REDRUM 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: RC or fiber?Previous thread: >>4516071
comfy
>>4526499>where I sit waiting for the new /fgt/ to be bakedYou did it! Image limit hit!Nice little narrative image to wrap things up.
And with that said: >>4526501>>4526501>>4526501
>>4526301To be fair really old trucks are worth taking pictures of in general
>>4520942This is not true at all. I remember when film was popular, you would always want the negatives so you could make extra copies of pictures you liked and give them away to your family. My parents have given away tons of family pics to my grandparents and other relatives, and they always made sure to have the negative and make copies first.
I could make it work for landscape, interiors / cramped spaces or macro (if I had macro UWA), but I just can't make it work for anything else. Sometimes I feel like my 17mm is in an awkward spot where it's either too wide or not wide enough, but I'm probably just bad at it.TL;DR how do I git gud?
>>4524726Using UWA = Your background carries equal if not greater weight to your subject. Even with shallow DoF apertures like f/2.8 you're still getting most of everything in reasonable focus, so you no longer have the ability to blur out undesirable elements. Telephotos kind of always give you the option to have a single subject and fuck all else, which is simpler to manage.This makes things inherently challenging. You need more stars to align for the photo to look good, or more planning. Even Ren Kockwell's lead-addled mind put it together correctly when he surmised that UWA lenses aren't for getting everything all in. Sure you can do that, but there's far more potential at hand.Take your pic rel for example. What the fuck did it being ultrawide add to the photo? There's nothing interesting about the background other than it's open and empty, which could have been shown with a narrower focal length while also making the people and birds more prominent. If the point was to focus on the vast ocean then there's too much going on with the foreground to draw the viewers attention that way in the first place.
>>4524731>Telephotos kind of always give you the option to have a single subject and fuck all else, which is simpler to manage.That is true, although I rarely do that. There's something else.>What the fuck did it being ultrawide add to the photo?If I were to try and make a positive case, it adds context of the vast and empty ocean as well as of the shore to the photo. It depends a lot on the medium, you wouldn't do this for a 4x6, but it makes a lot more sense for big formats where the edges are in the viewers periphery. Though I don't know what Mr. Schwier's intentions were.I'd think UWA can help create a strong leading line in the sense that it connects with the viewer (you can imagine if the rope in the image was a bit bigger).Maybe the issue is also that it requires specific conditions to work, and then I'm lugging the lens for little benefit most of the time, as well as little in the way of experience.
>>4524739>it adds context of the vast and empty ocean as well as of the shore to the photoThe people in the shot distract from this too much. If it was one or two people not in motion then I could get behind that idea, but as it stands the photo is a bit all over the place in terms of where the viewer is meant to focus.>I'd think UWA can help create a strong leading line in the sense that it connects with the viewerThis is true if you can leverage how UWAs make close subjects appear larger. Otherwise there's nothing it being ultra wide has added.The final thing I can say in terms of usefulness, is that they tend to show the viewer the perspective of the shooter. That can be a double-edged sword.
https://www.voigtlaender.de/lenses/vm/15-mm-14-5-super-wide-heliar-asphaerisch-iii/?lang=en
>>4524743>The people in the shot distract from this too muchI think you misunderstand. What I mean is that when the medium gives you the space (like a big print in a hallway), you should be able to use wider context as your border where it is not meant to be the subject. I mean this more generally though; in case it wasn't clear from the watermark, that's just a random photo off the internet, since I needed some for OP.
This picture was not taken in Russia, btw. Good luck.
Hahaha lil mouse why don't you pet that lil fucker
Cileles, Jatinangor, Sumedang Regency, West Java 45363, Indonesia
>>4524525Put your trip back on cinefaggot dogfucking nazi glownigger
>>4524561Hello psyop victim
>>4524206Yr mom's basement, yr mom's house, I'm upstairs banging your mom.
Newfag here, I really like shooting buildings but don't really know what to do beyond hurr durr point and shoot so any criticism or advice is appreciated.(1/15)
probably my favorite of the set, I think there's almost a beachy feel to it with the sky and the orange sun cover thing
regular zoomslop shot
and a wideslop
alright guys this is the final one for today, sorry for posting this much but these were a couple weeks of shotstill next time
This zesty guy makes a call like he drank too much, "uhzahhh!"
>>4524403Even at 1/4000 the background will have motion blur when shooting a fast bird in flight.
>>4519533I got a manual 200mm and went to try more.
>>4524578
>>4524580
>>4524581(there is a bird here if you look hard enough)was going for 1/500-800 cause didn't want to crank the iso. on my camera even at 800iso there's color spec noise... though I'm also probably not exposing properly. manual focus is not as hard as I though but is a bit tricky sometimes. ordered myself a viewfinder magnifier though.
How important is sensor size really? I've been thinking of getting a camera that is both good at video and photo and want to avoid full frame due to its high pricing and big size. A lot of people seem to love the GH series from Lumix but I hear tons of backlash in this board making fun of how mft is obsolete and has " phone tier' image quality . Is the mft that big of an issue when the gh7 has dual iso or should I just go with aps c . I am willing to spend around 800-1300 usd.
>>4518013https://youtu.be/SpUkq6DJZh0
>>4522332The lenses are much smaller and cheaper. Whether that's a benefit for you carrying stuff depends on your setup and shooting criteria, but it will always be a benefit for your wallet. You also get more reach than anything on full frame. There is a 200-600 lens that accepts a 2x teleconverter. That is 2400mm equivalent for a full frame camera. They simply don't make lenses with that sort of reach on full frame and if they did it would be the size of a person.
>>4524207>you could spend $3000 to take a more zoomed in photo of a bird now with atmospheric haze and shimmer at levels fool framers cant comprehend. but guess what? i have the secret power of m43!>@GROK, MAKE MY PHOTO SHARP, VIBRANT AND CLEAR AND REMOVE ALL THE NOISE!>fool framers btfo! the skill of getting closer is DEPRECATED! Hahahaha ear shit poppets! Full frame is over bucko!>-some british hobo
>>4524219Only oldfags remember, k3k
Is that a Messi fan? Lmao L pessi dickriders
I thought he was le gay? Or did he just hire a model to beat the allegations?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BG-5n_lxpI
>>4522971> When you are so obsessed with being gay you believe a random youtuber who almost never talk about his personnal life and shows 0 sign of gayness is gay and his wife is a model he hired to """beat the allegations""" (actually just your mental illness)
>>4522971What the fuck does have to do with photography? I don't care if this man takes it up the ass or not.
>>4522974TRUTH
>>4522974he's got a MAN van though
>>4522971Literally who?
Going to dump a bunch of photos I've taken over time, enjoy. Criticism and feedback is welcome since I want to know what anons think or what I could do better.
>>4523917that's just another version of the "photo is good because I like it". "There is no skill to drawing because I like this drawing in which I see no skill". Whatever question you encounter in life, you can always answer "it depends, it's a matter of personnal preference". Relativism is not an opinion, is just a basic concept to keep in mind and remember most things are ultimately subjective. By denying the skill ceilings are different when learning photo and drawing, you're just refusing to think.
>>4523917Unironically looks kino, reminds me of some of those weird drawings you'd see in 1920s upper class magazines or something.
>>4523484>>4523499>>4523446I like these ones. Adelaide is boring as fuck too so nice job.
>>4523926never there was any mention of "skill" in this conversation.it takes more skill to break the rules than follow them.
>>4523977>there is no rules>it takes more skill to break the rules than to follow themyes
Only A Sony Is Good Enoughâ„¢ Last time sony won: >>4522451
>>4524090135 format film double frame: 36x24mmFull-frame sensor, which was designed and specified specifically to match the above: 36x24mmAre you retarded?
>>4524110>Phase OneMassively overpriced pretentious nonsense. More so than usual, that is.
>>4524169lol clueless retard
Is the Nikon Z8 still worth it? The Sony A7RV is cheaper used, higher res and same DR. Z8 has faster readout and burst. I shoot a lot of Landscapes now with a 24mp camera and would like some more detail. I also want to get into wildlife photography. Should I stick with my Z system or switch to Sony? I've used both in the past and prefer Nikon's color and menus. The recent news of Nikon falling down is also putting me off from investing more into the Z system. If you have a Z8 please give me your feedback!
>>4524082Fujiworms are a thing of the past. I now import my fuji raws directly into lightroom and they look better than XTransformer demosaics. LR is finally my only program
Is it worth to get into concert photography? I'm big into metal music and there are weekly shows in my town big and small. Also huge festivals nearby in summer. Instead of sitting on my ass at home lurking on 4chan or flickr.. should I give it a try? I have no portfolio yet so it might be best to start with smaller local bands and ask if they want some free photos. If I search for photographers in that area, they all are really mediocre, especially the post editing. I wanna become the Greg Williams of metal music. My main goal isn't money, though that would be a nice addition later on. What would suck though is if this is as oversaturated as soemthing like wedding photography. What do ya think? Anyone with experience? is it fun?
>>4520682>It was an awful effect in the 60s and 70sBeing a flaming homosexual is against the rules, bro
>>4520742also looked him up and honestly I dont really like his photos lol
>>4520435I literally can't think of anything gayer than photographing other men
>>4520686yeah you'd have to be press, but if you were to tie the photos to live show reviews or music blogging you could bend the rules
>>4521002faggotry was no longer considered a mental illness by 1973 and you can thank flower power summer of love hippie 60s bullshit for that
hey /p/ i have a canon m50 mark iii am planning on using it for youtube vlogs and stand alone videoany advice on good settings or if you have this camera what setting didi you put on it ?i copied the settings from a woman's video years ago but cant re find ithow fucked am i?
>>4522959Hey anon.You should match the frame rate and shutter speed to 1:2 ratio. Also set Clarity to soften or sharpen the overall look of the shot.The M50 is sufficent for most video needs. Lighting is always more important than the camera. A fluid head tripod or gimbal are also more important than the camera itself.Don't copy women. Look online for videos that have different looks, find one you want to imitate, then work backwards to find out their gear and settings.You're only fucked if you put zero effort in. Do a bit of research and spend a little money on appropriate auxillary gear. The zoom lens might be a bit shit, but the 22mm f2 is universally praised and would give you a classic wide-angle FoV.
>>4522959>make the best APSC system>kill itWhat did Canon mean by this?
>>4523175Should have kept EF-M as the APS-C lineup and RF as soley full-frame.
>>4523175>make system that covers the needs of like 90% of camera buyers with NO upgrade path towards your expensive fool frame lineupTotal suicide.
>I never photograph anything I don’t believe in. If I love working with death, it’s because even in death I find this power of reality that no sculptor or painter could recreate, not even a Michelangelo or a Da Vinci.
>>4523746This is what happens when you can't think more than 1 layer deep
>>4523669>Israel = R1A (jews, turks, greeks, and other aryans)Lol, I'm R1a1a1 and 98 % Finnish, 0.7 % French German and 1.1 % Broadly Northwestern European.
>>4523746Try again. Put that world-famous IQ to work.
>>4523791>>4523761>actually, i am very intelligent because my excuse is slightly differentmessianic Jews crack me up>atheist jew: its beautiful because its about how the body is just a body man. cool photography right?>messianic jew: DEMONIC! i pray to corpses to uhh reflect on gods grace instead. YOU ARE DESTROYING BEAUTY!>actual jew: wtf is wrong with these people
>>4523804>>4523761
/p/, I long for the 2000s. I miss the hangouts where someone always had a digital camera and was snapping away. I miss that sweet overexposed, sharpened, sometimes saturated look that naturally came from a digicam. Please post candid photos from the 2000s like picrel. The more unique the better.If you need help, go to Google Images and search (month) (year) and the word "flickr"ex - June 2005 flickr
>>4515018dude no one is lining up, they’ll get a digital copy in the millions MAYBE in the cities, New York or LA, but it will be some heavily publicised and controlled event.
>>4515021Don't under estimate GTA fans, these are the same lunatics that were charting the stars to try and figure out when the trailer would drop. All it needs it some special edition box with some physical garbage in it and they'll line up beyond an entire city block.
>>4501803I know that lady
>>4522143tell her i said hi
>>4522150She said to tell you that you're breaking the injunction
Remember when everyone would come to this place to post fun photos and critique each other? We can and WILL have fun photo generals here again and not just another gear threadYou do actually take photos with those expensive cameras you're buying, right anon?
>>4523580
Bridges EditionFormer: >>4517511
>>4522821Absolute kino. I feel I should have hopped into the car to drive to the sea, must have been amazing to see such an eclipse sunset over the sea's horizon.Made a new /rpt/ thread as the current one is over image limit>>4523061
>>4522368what even is this
>>4523081Pretentious as all get out and a shallow use of Christian iconography
>>4522561Better. And, although flares are often bad in a picture, this one works since it supports the fact it was night. Now, work on your picture telling a story.
