Would anyone be willing to make a digital version of this tag?
What do you think of this?Also, that's not a tag, it's a character. I just kept it simple and traced the lines but if you want something more detailed and full body I can doodle something more.Additionally, you might get better results on /i/ or /ic/ those boards have some really good artists.
Good job! You've captured the mood of the face expression very well.I wasn't sure how these things are called in English. I was also considering the word grafitti, but that probably wouldn't be accurate either, would it?Thanks for the tip. Will try on /i/. Here goes nothing. And once again, thanks mate, I wish I could do something in return for you.
How does /p/ feel about zines?They seem fun. You print your stuff, distribute it however you want, and people look at it. They might toss it in the trash but at least you made an impression.You can make them for pretty cheap. I made some lo-fi DIY-style ones with my visual art at home using just an inkjet printer, and I've been dropping them in random places for people to find.Anyone ever make zines?
>>4470809Many thanks anon, and good work.
This thread taught me that there are actual photographers on /p/. great work anon's!
This thread is so cool. Ive been putting together a film project for myself that is capturing the rural decay of small town Oklahoma and i feel like this is such a good way of putting it together.
Pretty inspiring. I have a photo project in mind relating to my local city. Maybe I should learn some InDesign or whatever you use for this and blow 50 bucks on printing a couple of these and distributing them at random places.How do you guys distribute? Just give them to random people? Leave them lying around in second hand stores?I was thinking of maybe looking out for artsy looking people at local cafes and flea markets and just harassing them with a zine.
>>4471957Some places have zine swap events.
What do you anons do to organise your photos? Do you compile your snaps into Year Month sub folders on your hard drives? Where do you export? What is the best system to organise your snaps?
>>4471964My volume is low enough that yyyy-mm-dd is more than manageable
>>4471987only correct answer
>>4471964I have a NAS where I store my pictures. I have folders named "Camerapix 20XX" for every year I have pictures. Each of those is organized by month and each month is organized by day.
>>4471964all ze raws are in ze nas. best raws i develope. jpg i put in ze apple photos. thats it. i also make in apple photo albumsapple photo has great ai search. i search for cow i get photos of cow and horse and sometime dog
>>4472016>>4471998Pretty similar here. I don't know why people need to overcomplicate things. A basic file-system structure like YYYY>MM-DD or YYYY>MM>"event"/DD is so simple to navigate and implement.Why the FUCK does anyone bother with anything else outside of not understanding how folders work.On a similar note, if I've shot enough in a single day that further categorisation is needed, I just split my photos somewhere in the camera's folders based either on time or battery swaps and keep that split on the NAS import.
I am going to buy one as soon as they hit the market in early Novemeber. I hope I get the 1987 edition. It's fire. Which one are you hoping to score?You are going to be getting one right /p/?You aren't gonna be a contrarian try hard no Charmera /p/haggot are you /p/? ISHYDDT
>>4470794>>4470813>The camera’s built-in flash is an LED, rather than a xenon flash.Shameful. They had one job.
>>4470858>>4470437No. I don't think I will. I'm gonna buy a Charmera instead.>>4470866>Kodak Yellow 1987 EditionOh man. That's the one I want.FUUUUUUUUK. I hope I don't have to buy more than one to get it. Thinking about buying the six pack just to be sure I get one. Could easily scalp the rest to cover the cost I bet.
>>4470152Shoot Ektar at 50 and E6 that shit nigger.
>>4471135it's just not the same. sigh...
>>4470376INSULT MASTER WONG AND MEET SWIFT DEATH, PIG
Drunk ordered one of these last night. Got fomo seeing everyone falling back in love with photography, using the optical viewfinder and onboard flash. Did I fuck up?
>>4471971No photos of the time you didnt realize what silent shutter did then?
>>4471855>>4471869>Every other camera brand takes good pics on the default settings>Snoy doesnt and requires tinkering and editing>Actually thats a good thing!>Its intentionally supposed to be bad!>s-skill issue!holy cope
>>4471978Lol cope camera
>>4460982would be nice if they made one of these with an 18mm lens
>>4460982Nice nails. chic
>He doesn't export all his photos as .dngs onto hard drives to have timeless, future proofs for when proprietary "RAW" files become obsolete NGMI
>>4471827Calm your tits
>>4471743Not necessarily. DNG doesn't have to be demosaic'd. Ricoh RAWs are in DNG format I think.>>4471734>>4471743The fact that unpaid opensource commies have sort of reverse engineered most raw formats doesn't mean there shouldn't exist an open format, given how all camera sensors are more or less the same anyway.
>>4471732As long as we have OS's that can run NX Studio, NEF will never be obsolete.
>>4471831after you kys
>>4471827ok and? as if you can't pirate capture one lel
Took these yesterday with my Galaxy s24, 30 second exposure, ISO 3200. Will post the originals as well.
We are like... star dust dude
>>4471304Hold on a second, are the first 3 your edited photos and the second three your photos you took in this RAW photo app? What is this RAW photo app? Each app could be doing something different. What did you edit these in as well?If I've understood the original/edit posts properly, I think what you're actually getting is darkness around the lens from either the camera or the telescope, and then when you edit them for exposure and saturation the dark parts get dropped meaning you have these lit up blobs left in the middle.I'm guessing that based on the circular vignetting in the originals, and that the light blobs in the edits are the same shape.
>>4471327the first pics look like the aislop went crazy and turned a large part of the milky way into a globular cluster ? the others look a lot more like real vignetting
>>4471401If you look at the thumbnails you can see that the density patterns for all of them match up to the unedited ones.The saturations will be picking peaks in the noise to turn into singular points, and that'll be where we're getting our "stars" from.OP, post the raws and the edits you made and let me see if I can replicate this with a set up that definitely doesn't involve AI to test this.
>>4471327The first 3 are the same as the bottom 3, with the brightness, colors, contrast and saturation edited. The RAW photo app let's you manually control the ISO, shutter speed, focus ect. They usually look worse than the standard photo app if you don't fiddle with it correctly, like a regular camera. Here's another I took with it.
What are your favorite Lightroom presets to work with? I have a hard time finding something because they either turn the photo in a depressive nightmare with dull dark colors or they change skin colors to yellow. Looking for something more vibrant, happy with punchy colors and still natural, not overprocessed.
Skittles from fropack 1 obviously
>>4471594camera standard
Post photos you like.
>>4471419
>>4471420
>>4471421
>>4471422
>>4470053Welcome back cruz
How often do you all go through your digital files and purge? I look back and realize a lot of my digital photos are unnecessary garbage, it amazes me how when i shoot film I take high quality photos I want, whereas when I review my digital shots I end up cringing that I even took a large majority of the picturesDo you guys purge your digital shots often?Do you find yourself reflecting back at how awful some photos are that you took and unnecessary such as landscapes and random street photography? or even people you don't even interact with anymoreI see why film is the superior method
>>4471426Never, I just buy more storage. Even if a photo is dogshit I can still use it to learn from, and re-take a better version in the future. I have never deleted a photo since I started shooting, I'm currently at 7TB.
i'm pretty aggressive when it comes to purging. instead of deleting one by one, i just select the pictures that somewhat decent. then select the rest and delete all permanently
>Tried rangefinder camera for the first time>Yashica_Electro_35_GTN.jpg>Felt absolutely like shit to shoot>The shutter sound boring>Felt awkward to holdRemind me again why people like film rangefinder? Not to mention that my friend bought it used and the quality of the viewfinder itself is quite terrible. so like, why? Do I need to try Leica or something?
>>4451975>the shutter sound boringare you really this much of an autist?
>>4451975I like using my Olympus XA rangefinder, mainly because it's tiny and I can carry around in a pant pocket for random family photos whenever we go out.I have no interest in lugging around my SLR when we go to a diner or concert.>>4467778There's a weird amount of people that consider the "feel" and "sound" of the shutter and film advance to be a significant factor in how much they like a camera.IMO the only things that matter are ergonomics, features, and image quality.
>>4451975DESU I'd recommend you do try a Leica. Just go to your local Leica store with your credit card and a roll of film. ask them to look at some of the cameras. Eventually ask to look at one of their film bodies. After you chat with the salesperson for a half hour or so, ask them if it would be possible to do a walk around with the camera. You will need collateral, a card that can cover the camera if you lose/steal it, or gear insurance for rentals that would cover it in case of loss.I regularly walk around with their bodies and it's always an enjoyable experience, just remember that it's polite to buy something every once in a while. I usually pick up the latest issue of the LFI magazine while I'm there.While I do like their film bodies, I also tried a digital rangefinder that had no screen. It's quite literally the closest you can get to shooting film without having to actually shoot film, although I really enjoyed my experience with the MP. Nothing beats the feel and ritual of shooting film.
>>4451975maybe find that epson rangefinder with voigtlander no need develop film
>>4467572>IT'S DA JOOS
I thought someone here might be interested in these vintage Kodak items and Polaroid film. I'm a long time lurker of the boards but have never been on /p/ before, but I thought I'd give you guys first dibs.I'd hate to see these go to waste, shoot me an offer.assefef@proton.me
>>4470597tree fity
5 dollary doors and a button
>>4470597I'll take it off your hands for free + you pay shippingI'm doing you a service here, remember
>>4470597top zoozle
Are there any other photographers out there that have similar or better work ? Unironically used to love his style.
>>4470880wtf terry is based? i thought he only had consensual sex that some ho regretted 5 years later. if he’s an actual rapist i like him a lot more now.
>>4470880It’s not rape if she was into it at the time and decided post wall that she regrets all her choices, chuddie. Which is every single time with these guys.
>>4470880Imagine believing some cum gargling roasites.
>>4468966>>4468968that's why I'm still sticking with my XF10, the built-in fill flash serves it's purpose well.
>>4468690>what is your favorite work of his?His pecker in upcoming models.
Are there anons here who are not really photography ppl but still into film developing because the aspect of developing your film urself is fun? I always have this issue where I don't feel an urge to take photos, as I don't have much of a creative bone, but I feel a lot of desire to make my own prints and develop film.
>>4470590comes to think that on 2 occasions i have seen zoomers using a kodak funsaver
>>4470601The thing is I have no way to scan or to enlarge them
>>4470587i don't really care for photography but like the idea of it as a way to remember or save memoriesnot once have i reminisced over photos taken with the phone so i bought a film camera, dev stuff, and a scanner some years backfound that not having the "instant feedback" of digital photography and actually taking the time to develop, scan, and print the shots lets me enjoy them moresupposedly could get away with printing from a digital camera too but i just dont care for it. literally exactly the same as a phone, hundreds of photos to transfer and scroll through
>>4470697Make contact prints. No excuses
Bump
Get back out there edition.
>>4459229nikon ain't expensive I got 2
>>4457795>PLAY OATIs it good?
>>4458676Almost dreamy. Darken the hoop a bit, too grey.
>>4458676I’ve seen this before in the /rpt/what are you trying to do? if you explain your idea for the end result we may be able to help. ignore this if you’re just experimenting/iterating.
>>4471056It was a crappy shot so I decided to get all artsy with it. Some old darkroom tech plus some Rockwell.
