Give it straight to me, /p/. Are Leica M cameras a meme? Or are they worth it?Mainly for portraits, and rock and leaves.
>>4481817The niche:>3rd generation holocaust survivor who lives in a western metropol and hates it
>>4489483>artificial countertopsLol. Lmao even
>>4489594More like omegalul, eh Tim?>he doesn't even send catalogs to himself, what a poorfag
The glass is decent and crisp, but the price for that is extortionate.
>>4489598Moophurt lmao
>shot using smartphoneC&C plox
>>4489486>>4489487>>4489489>>4489491>>4489492crazy vibes need a crazy angleall these shots are straight on horizontalget on the floor.get on your assyou want a filthy shot? then roll in the mud to get the shot.its all too sanitary.
>>4489554dumb
>>4489555cope and seethe.you will never take a good photo.
>>4489559u know u can just hold a camera low right instead of getting on the ground. how dumb are u bruh
>>4489554your highlights look awful, i'll ignore the green tint because its nostalgic to me being y2k af.your subjects and angles are boring and I dont know what youre trying to say other than "I AM OBSESSED WITH AESTHETICS" and vibes. Its half hearted and you dont commit enough at all to anything at all.you have to get lower or get high. get close or dont bother.
Continuous LED lights are terrible for photography.This is an approximate $2400 600watt continuous LED light.At a distance of 2 meters, it can manage 1/60 iso400 f8 at full power.That converts to f4.8 iso400 1/200 if you wanted to get up to a barely usable photography shutter speed.And if you want to go down to iso 100, you are now around f2.8So $2500 gets you something barely usable on your lowest settings at approx 2 meters, any further distance and it wont work.And if you want to use any modifier at all its all over and you wont even be able to have enough light for a photo.In before just shoot at iso 1600, no thanks, im not spending $2400 just to have to use iso1600.
>>4488580Yes, they're made for video. Of course there's going to be better options for photography
Bought it because it was more or less it30 but without the need to buy a riserThought the off camera shooting was going to be a gimmick - a fun one, but a gimmick nonethelessIt's not.It's THAT good even with a rather small range of 18m.Just by holding it in your second hand you can get so much creative control.A cheap selfie stick with a tripod and maybe an offbrand diffuser will genuinely let you have studio quality light for incredibly cheap and rather small package.
>>4488982Why the hell would think off camera flash would be a gimmick?
>>4488983nta but>/p/
>>4488983NTA but I havent bought a transmitter despite theoretically knowing the power of off-camera flash. I envision my first outing with a transmitter, speedlite and softbox to be groundbreaking and literally make me cum from the results.Anon probably had the same revelation.
show me what kind of weird shit you can make with photoshop
bluring my photos using jpeg artifacts
What the actual hell is wrong with my editing and photo something looks very wrong in the photo and I can’t decide on what it is I’m trying to get like a vibe Juno claspo but it doesn’t really fit that vibe
This was shot on a Canon 5D 12mp and edited in LR 3.5 on a Pentium 3 1ghz Dell c610 laptop with 2gb of RAM running XP SP3 on an IDE 40gb 4200rpm spinnydiskYour arguments, all of them in this thread, from all of you, are invalid.
>>4488401based blind man
>>4488199those star trails bug me, them seem incidental instead of intentional when clearly some level of effort went into taking & editing that photo
>>4489293Prolly just a side effect of exposing a night scene so long. I feel like anon didn't really care about three stars in the sky having a bit of a tail.In fact I would have liked it more if they were even longer (but like, 10x as long)
>>4489294>Prolly just a side effect of exposing a night scene so long.yes that's usually how you get star trailsI'm saying I would have retouched them out of the photo, or let it expose for like 4x as longthat's already like a 5' exposure, and either dawn or moonlight, so probably couldn't let it expose for much longer or the lighting changes too much
Should i get a Sony zv-e 10 II new or a Lumix S II.My goal is 4k 30fps with the highest dynamic range possible, 10bit log and fast sensor readout speed (low jellow)
>>4488812You're right about the apertures and f1.4 being a meme for it, but you do need an ND filter, that's the one piece of gear that is unquestionably needed unless you only film indoors.
>>4481494>posted it again award
>>4488812You need an ND filter if you shoot any kind of log during daylight, even stopped down
>>4488812>No need of an ND filterIf you shoot "cienema" you are gonna be shooting with a 180degree shutter. With a base iso of most cameras at 800, 1/48s outside is going to be fucking impossible. Even 100iso will be a stop over at f16.
>>4481589>unzips dickAI porn is so good its unreal. dont even need OF anymore
Anyone else here working a regular job/day job as a photographer? I've been working as a real estate photographer for a while and still do side jobs for things like corporate portraits/events, and I'm curious if anyone else on /p/ works in photography too.
>>4488755It's funny how so many gurus and people in your life say to make your job your hobby. Same thing with cars too, I knew a guy that loved cars and then fucking hated them and never did shit to his own car ever again after he started working as a mechanic. He let his car pretty much rot because he couldn't stand doing what he already did for work as an after work project.
>>4488758Entry/mid level jobs require you to sell your soul to excel spreadsheets or lung cancer for pennies over minimal legal wage with unpaid overtime. Anything that can get you away from today's hellish market is desired
>>4489009>he thinks the photography/filmography industry isn't also soul crushing or pays more than penniesLol
>>4489141I meant that market of regular jobs is so unbearable to people any escape plan is giving them hope. that means escaping right into the trap of even more competitive and ungrateful industry or hell of getting contracts for small buisness survival
>>4489179Gotcha. Same thing I did, I was in a normie regular job and jumping into a full time professional photography job sounded like a dream come true, but it just meant getting fucked in pay and essentially being told I was really lucky and other people dream of getting the job. I've no doubt they replaced in me in seconds but who knows how long the new guy will last, the industry rotates through normal people fast while only the people who are willing to be shit on will remain.
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?
The quality is shit but the audio is great
Kodak ZI8.
>>4483068Man, that takes me back. Remember when Flip cameras were all the rage for what, two or three years there, before “smartphones” really took over? I had a Kodak one that had jelly video like crazy but it could do 720p! Used it quite a bit lol.
>>4483080The ZI8 had a few advantages over the Flip>1080p instead of 720p>Used SD cards instead of internal memory>Mic jack>Image stabilization (whatever that consisted of)I remember I had a "rig" for mine that consisted of a cheap "L" bracket with a couple of cold-shoe mounts that I used for the mic and for an external light. Yeah, it was an interesting time. Smartphones were around, but they hadn't completely taken over. And even then, the cameras on them were just "okay." So to get full HD in something that fit in your pocket AND was under $200 was pretty cool.
>>4473540is that a fucking iDroid?
I'm gonna attend a wedding on saturday and i want to shoot some film. It's an african wedding, so there will be loads of bright colors and warm hues. I shoot with a Point and shoot camera (pentax iqzoom), but i own a SLR (Nikon fg 20). I have never shot with an slr camera, and i have no clue how they work. But i reckon the pictures look better on an slr. I have two dilemmas at hand>I don't know which film stock is good for capturing warm hues >I don't know if i should try out the slr camera (or if i should play it safe)i want to capture something reminiscent of picrel
>>4488924>I think it will be pretty well lit inside,NTA. Don't be fooled. Even pretty heavy indoor lighting is nowhere near the LV of the outdoors.Indoors with film I'm normally pushing HP5 to 800 at minimum and realistically to 1600 (but I think it looks kind shit pushed two stops). At 800 ISO I'm only just in a "safe" shutter speed range to avoid camera shake and I need to ask people to stay still for photos indoors.400 ISO film is absolute minimum for indoors and I'd be pushing that one stop anyway. If you're using colour film then fagghedaboudit
>>4488946Portra and Lomo 800 work fine indoors, if a bit grainy. But pushing hp5 will make the grain apparent too.
>>4488846get old gold 100 (2006-2005)
>>4488846it is possible to mount 28mm (if you have one) to fg-20 set aperture to 5.6 and 3.3m focus and shoot day with kodak 100 proimage
>>4488946Didnt understand half of that but what I got is >get 400 isoI dont really like the look of kodak ultramax 400 though. It doesn't look warm, and it doesnt have that "film" look>>4488953I have decided to use the point anf shoot so i dont think i can make adjustments like that.I need to finalize what kind of film I'll be using because im going to buy it later today. Ektar100 or kodak gold is what i am considering right now
Wetplate 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: What alternative processes would you like to try?Previous thread: >>4476005
>>4489017is… this one of yours?
>>4489651E100
>>4489847Yes it is.
>>4491531I'm not one of the harshest critics of your eggs but have to say that is a marked improvementmaybe I'm just a sucker for contrast
>>4489021Neat, thanks. I never bother to do edits but maybe I should start.
I shoot black and whit 'art' photos.I print a lot. So i spend a lot of time looking at the details of each photo. especially if they're hanging on my wall.that being said, i have a conundrum which, surprisingly, isn't well covered on the internet:>would you say a leica monochrom, or a medium format (with more bits and more sensor real estate) would produce better black and white images?
>>4487913Yep, silly me. I totally forgot. Somday I'll stop being such fucking scum. Alas, today is not that day.
>>4487910I like my nikon zr with its huge ass screen
>>4487915Dope choice, I'd love to get one>>4487914Still sad
>>4482924The Monochrom is cool and I'd like to try it sometime. But it's just way too expensive to justify. You can buy a Pentacon Six with a Carl Zeiss lens for $200 and 200 rolls of bw film including development and scanning ($20/roll) for the same price as the Leica without no lens. Double that if you develop yourself, which is half the fun with bw anyway.
>>4483444So buy a k-1 mark ii and have it converted to monochrome.
Who the fuck likes this focal length? What is its purpose?
>>4488750get closethat's the fucking secret to phone-like focal lengths. (there's a reason why 28mm looks like snapshits - because it's the snapshit focal length every teenage girl uses on her iphone)
>>4488750If you go wide, shoot wide subjects or get close as >>4488753 said. Seaside shots as well as in-car shots are two examples that benefit from proper wides.
>>4488753>>4488756Word, I'll creep up closer. Or shoot wide landscapes. Also the wider lenses for this camera are expensive. If I can't make 28mm work I'll probably just go back to shooting 50 and 135.
>>4488725i'll see you in court.
>>4488750Get 28mm vision in your mind. It usually can be acquired by getting closer to subject and observing the environment before shootong. Wide angles are difficult because our vision is usually much narrower.But some dudes mentioned about >muh zooming with your feet It's a meme. If you make a change in the distance between camera and the subject, you will get different result. It just doesnt work. On this matter, i recommend to think of composition based on the distance between you and the subject, rather than focal lengh of your lens and the subject.
>"Black and white are the colors of photography. To me they symbolize the alternatives of hope and despair to which mankind is forever subjected." Robert Frank.>"I work in colour sometimes, but I guess the images I most connect to, historically speaking, are in black and white. I see more in black and white – I like the abstraction of it." Mary Ellen MarkI see a pattern. One of making the world increasingly drab to demoralize the people. Look up their early lives.
>>4487132
>>4487132>Everything is either white, black, or a shade of grey. Maybe you see a couple blue and red cars, and if you find something yellow or even green you've hit the jackpot for the dayMore of an /o/-tier whinge than /p/ but I feel like the sentiment applies here as well. Everything is just devoid of colour these days
>>4488786High Impact were the days
I'm only shooting for myself. Travel and family. Photo and video. What I learned is that video easily brings people to tears. Because it's so real, you can dive back in memories and experience everything once more. Photography is different. You look at the images and it only activates emotions IF you use them to remember back that moment. B&W photos make it easier to remember back because it makes your brain start thinking. You don't get the exact image of a situation but more a vague interpretation in form of a colorless scene. So I believe that this is the reason why b&w photography is so emotional for many while color photos just collect dust forever on your hdd. But that is just my idea and I don't know if thats any true. Once the Ricoh GR4x mono appears I use it as an excuse to learn more about it
>>4487148Black and white is harder because you can only rely on light and composition
I would like a small, retro style camera for hobbyist / snap shitting type photography. Image quality is important to me, but not the end all, be all. I do not want a full frame type camera such as the ZF. I already have a D850, and actually owned a ZF for several months, before getting rid of it as the lack of grip and overall hugeness made it very unfun to walk around and shoot with. Between the OM-5 and some Fuji cam, which is the best choice?
>>4488729>>4488680He's alive he posted on /k/ a while ago. He has a Z7 and keeps shilling H&K.>>4488731Better cameras are also fun, spastic ESL bro, not just the em5iii re-re-release. Nice buyers remorse doe.
>>4488729Accusing better photographers of being zoophiles is rude. Poor 8x10 eggGod gets the same treatment. Is it all you?
>>4488669I don't think his tests were scientific enough.
>>4488737I member >dog didnt move>indoors>t-the lighting changedLarger pixels having better shadow recovery and more sensitivity was already known to real niggas anyways
>>4488745>shadow recoveryeither you're too retarded to get a proper exposure in camera or you're retarded to think that shadows need any recoveryit's a sign of the autistic mind to try to show everything in a picture
Should dishonest photography be shunned?
>>4488290>I must have missed where you suggested it was something else causing the distortion?I didn't, what I cared about was dispelling the fiction that the lens was distorting the shadows.
everybody taking about the moon itt needs to be executed also what the fuck is dishonest photography? any image at all could be considered dishonest because it is a single view of a single instant of a subject or event, its like how people talk about how much they hate "bias" or "indoctrination/propaganda" when what they really mean is they dont like it when others treat a perspective other than the mainstream perspective on a topic as truefor example: >teaching kids in school to be liberal capitalists = cool and normal>teaching kids that liberalism and or capitalism might be bad = evil indoctrination and brainwashing literally every perspective is biased and its the same with photography literally every image could be considered a lie based on the intentions of the person framing the imagei think the only thing that could actually be considered dishonest is how people use an image to make their audience feel, if i took a photo of a dead Palestinian killed by an israeli JDAM and the zog used the photo to say it was actually hamas who killed the kid or to say it was somehow the kids fault he god the bomb dropped on his head that would be dishonest but the photo would not be
>>4488318Capitalism does not exist. It was invented as a strawman to propagandize neo-feudalism aka the unending struggle towards real communism. And its greatest triumph is convincing americans that its real and business are the equals of the state or else the entire country is logically obligated to go full commie. You will also find this “jedi” mind trick in other debates. And not just lefty insanity like veganism and population replacement either. It is also used by the right wing. You must adhere to ____ or your world will end if you ever stop being a hypocrite, and anyone can do anything they want and you cant logically complain. Know this trick. Fear it. Hate it. And remember the more you acknowledge ISM dichotomies the more powerful they become.
>>4488318>also what the fuck is dishonest photography?The Bahbah thread is a great example of it. Photography done with the pretense that it's presenting some deep truth when it's just navel-gazing erotica peppered with some critic bait. The faux rebellious aspect of it is also part of the dishonesty. The photographer is playing it safe while pretending to be some daring maverick. The idea that it's speaking truth to power when it's actually just power talking. It's corrupt to the core, there's no sincerity in it. Another example, hobotography.
>>4488206lol they forgot to shoop in the stars
