Why aren't you rebadgemaxxing? Don't you want to be a member of the Red Dot club?
>>4520465negmaxing
is there even a diff. besides the branding?
>>4520480Yeah, the price!
Yeah, why does Leica even rebadge?
>>4520480In some cases software I think. I might be misremembering so take that with a grain of salt.
The "Cityscape" EditionPreviously: >>4507850Thread Question:>Who taught you the most about photography and what's the most memorable thing they said?
>>4512138moo
>>4510698Oh nice, a perth anon. Will always remember my home city.
>>4512138He's a big guy.
>>4512141not like that starting his own thread would change anything lol
>>4512138bad ass
I've been shooting macro with a Sony a6000 for a while now, and landscape only recently, but I was recently given a Rebel T6 with similar macro and zoom lenses as my Sony. Not sure which is better, if there's really any comparison since they're both entry-level cameras. Sample pics are from the Sony, had to resize to fit 5mb limit. The only settings I mess with in-camera is ISO, aperture, and shutter speed, the rest I do in Photoshop. Haven't experimented with white balance or in-camera color grading. Would a Rebel T6 be any better?
I've owned both. I prefer the A6000 based off the fact its mirrorless, shows zebras in live view, and has a Max ISO when set to auto. Shoot raw with AWB.
>>4517642The vignetting seems pretty rough here
>>4521112Disagree. The right side and foreground of the photo is just less exposed. Anon probably used a spotlight on the chaos marine.If it were shading the top left cloud would not be as bright as the dead center.Regardless, the lighting adds to the scene. It's grimdark not grimperfectlyclear.
>>4517642I have an A6000, it's a better camera for this use case. Since macro has a thinner DOF in general, try getting all the subject's eyes and face, or body in focus as much as possible, same context as group portraiture.
Does anyone have any recommendations on where to find good scans of essential photobooks? the wiki links are all dead
You can find some in the usual places for books. Though quality will vary, some are good, some have overcompressed jpegs that totally defeat the purpose for a photobook. Don't expect perfect full resolution either way.Another avenue for reviewing the classic photographers is there's a bunch of videos on youtube of people going page by page through a book.
>>4521074Please spoon-feed me sir I'm not so good with computers sir
check archive.org
internet archive
First time posting on this board. You guys wanna hear something nuts? So, my dad is a photographer. He does all sorts of stuff but mostly high def photos of abandoned places and 360 panos. Anyway, one time he walked into a mcdonalds in our home town, they had a huge television rotate random pictures. He noticed one of them was his. Used without his permission. Apparently, it was a disc sent by corporate. He sued and got a shit ton of money. Wild huh? any other stories kinda like this?
>>4519343What Minecraft mod is that?
>>4519343>mostly high def photos of abandoned placesWhy?
>>4519589Not him, but I think that is a cool genre, so why not?
>>4519612Does he get paid for doing this?
>>4520717nah he has a real job
rate my film snapshits from my Vietnam tripshot on a Ricoh GR1
>>4518337I think there’s a bunch of wasted space on the left.Something like this looks more complete IMO.Good shot nonetheless.
>>4520471Acting all tough but in the end they lost their war.
>>4518337>>4518338>>4519604>>4520312Ty. Those night time photos in Sapa we're my favorite from the entire trip
Great thread!lot's of soul in hereThey do translate as mostly random travel snapshits and I think you could gain from setting up some sort of focus or goal on your next trip, but these already are better and tell more of a story than most shit on here
I'm thinking of getting a Ricoh GR IV Monochrome, but the thing is, can something like a Fuji X-H2 fake it well enough with a B&W film simulation? There's going to be mottling due to differences in color channel noise at higher ISO, right?Damn, it'd be a no-brainer at $1500 but $2100...
>>4520666>Just put in a bunch of effort and you'll see I'm rightI'm not going to do that.
>>4520663I don't have a goyphone. I do have old analogue and old digital cameras. I use them because they are no smartphone and not because they are superior. Currently I mostly shoot 5 Megapixel for sharing stuff with email. I could shoot 8 megapixel, jew the image and reduce it to 5 megapixel so nobody will notice. I don't like using AI.
>>4520665Wait, guys, I think I'm starting to nootice.
>>4520747When did:Click resize image == AI???
>>4516879can you stick it on a tripod, take 3 photos with different color filter and achieve better effects in still photography than more expensive color camera?
Where the fuck did everyone go?
>>4521631cANON faggot is all 3 in 1
went through this whole thread instead of just doomposting in it. rough count, and this is just my read on it, is that maybe 1/5 of the replies actually contribute something to this meta discussion (captcha friction, demographics, the 4stats.io link someone dropped). the rest reads like filler, or the same handful of anons keeping one gear equivalence slapfight going for 100+ replies. that alone is probably why it feels dead in here more than an actual lack of interest, though I could be off on the exact ratio.what in this thread actually made a post feel worth reading imo: it cited something checkable instead of vibes, it named one specific fixable problem instead of just "board bad", or it didn't take the bait when someone tried dragging it into a brand war. not saying that's a formula, just what stood out to me going through it.if you want this to be your place again: post a photo, make some effort when you reply to someone else's, and if you catch yourself about to post something just to have posted something, maybe don't. skip the "prove you own a camera" bait too, it only exists to eat the thread and engaging is what feeds it.for your own sanity while you're here: 4chan X (or a fork like 4chan neXT) lets you filter by name, tripcode and keyword, so you can mute repeat slapfight participants and brand war terms yourself instead of waiting on a janitor. some forks also let you collapse a reply chain once it passes a certain depth, so a long back and forth between the same two posters stops taking over your view of the thread even if you never mute either of them by name. bans are ip based anyway and pretty easy to evade, so don't count on mod action to fix your experience, filtering does more.tl;dr post pics, put in some effort, don't post just to post, filter the rest yourself
tldr vax deaths
Interesting to see a thread lasting this long, starting out with months-old posts at the start and then, like bumping into an acquaintance in the wilderness or a foreign city, finding recent posts at the end>>4522444>>4523947I'm a /fit/ tourist that got here from a search related to the captcha. I don't know if it is the sole cause, perhaps without it and the wait times, the website would still keep losing users, but I would wager that it is the main and absolutely biggest cause for the decline.It doesn't matter whether it's "easy" or "simple" or sometimes "fun", fact of the matter is that gets annoying as fuck and takes 10-15 seconds or more (especially on phone or touchpad) to complete just by virtue of the motions you have to do - scroll through the images, click next and repeat multiple times, for EVERY SINGLE FUCKING POST. And before that, you have to wait to even be able to request one, and the wait time resets if you leave the thread.Before you'd sit down on the shitter or at your pc and be able to participate in multiple threads in the span of a mere few minutes, now it's a drag with you having to repeatedly complete shitty minigames to engage with the website. Want to post a quick reply to someone, a simple kek, an image or a single sentence? Well hope it's worth waiting 60 FUCKING SECONDS then doing a minigame.At some point you just decide fuck this, I'd rather just not bother, or you go to another thread because of the wait time and forget to come back. And posts get fewer, and the website becomesworse, and so it's now even less worth the annoying minigames, so more people say fuck it and leave and so on it continues until we're here.
>>4524002would it be more enjoyable if there was more variety to the minigames?
Can you take amazing shots and get good at photography with just a point and shoot? I'm getting sick of carrying around my bulky setup everywhere, even though it's M43
>m43 >Bulky Sounds like your a weak bitch
>>4516732Then why are all the movies now made on digital?
>>4516386I thought of this analogy: a formula one pilot is gonna be an amazing pilot no matter what car, but you won't train a formula one pilot on a cheap consumer car.
>>4518685They are not.>I'm sorry anon I was being a dishonest birch, what I meant to say was "why are most movies shot on digital?"Because it is much more convenient in many different ways and much cheaper. Because consumer don't care, don't see the difference, and also because shooting a good movie is often not about getting the cleanest highest resolution image possible. Actually, you can watch a movie in low resolution and you will forget about it if there is good sound, but a movie in high resolution is unwatchable if the sounds is not clear. Anyway, it's very different from what you would want on a still image.
>>4518687>birch
Brand Loyalty 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: How much would you suffer for your art?Previous thread: >>4511253
>>4520878We develop at home or send by post to a real lab, the guy only sees kids who found grampas camera and is biased for this reason
>>4520867tell me, what does contrast mean to you?
>>4520497That's a good point. Maybe I'll see if I can get a 500N/rebel g
>>4519720nta but "I'd love to shoot you instead but right now I'd prefer to try some different angles and compositions as not to waste other people's time".
>>4517767is that UK or Russia? the signs and buildings look very 'European' but that's not actual EU traffic signage.
>Go to Japan>Only shoot Kodak Portra 400
>>4517946it’s funny because some other japanese hobby markets are the complete opposite>CONDITION: POOR (outer box seals broken)
I'm going to Japan and planning on only shooting HP5
>>4518055It’s just Tri-X with inferior tonality. Don’t bother.
>>4518055Lmao same
>>4518033Every used dealer has wacky condition scales/ratings, like KEH jumps from bargain straight to excellent in their scale, B&H's numerical scale starts at 7 and those two are reasonably reputable dealers with permanent storefronts.
first actual attempt on photography poco x8 pro thoughts???
>>4519819
Who are the todays truly great modern/digital photographers? the ones likely to be remembered alongside legends like Ernst Haas etc?
>>4520650>Fuck palestineI see what the priority is.
>>4520653Any pro palestine break from israel involves refugees and gibs. Its far better to let bibi cook and then abandon him entirely.
>>4520656>and then abandon him entirelyYou say that as though it's a viable option.
>>4520504>Who shoots digital again?Ironically, several of the names you listed
>>4520504Impressive post, I know what you're doing. Masterful.
Chance Encounter editionI was going to snap a picture of a flower when this Saffron Finch came flying and stood on one of its branches>Previous Thread Image Limit Reached >>4500320
>>4517866For single birds, that is too short for sure. 300 is too short even on crop imo. The most popular lens I've seen on FB birding groups is some kind of 150-600mm and they mostly shoot at 600mm. But if you can find big birds that are used to humans or you stick a birdfeeder just outside, 80mm could work. The birding photographers I follow often use even longer focal lengths which is why I just watch their videos. I tried with a 200mm and it just wasn't nearly enough.
>>4517895damn, okay
>>4509680hawk tuah
>>4507781The body is round
>>4517866Entry level birding lenses are your standard 100-400mm, and they're normally pegged @400mm. More serious birders will buy super telephoto primes like 600mm f4 or even more crazy. You can't really have too much focal length with birding, but anything less than 400mm is normally just going to be a disappointment.You absolutely can bird with shorter lenses but prepare to buy a ghillie suit and to be camped in one spot for a few hours.
Pictures with potatoes in them give me a quarter chub edition.
>>4515739we need a /p/ hall of fame threadit would be great if oldfags could contrib anything they saved from anons posting last decadeI’ve got a folder of about thirty or forty images
>>4515739these photos look like shit. ur retarded
>>4516383>>4516018>>4516017Someone’s mad he didn’t get in the hall of fame
>>4515739?? maybe three of these are remarkable. better photos than most of these can be found in every rpt>>4515154tried too hard? anon didn't try nearly hard enough. for one, the people in them are barely noticeable
>>4515635very cool, could be an album cover
