Color grading is a totally different beast. For me color photography died with film. All of the contemporary photographers that I like shoot b&w

>>4357474
>What should be your goal when post processing/color grading?
To convey your artistic intent. Fiddling with histograms and mindlessly sharpening is the PP continuation of snapshitting
>>4357475
>For me color photography died with film.
Skill issue

>>4357503
>Skill issue
I agree

How I should learn color grading? I have seen a lot of photography so I can sniff good color at basic level but I have no idea how to do it in color grading.

>>4357474
wow, after looks like an eye cancer diagnosis

>>4357474
Essentially just not looking fake. HDR is about as fake as you can get, and that pic is the perfect example of fake since real life doesn't have perfect exposure.

>>4357474
move sliders and numbers until you think it looks good. save, close, re-open, and repeat
color grading is basically magic bullshit

>>4357556
Real life wouldn't be as overblown on the right but would also not be as dark on the left. Our eyes are pretty decent at making use of the smallest amount of light available.

>>4357556
The psychotic need to represent reality murdered photography as an art form.

Photographic truth is a lie.

>>4357576
Based

Realist photographers are the biggest manipulators because they present their lies as absolute truth

File: instagram 1.png (632 KB, 820x607)

632 KB PNG

>>4357576
>The psychotic need to represent reality murdered photography as an art form.
yeah, extremely edited photos and hyperreal shit is so much nicer

>>4357576
>>4357577
I never said super realistic or anything of the sort is the end all be all, only that super fake is shitty. Settle down.

File: DarkMountainsHeader.jpg (1.76 MB, 2000x1125)

1.76 MB JPG

>>4357579
>yeah, extremely edited photos and hyperreal shit is so much nicer
This, but unironically.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
Photographer	Sam Drake
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:27 14:49:26
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1125

>>4357586
Pictorialist chads won

File: Pictorialism-examples.jpg (163 KB, 2506x926)

163 KB JPG

>>4357579
You don't seem to be aware of what exactly ansel adams and his merry band of marxists killed and what was in the coffin winogrand nailed shut while laughing like a madman

We went from "photography is the evolution of painting and a new way for artists to express their creativity" to "all you do is stand in the right spot and press the button". It just so happens that the "photographic truth" side is convenient for government propaganda... a coincidence, unironically.

>>4357591
>"all you do is stand in the right spot and press the button".
What's wrong with this view?

>>4357609
It was a view for a big world made of small worlds, where most people never saw anything because it was all too far away, when cameras were the equivalent of thousands of dollars and film was more expensive adjusted for the economy than it is today. When every frame was precious and most people dare not waste them. When having the technical skill to take sharp, in focus shots everywhere was considered the sign of a practiced and wealthy man, or a newspaper employee. Someone like garry winogrand, grabbing a constant feed of reality, was new to most people. Paintings and drawings were what they were already used to.

It must have felt like being the first caveman to walk around with a torch, but now we have matches, and we're more impressed by someone starting a fire from scratch.

>>4357611
>>4357611
Eh, I love Pictorialism but I have nothing against "position and timing" view. If someone can show me something new then I have nothing to complain. Even pictorialists can fall into self parody, see boomers trying emulate the late 1800s landscape photography which is meaningless in 21st century. If I have to look for those aesthetics then why I would look at boomer shit rather than great pictorialists?

For me Eugene Atget nicely balanced the aesthetics of Pictorialism with heavy emphasis on position and time(in case of down town Paris). Way ahead of his time.

>>4357611
>>4357620
Also composition balance is in skill in itself. People might have seen those places but to balance a photo according to your style is a different beast

>>4357611
>over production and mass consumption leads to a decline in aesthetics and values
Yeah I'm sure winogrand managed to do this for all of photography by himself. Retard

Colorblind people should just do SOOC.

>>4357648
(((winogrand)))
it's a kike doing kike shit and you retard goys fall for it. street photography is kike photography. the white man's game is landscapes

File: 1727451648725628.jpg (215 KB, 1440x1440)

215 KB JPG

Why do boomers love HDR so much.

>>4357677
Because film struggled with representing the full color spectrum, so they were fed and bred on the concept that
>more color = more better
To people who have no artistic intuition, it's easier to follow a dumb doctrine than to make something nice.

>>4357677
To show off how much they spent on camera gear.

>>4357679
HDR predates digital. The original form was GND wanking.

>>4357474
imagine taking a landscape photo without any subject and literally no composition

>>4357809
>HDR predates digital
And?

File: IMG_2482.jpg (407 KB, 1080x659)

407 KB JPG

>>4357474
Photography is art. There’s no rule saying the photo straight out of your camera is the only valid result.

Generally, I would correct the exposure and white balance to make the image more neutral at first, then you can add your own twist, be it very minimal to retain the natural look or transform it completely with a certain colour palette and/or intricate masking.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	144 dpi
Vertical Resolution	144 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1080
Image Height	1080
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4357550
Unironically practice. I was in your shoes 2 years ago.
Best way is to look at pics you think are nice, try taking similar pics, look up how to get certain styles(moody greens, warm images/orange&teal etc), import your RAW files and try to replicate it.
Masking is your friend. It may seem highly complicated at first, but once you practice alot you will become a master in no time.

>>4357579
>select person
>face
>texture: -100
>clarity: -100

>>4357474
Whatever the fuck you want/can achieve

>>4357586
Any advice on how to shoot like this on 35mm film ?
>push film to orbit level
>scan & decrease clarity
>sepia tones
?!?

File: 1765_pepe_vomit.png (24 KB, 128x128)

24 KB PNG

>>4357579

>>4357591
>photography is the evolution of painting
lmfao
>stand in the right spot and press the button
always is, always has been

>>4357991
>hurr durr photography should be MY way!
Shoot a self portrait but with a gun you fucking faggot

>>4357809
high dynamic range has nothing to do with blown out contrasts.
It's just a feature that came out before real photo editing features were a thing
as you know from today.
Back in the days when you went +10 brightness the photo became useless.
and the so called HDR gave boomers the magic feeling of achieving great results.

>>4357474
Right looks like a video game

File: 1488474971433.jpg (1.5 MB, 1200x1535)

1.5 MB JPG

>>4357474
saturation

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1200
Image Height	1535
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:02 09:15:56
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1200
Image Height	1535

>>4357474
Well, for starters it should look a lot more like the before image.
Everything in the after is very wrong and very ugly.

>>4359777
photo realism is for people without souls

>>4357874
This ain't it chief, I can see right where you added the graduated filter

>>4357591
Ansel Adams edited his photos a lot. He wrote whole books on it.
What he didn't do was tasteless gimmicks like blurring the fuck out of everything and sloppily pasting fairies in. Most pictorialism looks like absolute shit.

shoot sober
edit drunk

File: dt_DSCF6622.jpg (1.65 MB, 2104x1553)

1.65 MB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	FinePix AX300
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.3
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:09:14 17:09:37
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/5.9
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/5.9
Brightness	5.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	29.50 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2104
Image Height	1553
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Off
Macro Mode	Off
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Program AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

I just hit Active D-Lighting a notch up in NX Studio if I don't like how it looks, then play with the exposure comp 0.10 at a time finally slightly bumping up or down the RGB curve.

I'm a fucking moron though but my aim is to make the colors pop a little more or eliminate any bad dark spots that obscure details I want the viewer to see

>>4357474
>Open gimp
>Use shadows-highlights tool
>Change sliders until the photo looks more accurate to the reality of what I saw with my eyes
>Nothing else
Accuracy for me.

File: 100_5915.jpg (2.86 MB, 4000x3000)

2.86 MB JPG

Here's an example. These pics were mostly taken with a snapshitter I never gave back from a job I had 5 years ago (Kodak Easyshare M550). I went to Europe last year and wasn't happy with these pics so never bothered, but once I got into Photography I learned I could edit my photos and make them look acceptable enough I'm willing to share them with friends and family. In this case I opened the .jpeg in NX Studio and went:

Brightness: +9
Contrast: +30
Saturation: +15
Highlight Protection: +20
Shadow Protection: +26
D-Lighting HS: +15

And bumped the RGB curve just a tad. Also did a mild straightening. This is the before.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
Camera Model	KODAK EASYSHARE M550 Digital Camera
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	480 dpi
Vertical Resolution	480 dpi
Image Created	2023:10:05 19:50:18
Exposure Time	1/800 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Auto, Red-Eye Reduce
Focal Length	5.05 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4000
Image Height	3000
Exposure Index	100
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: 100_5915_03.jpg (4.86 MB, 3918x2939)

4.86 MB JPG

>>4360376
I'm the OP of this post btw >>4360136

And to be fair this pic isnt too bad, but there's others where you cant make details out or the lens flare is ridiculous.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
Camera Model	KODAK EASYSHARE M550 Digital Camera
Camera Software	NX Studio 1.7 W
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:09:15 08:08:00
Exposure Time	1/800 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Auto, Red-Eye Reduce
Focal Length	5.05 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3918
Image Height	2939
Exposure Index	100
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: 100_5903.jpg (1.73 MB, 4000x3000)

1.73 MB JPG

>>4360376
Another one. This one I bumped the RGB Curve down cause it was overexposed and the lens flare was too much

Brightness: -2
Contrast: +4
Saturation: +10
Highlight Protection: +25
Shadow Protection: +40
D-Lighting HS: +17

The last 3 really get me the most out of my pics

This is Buckingham Palace IIRC

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
Camera Model	KODAK EASYSHARE M550 Digital Camera
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	480 dpi
Vertical Resolution	480 dpi
Image Created	2023:10:05 15:00:35
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	64
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	5.05 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4000
Image Height	3000
Exposure Index	64
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: 100_5903_01.jpg (3.52 MB, 3954x2966)

3.52 MB JPG

>>4360379
And the after. The before is straight off the memory card on a fairly entry level camera from 2010 that was dropped often

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
Camera Model	KODAK EASYSHARE M550 Digital Camera
Camera Software	NX Studio 1.7 W
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:09:15 08:09:43
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	64
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	5.05 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3954
Image Height	2966
Exposure Index	64
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4360381
Isn't editing digishit pics sort of missing the point of digishits?

>>4360387
no, its using what you have instead of consooming
>i need to buy a new camera for the jpeg converter and raw noise levels! -consoomer gearfags
>capture one to topaz my lumix gf1 and canon powershot everything now -smart people

>>4360428
I mean there's definitely some sharpness and AF differences, but I was doing it to fuck around. My camera phone at the time took better photos (OnePlus 7), but I also fell for the sovl meme and realized photography is more difficult than just point and shoot. Most of the pics I took inside the coliseum and museums I went to all fucking suck and honestly aren't worth keeping either. Hell even a lot of the landscape/street photos are out of focus

My Nikon Z50 mogs FUCK out of this as it should, but it made me appreciate point and shoots for the simplicity and ease of carry. It's hard to carry this thing nearly as easily as any of the options I mention below, 2x with the 50-250 lens on it. I'm keeping a eye out for a cheap high end point and shoot, probably a $3-400 Sony ZV1, RX100 III, or a Ricoh GR. Maybe a Lumix GX85 and stock lens. There IS value in something between a APSC/FF ILC and a camera phone, especially if your camera phone fucking sucks at photos or you want a telelens for any actual focal length

File: 1726402363053428.jpg (636 KB, 3166x2375)

636 KB JPG

>>4360379
>>4360381
whipped this up in a couple of minutes

File: dt_DSCF3279_02.jpg (2.79 MB, 2034x2712)

2.79 MB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	FinePix E900
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:09:21 08:59:00
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Brightness	5.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	28.80 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2034
Image Height	2712
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	On
Macro Mode	Off
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Auto
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

File: JUN23_09.jpg (728 KB, 3089x2059)

728 KB JPG

my favorite kind of compositional image are those early 20th century LF architecture shots. Usually nothing more than a tilt-lens shot of a brand new building but with enough detail to see lettings in the windows and a person's face on the street corner. I've tried to create my own versions but streetscapes are too busy and cluttered now for it to really work
This was in Winona MN, a rare time where there was almost no cars out

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8100
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3089
Image Height	2059
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2023:06:24 10:14:05
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3089
Image Height	2059

>>4360039
>tasteless gimmicks
>sharpness is not gimmick
oh my mkultra sweet summer child

>>4365292
if sharp lenses and high res sensors were free you wouldn’t be seething like this

>>4365309
shut up soulless gearfag bitch. it's great that zoomers are shitting on sharpness

>>4365314
your anger = proof i am right

you little commie. life is a class war to you. soulless. your most well thought out morals pertain to the virtues of spending money. you are a drone, a slave to a slip of paper. do you also refuse to listen to music played with instruments that go over the holy budget? shield your eyes from paintings made with too fine a brush that was $10 more than it “should” have been? so soulless. so programmed by the economists. your entire life is just pricetags. i feel sorry for you.

>>4365315
that wretched f/64 group is only remembered by boomers. and will die with boomers. sharpness=real photoz almost killed photography. no space for imagination or personal aesthetic strokes. pictorialists were sensitive young men with rich inner lives and beautiful souls. they created and envisioned different worlds where straight photography nasty boomer shoved their nasty totalitarian of sharpness down everyone's throat.

no doubt that the era of straight photography was a dark age.

>>4365317
thats a lot of seethe for having a skill issue

Fun pictorialism fact: it was just the gayer continuation of a doomed trend in painting that everyone already hated

If you cant arrange art in front of a camera thats on you. No one is forcing you to be ansel adams. Its just that most of your photographs look like mistakes and technology failures instead of intentional blur.

>>4365322
>>4365325
literally no one other than demented boomer vaguely remember those totalitarian freaks of sharpness

>>4365331
Your nonsensical seethe has turned you into an esl third worlder

>>4365337
you're a mkultra victim, worry about yourself

>>4357474
Photography is art, so your goal should be whatever you want.

>>4359759
And donations for his growing family.

>>4357576
okay guys, give me your best example of an artistic photo, from a grading perspective. and maybe your favorite from a 'natural' look perspective.

File: PICT7507.jpg (524 KB, 1728x1152)

524 KB JPG

My 50mm creates art photos when used at f1.4

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K-7
Camera Software	K-7 Ver 1.13
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:09:10 15:47:14
Exposure Time	1/90 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1728
Image Height	1152
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Soft
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4366246
Just looks like you applied a gaussian blur in photoshop.

>>4357474
>import into lightroom
>set white balance to auto
>set color to auto
>sync all
it's quite simple really

>>4366246
Is this the new Sony pancake lens?

>>4357677
it's the first and last photoshop trick they learned.

>>4360377
great results anon

File: DSCF1283.jpg (845 KB, 1920x1280)

845 KB JPG

My girlfriend is getting into professional photography again (she used to do photoshoots and weddings) and I have a background in Graphic Design, so I volunteered to do the photo editing.
I pirated Lightroom and found a couple of RAW's to practice on. It's pretty fun. I just toggle the things around and play with masks until I get a result I find aesthetically pleasing. I have no idea what I'm doing though.

I'll post my results. Here is a before

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-E3
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-E3 Ver1.30
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:18 10:53:28
Exposure Time	1/350 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	7.8 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	20.50 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1920
Image Height	1280
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

File: DSCF1283b.jpg (4.92 MB, 3000x2000)

4.92 MB JPG

>>4367524
After (downsized for 5mb size limit, why does a photography board have such a low limit?)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-E3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:10:01 18:41:53
Exposure Time	1/350 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	7.8 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	20.50 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3000
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: IMG_2428.jpg (1.21 MB, 5760x3840)

1.21 MB JPG

Before

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	EOS 5D Mark III
Camera Software	dcraw v9.28
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2016:06:18 14:27:37
Exposure Time	61/62500 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
ISO Speed Rating	100
Focal Length	24.00 mm

File: IMG_2428-1.jpg (2.17 MB, 3892x2120)

2.17 MB JPG

>>4367534
After

any tips welcome

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.5 (Windows)
Photographer	Boketto
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:10:01 13:06:38
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4367532
nice worms

>>4360376
>>4360377
>>4360379
>>4360381
>>4360428
>>4360617
You are one of the stupidest people alive. They look like dogshit. Kill yourself.

>>4367524
>>4367532
What the fuck is wrong with you people

>>4367541
Yeah I agree, they were taken with a camera that was dropped probably a dozen times off several roofs and cost $150 in 2011 (I paid $0 because I stole it from my old job).

I'm happy with the pictures and how they came out because prior to any editing they were even worse. I'll stay and keep posting because it makes you upset.

>>4367524
>>4367532
Oh no, you lifted shadows

Fujislugs here hate shadow lifts. They only crush shadows. You also photographed the front of the building instead of the corner. You will never fit in with these talentless NGMIs.
>But it looks more like real life!
Yeah well when you say that you remind them of their dad. They literally rage at sharpness and being able to see things because their parents liked it that way - and their parents didn't like it when they came out as gay furries.

>>4367524
>>4367532
>>4367570
The tower is too bright in the edit, it throws off the nascent composition.

>>4367570
>>4367571
I lold

File: PICT7214.jpg (490 KB, 1728x1152)

490 KB JPG

>>4367488
>>4366257
It's the Super Tak 50

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K-7
Camera Software	K-7 Ver 1.13
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:08:20 22:18:47
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	560
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1728
Image Height	1152
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Soft
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>4367524
>>4367532
Is this a joke? It has to be a joke.

>>4368088
>Hi, I'm a noob and here is my first try
>IS THIS A JOKE WOW ITS SO BAD
O-ok, thanks

>>4368088
why are you so fucking negative?

>>4368143
because slide film is too expensive you insensitive fuck. dont be so classist.

>(downsized for 5mb size limit, why does a photography board have such a low limit?)
well done

File: DSCF1283-1-2.jpg (4.52 MB, 6000x4000)

4.52 MB JPG

>>4367571
I tried to bring out the nascent composition

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-E3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.5 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:10:03 02:37:34
Exposure Time	1/350 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	7.8 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	20.50 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4357474
>What should be your goal when post processing/color grading?
crush the blacks

>>4368369
that's racist

>>4368285
acceptable edit for a photo that really can't be rescued. the lighting just kills it. maybe you could try a b&w conversion but I don't think that will fly, either.
the subject is interesting though. I would re-visit in the morning/evening and try a different POV.
points for recognizing an interesting subject
points for taking a photo
points for posting it here
you're gonna make it, anon

>>4367482
no its actually
>import, set so it uses camera matching profile
>select all, turn on auto-sync
>auto

>>4368285
you should've changed the exif to OM-5

>>4357875
>warm images/orange&teal etc
Please do not reproduce.

>>4367536
get closer faggot

>>4367536
the colors look so much nicer in the edited image, but really you are too far away and your subject is reduced to a spec, the temptation is completely understandable to get some nice framing with the pulley elevator things whatever they are but the sacrifice here was too much, and even IF the couple was closer to them the pillars are unfortunately plastered with ugly mundane signs which are the most un-special thing to include with this special moment, signs and cars and people staring at cellphones are all "visual trash" that I never want to see in a photograph

>>4367536
>environmental portraits: did you forget the environment is not the subject?

File: dt_CRW_0708.jpg (1.24 MB, 1500x2000)

1.24 MB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon DIGITAL IXUS 960 IS
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.9
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:10:12 09:41:14
Exposure Time	1/64 sec
F-Number	f/2.9
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	116
Lens Aperture	f/2.9
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Subject Distance	0.87 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	7.70 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	2000

File: dt_CRW_0708_01.jpg (1.08 MB, 1461x1971)

1.08 MB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon DIGITAL IXUS 960 IS
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.9
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:10:12 09:43:43
Exposure Time	1/64 sec
F-Number	f/2.9
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	116
Lens Aperture	f/2.9
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Subject Distance	0.87 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	7.70 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1461
Image Height	1971

>>4372560
>>4372560
>>4372560
>>4372560

>>4367536
imagine you just got married and wanted to see some photos of the amazing moment on the pier. then the photographer delivers a blue piss-stained image with no smoking signs bigger than your wifes head

File: fuckedupweddingphoto_v1.jpg (456 KB, 1430x2145)

456 KB JPG

>>4372774
Even just cropping out the shit on the sides improves it somewhat. Maybe leave the 16mm prime at home next time. Like fuck me, shot at 100mm even would have been a 'yuge improvement

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	digiKam-8.4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1430
Image Height	2145
Image Width	1430
Image Height	2145

>>4367541
t. nophoto

>>4372780
>>4372774
>>4368692
>>4368688
>>4368435
Perhaps I should make this clearer than I did in the OP: I did not take these pictures. I found random RAW's on the internet, purposefully with flaws, so I could try to make them better through editing. For editing practice.

>>4372774
Most wedding photos I've ever seen are straight up bad. Whenever someone posts them on social media I am shocked by what wedding "photographers" are getting away with. It's actually insane

>>4357677
Eyes lose the ability to see color over time, so over-saturated stuff becomes the new normal

>>4373219
Fair. If I spent longer than 60 seconds on it I would probably have done a bit more NR and resized it among a couple others.