Henri Cartier Bresson would use a digital autofocus point-and-shit cam these days.
Cartier-Bresson would pay models to pose candid street photography and make videos about it on Youtube these days
>>4527661Someone put actual effort into making that image. I bet they could actually afford the camera of their dreams if they put that effort into making money. Kek
>>4527665AI isn't someone. Pay attention and behold all AIs do this.>Thing: Descriptor, descriptor.>Statement. Statement. Conclusion.>It's not A, it's B.>Excessive sarcasm>Passive aggressive>But hey>Nothing like>Question? Question? Dismissal.tldr its a mechanical redditor
>>4527666Ah I had a feeling it was ai, but it seemed a little too detailed to be 100% ai. I will still laugh at whoever prompted ai to make the image. They are definitely just upset they can't afford one.
>>4527669It even got wrong aspects of the actual camera, there's no rewind knob on a Leica M (it's digital).It made a mockery of a Leica, a Fujislug tier contraption.Pic related is arguably more authentic than what OP posted, a machine forgery not unlike the Moon that Samsung got caught faking. "Computational photography" and electronic "viewfinders" will blur this line even further, unlike OP people won't know they're being fed AI fabrications.
rate my film snapshits from my Vietnam tripshot on a Ricoh GR1
>>4518205>>4518220>>4518249>>4518255These ones stood out. Do more like these, less like the others. Also, please curate your work better - there are a lot of lazy shots here. It's obvious you are not thinking much before hitting the shutter.
How was the weather any Vietnam? Any concerns about getting fungus and excess moisture in the camera? I've heard tropical and humid countries are hell on gear.
>>4518201Great thread, anon, I enjoyed it.
>>4518291This is good
>>4525344It was hot and humid and the little led screen of the Ricoh GR1s that I had just bought from eBay stoped fully working. But those cameras are not known for their reliability. I had a Ricoh GR1 screen fully go out one time when I was in Bali but it then started working again after a few days.
Why do companies ship cameras with the viewfinder missing? What causes this behaviour? Why do people buy them? What is the use case? I can't think of any reason to intentionally design or buy a camera without one. It's not like the viewfinder somehow makes the camera worse, or makes it appreciably heavier/bulkier, or appreciably more expensive. It's just useful with no downsides.
>>4527420I said a shitty EVF, a crappy low res LCD and plastic optics. Obviously a 5.6m dot OLED with glass optics is much more expensive than that but that's not what was being discussed.
>>4527441No EVF is goingvto cost 10 dollars to add, no matter how shitty you think it is.
>>4527420Yeah it was extremely expensive to add an evf to this >>4526814 camera. 11 dollars is extremely expensive to somechuddy out there.
>>4527521Regardless, my point wasn't that they were super cheap.
>>4526425My Sony RX100VII doesn't have this problem.
>Sony makes the worlds most used number 1 reliable professional camer-ACK!Last containment thread: >>4525985
This one has strong grain effect added.
This one is backlit so you can see dynamic range a bit better. Subject detection AF hits right on the eye as long as subject is more or less stationary. It kinda falls apart with moving targets.I don't claim those images are any "good" they are just technically correct snaps with 0 editing so you can see what xtrans can do. I can't post my better pics because they usually have faces on them or could give out my location.
which one should i pick ?Just for little sessions in very small rooms for little portraits, nothing fancy
How can a portrait represent something about someone other than mere appearance? Can you draw out an internal character or trait from compositional elements?
>>4523222Depends. If they've been posed or told to have a certain expression, it doesn't express who they are.
>>4523222Everybody has idiosyncrasies, ways to move or do things in a manner that is specific to them.They can be real tell-tale signs of a personality.A good example is how people sit.
>>4523222How can actors act and be anything other than themselves??
>>4523335Demonic possession?
>>4523222If you can, read Camera Lucida by Roland Barthes.
Reply if you're a real mf'er
Test portrait
>>4527373Underexposed. Make it darker overall and the image will appear less flat.
>>4527731Lazy exposure fix
>>4526827looks like someone forgot to aerate their bleachthis will be interesting to fix, since I already cut up the negatives to scanloading a bunch of small sheets onto a reel, like developing mini LF
>>4482575Look into Mamiya Press.
as a beginner, should i buy a 55-250mm lens or a 50mm lens? i dont know specifically what i want to shoot yet.
>>4526717size/weight is just another irrelevant spec for nophotos to min/max argue about
>>4526717Its always a reference to weddingslop ("holy trinity") and sigma art/snoy G master styled primes>Carry bigger lens that costs 3x more>photos look AI generatedThere's a reason "gearfag" and "pixel peeper" became such cutting perjoratives that micro fool turds users began feeling a false sense of confidencehttps://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1698397/>sigma 35mm f2 shoots landscapes as well>sony gaymaster photos look uncanny and harsh
>>4525248I'm >>4527247 and the lenses are the 18-55 kit and the 55-250. I have very little experience with DSLRs so take my word for what you will. The 55-250 is pretty nice and sharp. Pictures look nice and bright in good lighting but it's quite lacking in low light. Autofocus is also snappy in photo mode. I haven't tested it in video yet. It's a pretty fun lens overall. I guess you will have to choose between low light performance and telephoto. I will eventually get a 50mm because it goes for like $20 used over but I am in no hurry. Godspeed.
>>4527252*over here
>>4525248I could never be bothered to actually swap lenses that often and for a hobby, just carrying one zoom lens for whatever you wanna shoot is just so much less hassleI got a prime 50 for that sweet f1,4 but I dont notice that much of a differencemy only critique, at least with the zoom I have, is the bokeh looks a lot nicer on the prime when shooting something like flowers or anything where background elements are really close, otherwise they look the same
I'm a poorfag and used exclusively old manual lenses for the longest time because that was all I could afford. Last month I finally bought my first modern AF lens (Sony 85mm f1.8 if you were wondering) and I've been thrilled with the optical quality, it's amazing the step up that happened in the 30 to 40 year gap between it and my previous lenses. I'm finding though that even if I put it in manual mode and manual focusing it just doesn't feel the same to use in terms of joy and I don't know why? It's like I don't feel as involved in the photographic process when using it, whereas the old lenses it was a lot more visceral - the click of the aperture ring; working in combination with the focusing ring and the camera settings to try and push the old glass to its limits and get the most out of it. The new lens just feels too "perfect" and thus feels boring to work with. A lot of the time I just end up sticking it in auto mode with a feeling of resignation.Anyone else ever feel like this?Pic rel taken on a Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm
>>4527220>i dont like your photos, so dont use a camera you likeweakest and yet most common critique on /p/
>>4524398if it doesn't have an aperture ring i don't touch it. focus by wire is also horrible
>>4527220kinda true and reali recommend paying attention to both the technique and the gear. probably you'll end up settling on gear, ie find the camera systems that suit you, and never have to worry about that anymore. whereas the skill end of things you can work on til death.
>>4524444checked
>>4527220yeah, he should take more black and white photos of skinny white girls and homeless people
What makes Japan such an desired place for photography? I'm really trying to understand the hype around it. When I visited of course the size of Tokyo itself opens lots of opportunities but I quickly notice that it gets repetitive rather fast. All muh taxis look the same, the buildings have a pattern that repeats a lot. If you've seen a few shrines/temples.. in the end they all look the same. Even if you visit other prefectures you won't see much of a difference. Whenever I see camera vlogs or flickr uploads in Japan I now tend to skip because it's always the same. My current number one location would probably be Germany. Still safe enough to bring your camera with you, every state has it's own architectural style. Towns are usually a comfy mix between old medieval houses in the center with grim 60s bauhaus constructions that look really odd. Also home of Leica where this sort of everyday compact photography started. What do you think? What's your prefered location?
Stop sign, in Kawazu, Japan.
Little girl grilling mochi? in Yokote, Japan.
sugoi!
All my potato
What has the consequences been since everyone has access to either a digital camera or a smartphone with up to 200 MP sensors? Snapshits were easy to identify in the 80s because they were often shitty point and shoot, or Polaroids, but what gear does the snapshitter use now other than smartphones? Has the ubiquity of photography destroyed whatever strange, new artform was budding?
Photography isnt artIts simply documentation
>>4526891A gorillion people on flickr have in fact learned how to do this on digital. It's still hard to do as a 4x5 enlargement. The gear just can't be separated from the photo for the same reason a cool pic taken with an actual camera is more significant than an identical image generated with AI. And doing it as a 4x5 enlargement still won't hit the same ever again, because ansel adams was an environmental activist that joined an art movement, and he was the only one promoting photos like these as much as he was.>gear>novelty>topic>public relations>institutional connectionsHopelessness and despair was already there. You just need to open your eyes to it. If anyone here got into photography expecting to be an equal to good painters with just skill, lol sorry. Photography is a social game as much as it is an art.>Don't underestimate your local art scene and make the highest quality physical prints you can!A significant segment of young up and coming approved-good photographers are actually doing this, increasingly with 8x10, and it's full of the usual topical shit. Photography is inherently journalistic so it always will be. Pure art is a passing curiosity, like "cool, but if it were painting..."
>>4526893The camera is just a tool you can use to create visual media. Photography can 100% be art.>>4526895Sad to see you've given up. Hopefully you don't spread your despair to many other people.
>>4526893if you have to still make it look cool it's an art, even if it isn't the highest artif it was just journalism you could take a dogshit tilted blurry photo with the wrong colors and it would still be newsworthy if it was about the thing
>>4526883>>4526884>>4526887>>4526895>Photo a 100 years ago was just getting the exposure right and level the camera.is what digital users say, because it's all they have to do on their device to create a forgettable digital file that will never become an actual object. But 100 years ago you couldn't do that. You had to try a little bit to go from camera to enlarged image. But that's not part of photography according to digital shooters. >Anyone is just as good as Ansel Adams nowadays.lmao. ok. >...if they were to use the same gear and techniqueYeah because everyone knows how to use a large format camera, to develop and to print. It's not skill. Anyone can do it.>Photo is actually about being rich and knowing peopleYeah as opposed to painting where you become famous by mesmerizing everyone with objective talent. It's only in photography that rich people with connections succeed.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Will they finally announce tg-8 on 9th? Any leaks?
https://explore.omsystem.com/us/en/pen-body-silverNoooooooooooo!
>>4526864>$1000 for a phone sensor>IPX1 (IP53 already effectively means nothing and performs on par with or worse than non-IP rated cameras, IPX1 means it's screwed together somewhat tightly)*eBay searches for Sony a7c condition:used intensify*
>>4526864>>4526880Both these cameras are irrelevant to the topic. What the fuck are either of you on about. MFTards and Snoyggers competing against each other is like watching the tranny disability hire and the import Bangladeshi fight over a girl.
>>4526882its p relevant. olympus doesn't make new cameras. they re-release old cameras with gimmicky firmware updates so now a six year old sony is a threatening image to m4turdies. asking when they're going to make the new ____ is pointless. they don't make new anything.
>>4526882Thry were supposed to announce new cameras and they came out with this PEN shit. Fuck that, I'm buying a Nikon.
Theme: FoodAll photos must be taken during the current challenge month. No old or archived shots.Get creative and enjoy the process. Unique perspectives are encouraged!Previous thread:>>4519751>Go highlight your choice of best pics!
>>4526309Was it busy moving when you took the picture? Or did your stomach grumble so much that you were shaking?
>>4526309>>4526290I see the bar is nice and low, as usual. Almost touching the ground there in parts.Good thing this isn't a limbo competition.
>>4526309dawg wtf are you eating??
>>4526290
>he takes pics landscape
>>4525363Oh you're the color accuracy autist. Yuck
>>4525428Apparently they either couldn't figure out how to implement it again without it still having some security issue or something, so it's unlikely to ever come back. The whole site was running on an extremely outdated versions for years as I recall and I guess that feature won't work now. But I do miss being able to see the settings used. We got to have all the gearfagging disappear from /rpt/ but we also lost being able to view settings that achieved certain photos.
>>4525518I remember a year or so ago when someone was taking intentionally bad photos of the garbage on their desk with a FF and an MFT. Even in those conditions, the FF photos had better light rendition, more accurate colors, and retained much more texture even with a shallower DOF.
>>4525222
>>4525641But how was the microtonal harvesting?
Bald editionITT people who don’t take photos or own cameras discuss how the camera they might consider buying later is the reason their theoretical future photos look badLast containment thread >>4525019
>>4526533>>4526577looks like they're making both black and silver versions.
>>4526662kek, cost is basically the only reason to go digital over film
>>4526666For me, it's black and silver gelatin)))
>>4526559Right still looks kinda blurred, but less so, and colour is better. I think I prefer it but I'd have to see the whole image instead of pixel peeping. I'd be happy with either.>>4526568Are we going to pretend that colour correction is bad, actually? Is that where we're at now?>But anon wouldn't it be better if it didn't need colour correction at all?Yes but that's not always practical. It's not like it matters that much for digital since you can in fact just correct it. Digital colour is not and never will be real, fundamentally.
>>4525985I love this camera.i wouldnt mind an upgrade of some sort
itt: post your non-standard color photos. your lomo turquoise, your harman red, your aerochrome, and all the like. I guess if you do weird stuff with your digital sensors that's fine too.shot a roll of kono donau II last weekend, its a blue monochromatic c-41 film rated at ISO 8.
Trying to replicate aerochrome sooc with my a6000 with the IR filter removed. Using flash gels behind the lens to get the colours
>>4526562
>>4526564
>>4526562>>4526564>>4526565I'd say great job
DigitalSima Soft Focus
