>open Lightroom>import picture>check lens corrections and remove chromatic aberration>auto adjustment>apply grading preset>denoise with AI (optional)>export imageWhy would you ever need more?
>shoot jpeg>never look at image ever againWhy would you ever need more
>shoot jpg >import into Apple Photos>auto>export
>shoot film>develop filmwowza, just like that, photos!
>go outside>don't take photos>remember the experience
>>4347190>open DARKTABLE>import pictures, creating an equal amount of bullshit files .xmp files in location folder>turn vibrancy and saturation up all the way (the image is now half as saturated as the jpeg version)>add more noise>add white borders>blowout highlights with an astia curve>bloom to maxWhy would you ever need more?
>open canon digital photo professional 4>import image>program crashes>try again>import image>lens correction>export imageIt just almost werks.
>>4347190same with darktable but no AI
>>4347204This. Consumers have spent ridiculous amounts of money on DSLRs/mirrorless/Capture One/Adobe, chasing the latest and greatest sensor or post-processing slop, only to slowly come to the realization that it was all a racket, and film was the way all along.>>4347258This is good and healthy to do sometimes too. Binoculars are great for this.>>4347190AI is cancer>>4347192Hi Ken Rockwell, love that Cheeto Mountain pic
Whats the best 'No AI' digital experience?Right now Im using a 90d and a cracked version of lightroom 10
>>4347379Shoot film and have the lab scan it for you.Other than that, when I used to shoot a Canon DSLR I just used DPP 4. It's free, I never had any reliability issues, and it had all the features I needed.
>>4347204>pay someone else to edit your photos
>>4347261Bro, your Sigmoid? Your demosaiac method? Your choice between "pink" and "LSD" highlight reconstruction?
>>4347261literally me
>find fujifilm film sim preset >take photo >dont use editing software because your photos look great sooc >put camera away and enjoy the eventwhy would you need more?
>arrive at a party>pull out my Fuji X100VI>get compliments on my cool looking camera>classic neg/acros green depending on the mood>shoot people (I'm euro, don't worry) while enjoying being with my friends>import them on my phone>photos look fantastic>pass my phone to show the pics>smiles on their faces Life's goodalso>send my good photos to a print shop>0,20€ per photo
>>4347458>look greatI love corpse skin because fuji is colorblindAlso, IRL, small cameras skeev people out. People actually LEFT THE ROOM and HID THEIR CHILDREN when I had my x100t. Now I use a DSLR and no one gives a fuck. Small camera means pedo to normies unless you are a woman. Men with small cameras are hiding that they’re up to no good. They must be super high resolution so they can make deepfakes and photoshops, you know
>>4347190>shoot jpeg>upload to instagram>instagram AI automatically crops the image to a square of it's choosing>pick flashy retro filter>max out sharpnessahhhh, that's better
>>4347379Just use DPP, it has all the features you need for RAW development and is better that the alternatives since you are on Canon.
>>4347470This is not true and you're larping, or extremely ugly, and dysgenic
>>4347482I’m a 8/10 with solid ebony skin and a jaw like gigachad. People who say “dysgenic” are ugly nazis with the facial profile of an earthworm. People just think tiny pro cameras are for creepshots.
>>4347479does it matter if im on nikon because nikon studio fucking sucks lol
>>4347483I, too, am a giga nigga 9000. People just don't respect a man with a woman's camera. What do fujislugs expect it to be, otherwise?>Your "EDC camera" is stylish? So is your miata, right? Your dick is small and aesthetic? You must be a real artist to carry a little purse, huh? Waifish retro chic wallflower, this guy must be a real artist.
>>4347483My black buddy looks great with Fuji colors. Get a better screen, nigga.
>>4347535Fuji colors totally eliminate any red or blue detail and leave black skin 100% brown, yes
>>4347542Check your settings bro, you might have fucked somewhere.
>>4347190>open lightroom>turn up vibrance/saturation>add grain>export
>>4347543Idk man no settings can make fuji look 1/2 as good as a canon or 1/4 as good as sigma foveon
Q: what can I do with jpg noise in b&w photo? I don't want to remove the noise, I just want to make it less obviously jpg-like. Pic not related.
>>4347379Just use Lightroom Classic. The AI stuff is entirely optional.
>>4347475>>instagram AI automatically crops the image to a square of it's choosingbased retard
>>4347689Lol imagine being that dumb
>>4347379adobe camera raweverything else is wrong and gay
>>4347581I'm actually not seeing any jpeg artifacts in that photo, normally you can see the macroblock boundaries but that seems to have been saved at pretty high quality, and in greyscale mode, which helps a lot
>>4347190>open C1>import pics>press CMD L for auto levels>export image[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON Z 6_2Camera SoftwareCapture One 23 MacintoshSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)40 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiExposure Time1/4000 secF-Numberf/2.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length40.00 mmImage Width3024Image Height2012RenderingCustomExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationHighSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4347192on my olympiss OM-5 I actually prefer the JPG output.on my niggon z6 I prefer C1 RAW developer[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeOM Digital SolutionsCamera ModelOM-5Camera SoftwareCapture One 23 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.8Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiExposure Time1/4000 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/3.5Exposure Bias-1 EVSubject Distance2.21 mMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length17.00 mmImage Width1944Image Height2592RenderingCustomExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4347204if you actually develop it yourself and then make prints with an enlarger: basedif you're just a retarded fag that develops the film (or lets a lab develop it) and scan the negatives you're a fucking imbecile and deserve to get beheaded by ISIS
>>434736910 rolls of film + development will set you back the amount of a mid-range mirrorless cam, faggot
>>4347483>nigger >mother's run out of the room with their children and think you're a pedo when you start taking pictures >no bro you don't understand I'm a ULTRA SEXY LOOKSMAXXXED BVLLYeah that fits pal
>>4347759$10x10 rolls + $15 for D76 + $10 for fixnice math you idiot
>>4347758you should get a job anonyou sound poor
>>4347759>10x ProImage 100 - 117€>10x C-41 lab develop - 39€dunno about that one anon
I use Faststone and check the shadow, light, saturation and contrast. Maybe correct the angle or the framing.
>>4347755I don't even touch the levels.The jump from Lightroom to C1 transformed my A7III pics from having fucked colors to being pretty much perfect from the raw developper.
>>4347854I touch the levels if I'm printingAll jpeg engines and raw profiles are calibrated to produce high contrast images that look amazing on backlit screens, but in print they're basically invisible.
>>4347758Developing C41 is the automotive oil change of photography. A total waste of your time unless you are going for something special.Negative scanning is based too. It's just a copy. >b-b-b-butFilm looks significantly different (better) than digital no matter what you do unless you "scan" it with a camera (ruins the colors).
>>4347190Lightroom auto looks way better than C1 from what I've seen. I turned off auto WB and exposure and it still makes the images far too bright. Haven't tried NX yet.
>>4347861C1s "magic auto" settings for anything with impact on color and brightness are so bad I honestly believe phaseone doesn't expect that anyone uses them, because really, what actual photographer would? They might as well remove them. There's already an auto setting, its on your camera.The leveling, AI cropping, and AI masking are spot on though.
>>4347727As I said, pic not related. Posts with a photo just get more attention.
>>4347859gonna lose your head, faggot
>>4347861>>4347863you two homos know, you can configure what auto does in C1, do you?
>>4347856Interesting, that might be why my prints look disappointing. How do you generally calibrate for printing? Do you send them to a print shop or homemade?
>>4347859>faggot doesn't change his own oil>faggot let's the lab do all the colour gradingwhat a faggot
im about ready to jump from C1 to LR again simply because I hate C1's bullshit and its getting to me.>fucks up import file handling>fucks up export file handling>fucks up cropping and navigating>fucks up updates which touch none of the existing problemssomeone teach these guys how to deploy incremental updates instead of requiring you log into a site and download/install an entirely new packagewas with LR from 2009-2019 before trying C1 and getting it free with my new SNOY (now paid pro), but i'm starting to look back realised there was so much less hassle with LR. as much as i hate adobe and their subscription fuckery, it just worked better..
>>4348431Werks on my machine (I never update)
