro, etc lenses safe. I usually keep my camera out hiking so it doesn't need to store that. I have a pretty compact non-photography day hiking kit so I don't need a ton of space, but extra would be nice if I'm carrying winter gear or maybe even backpacking (that'd probably be a stretch I guess).
>>4398613no.
>>4398613Wandrd Fernweh. Liked it enough that it became my go-to for 1-2 night backpacking, even if I don't bring camera gear.
>>4398613Just buy a $10 little camera pouch off amazon and put it in a normal comfortable backpack. Photography backpacks are all garbage.
dedicated to Filippo Brunelleschibut if you're more into Palladio that's fine tooboring formal shitedump all your building corner shots here and flat on facades[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeEASTMAN KODAK COMPANYCamera ModelKODAK EASYSHARE CX6200 DIGITAL CAMERACamera Softwaredarktable 4.6.1Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.5Focal Length (35mm Equiv)38 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:06:23 10:26:01Exposure Time1149/1000000 secF-Numberf/4.5Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, AutoFocal Length4.99 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1615Image Height538Exposure Index100RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4396371>>4396373I think you could have cut a bit more from the bottom part and tilt a bit more upwards, would help the overall composition
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakesamsungCamera ModelSM-G985FCamera SoftwareG985FXXSMHXK1Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0Focal Length (35mm Equiv)28 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image Width4032Image Height3024Image OrientationRight-Hand, TopHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2025:01:02 16:32:36Exposure Time1/50 secF-Numberf/2.0Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating50Lens Aperturef/2.0Brightness4.7 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeSpotFlashNo FlashFocal Length5.90 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width4032Image Height3024Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoDigital Zoom Ratio3Scene Capture TypeStandardUnique Image IDR64LLMF05VM
>>4396373damn she thiccc
>>4331306i fuckin' love this one>>4340710and this onesorry i have nothing to contribute to the threadhave a bump instead
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 10.1.1 (iOS)Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2025:01:10 22:33:38Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width4000Image Height6000Scene Capture TypeStandard
For decades boomers held back the evolution of photography. Now hipsters have joined them. Today modern digital cameras are still designed as if it was 1995. Billions of dollars over the past 30 years has been wasted by corporations designing digital cameras around designs of 1950s film clunkers. The world of photography should have moved on from film and its janky designs twenty five years ago. Cellphone companies certainty figured this out. Now they are eating camera companies alive. How embarrassing.Fuck retarded photographers and camera companies for not pulling their heads out of their ass. There is literally no rational reason to be using film today besides hipsters shitting themselves over bygone aesthetics. This is especially true since 99% of their shared film photos are DIGITALLY SCANNED AND UPLOADED TO THE INTERNET!!! There is certainly no reason for cameras to be be clunky monstrosities either besides boomers nostalgic for the past and retarded corporations catering to them. God damn, film and its antiquated designs still hounding photography. Film and its lingering stench need to die already.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareGIMP 2.10.36Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:12:16 21:02:44Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4392664Why would an aesthetic need to die? You sound like an angry tween too lazy to learn the fundamentals of photography. Why are you even here?
>>4395626Those are accesssories for cellphones. Modern cameras don't need to be literal cellphones to utilize the technology found in cellphones. That today's camera companies aren't taking advantage of modern technology is a disgrace and a waste of customers money. Only a luddite would argue cameras need to be antiquated to be functional.
>>4396031>Why would an aesthetic need to die?The OP explains this clearly you reading comprehension challenged retard. Film is a boat anchor dragging down the progression of photography.>MUH AESTHETICHogwash. Anything that can be done with film can be done with digital. The fact that essentially all film pics are now digitally scanned and enjoyed after development is proof.
>>4396031This.
>>4398533OP is complaining about superior physical interfaces and wants an iphone camera. FILM AESTHETIC!!! is not holding things back anyways, patent laws are.
Don't consider myself a gearfag but it does feel good to buy sometimes
>>4398502>24-105 f4 - the long end quality is low enough that cropping from 70mm with a better lens looks slightly crisper. a good lens to avoid.Really? I had heard good things when it launched. Actually looking for something in that range so a little disappointed to hear that.
>>439850524-35-50Is less fun than20-24-35-50-70 (can crop to 105 with no perceptible quality loss)Its for if you need to save weight, demand first party features like focus breathing compensation, and need f2.8.
very slightly weird. I thought I gave my cousin my EF-S 55-whatever, and nifty fifty. Turns out I must have given him my EF-35mm f/2 or whatever the cheaper one was. bad news my only EF lenses are the 50mm 1.8 and 50mm 2.5 macro. good news is that rebel 2000 + 50mm f/1.8 is a total fucking beater rig worth less than $100 I will not give a single fuck about
why the fuck are m43 lenses way down in cost, but used pen f bodies are going for more than what I paid for mine new in 2016?
>>4399141are they? the zeuiko pro lenses are still really expensive..
What's the stupidest way you destroyed your (or someone else's :DDD) gear?
>>4391634>Swam with my host family's waterproof compact camera>Lost it in the deep>No, wait, it's hanging on a corral down there!>Manage to swim down about 5 meters to get it, thought I was going to die>Get a hero's welcome as I swam back to the boat>Standing ovation>Memory card lid wasn't properly secured
>4395185classic nophoto
>>4395184I almost lost one of those too on this shot, I used a Cokin filter ND stack to get the motion of the leaves. I had to hold it in front of the lens and it slipped and fell and I caught it right when it hit the water I got lucky lolThis whole setup hung over the water because there was a ledge I was standing on and for whatever reason it was in the shot so I had to basically lean over it with the tripod in the water, with PVC extensions, to get the shot.
Sighted in a new rifle using a Canonet QL19.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiCommentScreenshotColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1290Image Height2796Scene Capture TypeStandard
>follow ez lens disassembly video>no lens reassembly video:((
Midnight Creepin' EditionPrev. Thread:>>4392094/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.
>>4399571you need to make a new thread
>>4399573I don't make new threads. :( We're only on page 5 anyways. My new film camera is going to be here before there really needs to be a new thread.It's a cool one. Just wait. The model no. starts with a 6 and ends with an F. Can you guess????
>>4399575Nikon F6?
>>4399604Nope. It starts with a 6 and ends with an F.
NEW THREAD >>4399633>>4399633>>4399633>>4399633>>4399633
In 2025 I am going to become a local glamour photographer. I already have a couple of strobes.Anybody know whos good in 2024/2025 that I should be studying in this genre? Instagrams, websites whatever. I am looking to get with the current look. Also glamour photography thread, any tips etc.Current plan is to book a hotel room, shoot a few models with strobes to get the most value out of the location. Frequency separation retouch on the skin, build up an instagram, and once its rolling start charging the girls money.
>>4395277Nah. Glamor photography is for dimwits. Even of it wasn't it doesn't change OP being a blog posting faggot. Discussion of photography doesn't need to include excerpts from OP's diary.
>>4395959@naomi_dreamzyou are deluding yourself if you think stuff like this doesnt impact.Glamour has been one of the cornerstones of photography since its invention. We are discussing techniques to do it in real life.A real life issue I am 100% running into is that Instagram I just posted above. I am already changing my strategy with a good idea from another poster. I am best to target people who would never of done photoshoots anyway. They are probably the last big market that will remain that photographers can tap.I am also gonna try some onlyfans girls that have been around for awhile. They are less likely to use AI as they cant really change how they look as their fans will notice. its crazy how fast the AI tech is moving though, its really going to change things for anybody shooting photos for social media over the next year or so.
>>4395347>Forget it, models don't show up. They flake on you, lead you on and then cancel last minute, always some bullshit excuse.>tripthis is because of you not because of the models
>>4395882>@Bia.azhelia. >Keep your body add a whole new face.the body is ai too, this whole thing is ai
>>4395964>>4395882>>4395878this is not glamour
Alright you motherfuckers, its time for pure SOUL!I built this piece of shit in 30 mins out of the chassis of some failed repair project and whatever garbage I could find in my trashcan plus a random lens elementit has an aperture made from the lid off a tin of cat foodno shutter, you take the lens cap off and put it back onmanual film advance made from a 120 spool and a bottle capand light leaks
>>4393762>>4397421Pretty low even for a namefag
>>4392239nta but i might have to invest in one
>>4398395Get the 4000, it has a usb interfaceScuzzy is shit
>>43983964000 is firewire5000 is the one with usb>t. 4000 owner[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNikonCamera ModelLS-4000Camera Softwaredarktable 4.6.1Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:06:17 19:43:53Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width4000Image Height6301
>>4398398What the fuuuuuuuu i thought it had both
Let me guess, you "need" more[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>4397145the lens is the whole point. if i could take that off and have it mounted to a proper camera like a P67 or RZ/RB with a decent shutter, i'd absolutely do it
>>4397265You could deffo mount a holga lens on a Baby Speed Graphic lensboard and use the curtain shutter, or jury rig it onto a copal shutter and use it with a Baby Crown Graphic. >tilt-shifted Holga lens 6x9sI actually really wanna try this now...
>>4397265fwiw, they make adapters to mount Diana lenses onto Nikon F and Canon EOS.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2014:07:29 14:40:37Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width900Image Height600
>>4397391might look into that, i've got a junk RZ67 lens with a trashed optic block, but a solid shutter, so I've been wanting to make an abomination of a lens using a magnifying glass or the element from a broken Kodak 3a I've got on the shelf. got a machinist buddy onboard to mill an adapter holder for me, just need to get off my ass and give him something in CADnot sure _how_ crap the image will be, but it'll certainly be something 'unique'
Less actually
How the fuck he did it bros? HOOOOOOOW For me Edward S Curtis is an absolute towering mammoth of 20th century American photography. What a fucking genius.
>>4395879Yeah they gave us web servers
>>4395948kek
>>4375225Taschen is releasing a combined version this spring. Excited to get a copy.
looked him up today, never realized it but curtis has that varg phenotype going on.
I think this thread should be pinned
what are your sygestions? don't hesitate to give info about your opinions.pic is the night sky with an exelent moon not being photographed corectly due to phone cam. not proud of it.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakesamsungCamera ModelSM-A310FCamera SoftwareA310FXXS5CTJ2Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.9Image-Specific Properties:Image Width4128Image Height3096Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:12:15 18:12:30Exposure Time1/17 secF-Numberf/1.9Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/1.9Brightness-6.3 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length3.70 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width4128Image Height3096Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardUnique Image IDT13LLIA00AM T13LLJJ01SB_
>>4395677canon 6d and a rokinon/samyang 14mm f2.8
>>43956772nd hand dslr and a good wide angle lens. >>4395680Like this.Wide angle because it allows longer exposure without a tracker mount. Do not forget a sturdy tripod or a beanbag.
>>4395677Canon 2000D
>>4396562why that one ?
>>4395680>f2.8Doesn't collect nearly enough light for good night sky pictures. Need at least a f1.4 lens (two whole stops more of light than a f2.8).
There is this thing that happens in photography, (particularly in porn) where the magic veil of the medium is pierced and I realize that what I'm actually looking at is; a man paid a sex workers to take photos of her in a cheap hotel.Why though? Why does the illusion hold sometimes but not others? I have the vague sense that it has something to do with the depth of field, but that's not all of it. I can't quite put my finger on what exactly causes it, but I've definitely experienced it quite a few times looking at photos. Any thoughts?I really want to know because it is currently the major fear holding me back from doing shoots with women. I don't want this weird uncanny effect showing up(censored because /p/ is a christian photography board)
>>4398020This is the meaning of gearfag>seeking out and screenshitting forum posts you think "btfo sony"Aw did sony steal your favorite brands ff market share and press contracts? Did sony bros make fun of all your favorite brands stuff being bigger?He got turned down because he was a creep in an asian country who said "but wait, i have a good camera"
>>4398155I can tell you are a white incel from how you write. Go back to /pol/ you chud loser.
>>4398163asking whores to take photos isn't incel?
>>4398020lmao
>>4398153This is a Christian thread.
