Keep slathering lipstick on that pig.

File: unnamed.png (408 KB, 512x512)

408 KB PNG

shot with my cell phone

>>4379454
Show me a more compelling photo that you’ve taken on your full frame camera please

>>4379453
those purple and green splotches are why I sold my MFT camera lol
Ridiculous that I don't get those on a 20 year old dslr (though it has banding if you push the shadows)

If I were a mod so many people would get banned from this board, kek. Probably even me.

File: 1718078358390248.jpg (3.31 MB, 1600x1600)

3.31 MB JPG

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 22.5 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1600
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	2024:06:25 00:41:19
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1600

>>4379463
I love his colors, this would make a great print

It's a lot easier to take a photograph with a smartphone. If OP can't even manage that, imagine how bad he'd be with literally any camera.

>>4379466

I sure love using something that makes taking a photo more difficult than it needs to be.
Canon Nikon and Sony need a reckoning day, their refusal to add any smartphones features even in 2024 is appalling.

>>4379467
>i'm a casual consumer not a photographer
Yes, we know. Wrong board, son.

File: Screenshot from 2024-10-3(...).png (796 KB, 1089x547)

796 KB PNG

>>4379453
Nice picture OP. Gearfags will zoom to 100% and say it's an AI render not a photograph but they're just jealous about your talent.

>>4379470

Have fun taking 20 times longer to get some video for your Insta reel.

/p/ is dead, it's just snapshitters and weak trolls now. No wonder it isn't moderated in the slightest anymore, it's a rotting carcass.

>>4379475
then leave, don't let the door hit you on the way out!

>>4379476
>boomer talk
ESL? I know you guys are behind the times like that.

File: IMG_2122.jpg (3.6 MB, 8064x6048)

3.6 MB JPG

>>4379472
>>4379472
The fact you think my photo is AI is a compliment I can upload the raw photo as proof if you like it’s taken in the camera app for iPhone and edited in Lightroom that’s it.

Subject > Lightning > Framing > Camera is the point of this threat hate Full Frame retard shills.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 15 Pro Max
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 10.0.1 (iOS)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:10:30 01:32:58
Exposure Time	1/29000 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Brightness	12.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	6.86 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	8064
Image Height	6048
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4379475

You might prefer reddit where you can read 500 posts about somebody who just brought a camera and is trying to start a business and is asking how to use the camera as they just started photography yesterday.
Or maybe the reddit film boards where it’s 1000 posts of check out this old camera I brought for cheap.
No fun allowed,just the same few dry posts over and over for all eternity.

>>4379479
>subject
>lighting
>framing

Yes, photography. Your hangups over sensors is really weird though, it's as if you're poor.

>>4379481
>plebbit lives in his head rent free
Never been there, man. I wouldn't know.

>>4379484

Know your enemy

>>4379483
I shoot a little bit of everything but since I’ve been on p the FF shills have been unbearable lol.

My current body list is
X100S
XT1
XPRO 2
XH2S
GFX50r
Leica M6
Canon 5D classic
Canon 6D i
Sony FX3
(Paid to use this stuff not an autistic collector)

File: k rock.jpg (331 KB, 1600x1600)

331 KB JPG

>>4379465
>he needs more

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 22.5 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1600
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	2024:08:26 01:39:12
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1600

>>4379492
lmfao saved

File: DSC_7818.jpg (809 KB, 1500x1200)

809 KB JPG

>>4379453
idk you tell me

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D700
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	794
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2022:11:21 21:02:37
Exposure Time	1/25 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	28.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1200
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4379492

Now that’s a comfy autumn colour palette, good job sampling nice tones. Saved.

>>4379481
I feel like this is the internet in general. Everything is overused and we have seen and read it all already.

>>4379513
>npc things

>>4379510
could have just said no

>>4379492
>Least post-processed digishit

>>4379520
I feel like compelling is entirely subjective.
I think my photo is more compelling because I think its cooler, but again that is entirely my subjective opinion.

>>4379453
I viewed this thread on my phone initally and went "huh, that image is pretty decent, what the fuck?" Then the second I opened it on my PC at a size larger than 6" it immediately looked like splotchy dog shit. So basically, if it's not viewed on a phone or printed at a measly 6x4, your phone pics are going to get mogged even by a 1" p&s or god forbid a MFT with a decent lens.

Now that's not to say I can't appreciate a phone camera, but when people say "the one you have with you", they obviously don't mean this lmao.

>>4379559

why is there always somebody who replies without reading the comments in the thread?

You might want to get your eyes checked if you viewed this on your pc and didnt notice anything unusual about it.

>>4379569
>complains about someone not reading the thread
>doesn't read the post he's replying to
Yeah uh buddy, I said as soon as I opened it on my PC it looked like shit.

>>4379453
Holy shit that is smudgy, even on my small screen. Did you do the noise reduction and sharpening or was that already baked in?

>>4379576
>>4379582

This is why ai is going to kill photography, so many people cannot identify blatant ai generated images.

>>4379585
AI or just AI over sharpening, same difference, people will look at the quality and say "yuck".

>>4379585
no, it's that terrible phone photos look like oil paintings, which also happen to look the way AI does now.

>>4379585
Alright fuck me, I figured saying it looked like shit would be enough, but yes, it's obviously generated. Happy? Similar to how you shouldn't give a fuck about what camera is used, you shouldn't really care if it's generated if it looks like ass.

>>4379585
>This is why ai is going to kill photography
This doesn't even make sense as an idea. Do you mean for professional work? Sure, but who cares? 98% of all professional photos aren't worth looking at anyway

File: P1380876.jpg (2.53 MB, 1351x1800)

2.53 MB JPG

>>4379559
>or god forbid a MFT with a decent lens

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-GX8
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	18 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:10:23 22:12:02
Exposure Time	10 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Tungsten
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	9.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1351
Image Height	1800
Exposure Mode	Manual
Image Quality	Unknown
White Balance	Halogen
Focus Mode	Manual
Spot Mode	Unknown
Image Stabilizer	Off
Macro Mode	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Audio	No
Flash Bias	0.00 EV

>>4379601

If i am a landscape photographer and nobody can even tell if i took the photo or made it with AI, its way easier to just make AI images.
If I am a brand and nobody can tell, its easier to use AI photos
etc etc etc

Sure somebody will still go out and take photos with a camera, just it will become infinitely harder than it already is to get anybody to look at it.
I can generate 100 images of corners of buildings in the time it takes you to go out and take one. Then with a bit more programming I can just get the AI to make a caption and setup and automated script to upload an image a day.
Hell the whole thing could be automated to where I made a system that posts 2 photos per day for 5 years straight and I never even looked at a single one or did anything.
That is the future of instagram by the way, in fact i would say tons of people are already doing this.

>>4379607
AI landscape is absolutely moronic
landscape photography is supposed to make you want to visit the place, if it doesn't exist, the image is worthless

>>4379607
>If i am a landscape photographer and nobody can even tell if i took the photo or made it with AI, its way easier to just make AI images

The answer is obvious; you don't enjoy photography and you should probably stop.

>>4379609

Or I cannot afford 5 trips per year to amazing landscape locations so I can just do an AI of them to build my following, while slipping in a few shots I took here and there.

Anybody not using AI will be fighting so hard to compete with that. I can AI antartic trips I never went on, nobody knows exactly how every iceberg looks etc. Then I can AI a trip to africa, as if anybody will know if a tree or hill is in the wrong place.

>>4379608

You wont know, my antartic photos from a trip I never took to antartica will fool you.

>>4379613
>how am I supposed to build a following without taking expensive trips?
You don't enjoy photography and you should probably stop.

>>4379607
Spiritually Jewish post my man.

>>4379453
Why does it look so blotchy like you ran it through a photoshop Stylize filter?

>>4379479
>Lightning

>>4379615

I am an artist, I will use the best tool to get my vision across.

File: tumblr_6f7d93f6c1c11ad819(...).jpg (38 KB, 540x541)

38 KB JPG

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4379585
I literally offered to post the raw image. It’s taken in a camera app and edited in Lightroom that’s it.

>>4379490
no fotos?

>>4379679
Still in the remote location I took the first photo in, island just north of Skye in Scotland.

>>4379582
iOS “Pro Raw” is not a true raw format it’s unfortunately baking in lots of stuff if I want to use night mode to get the 30 second exposure.

>>4379585
Perhaps I misunderstood you do you mean that the iPhone camera app is using AI or do you think I’ve used a generative image? Because it is simply a photo I took with my phones default camera app.

>>4379537
>local fart-sniffer enjoys huffing own fumes
You don't say

>>4379604
the purple/green noise splotches are unbearable
once you see you cannot unsee

>>4379682
Sorry for having an opinion when asked for one I guess?

>>4379453
Sky looks like a fuck ton of color noise but horribly denoised

>>4379683
Man, he's living ren't free inside of your head

>>4381112
It's a snapshit + slider rape from a complete retard.

>>4379686
seems you are unable to understand the fine nuances of the English language

>>4381301
>Unhelpful reply
Be the change you want to see and explain it to me if you think I badly understood the premise of the question :A)

>>4379479
> The fact you think my photo is AI is a compliment
????no

> I can upload the raw photo
was 1 week enough to convert a jpg image to .raw? or do you need more time?

> Subject > Lightning
your mom > lightning

>>4381319
This isn’t a board for learning English, ESL, may I direct you to Duolingo/Rosetta Stone

>>4379492
kek, 10/10

>>4379453
> I took on my phone
> photo
You mean an approximated image based on signal from 3 colors sensor that was processed with software written by chinks and pajeets

>>4381531
>approximated image based on signal from 3 colors sensor that was processed with software written by chinks and pajeets

so only film pics irl are real pics ?

>>4381537
yes, even though those are b&w they are real representation of absorbed photons: silver gelatine, colodion wet plate or daguerreotypes, color photography is an interpretation. Portra and gold look different, foogi and snoy color 'science' is different.

File: 2024-11-04T14-44-46-Z8N_4440.jpg (2.59 MB, 6192x4128)

2.59 MB JPG

>>4379453

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON Z 8
Camera Software	Capture One Macintosh
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	330 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/6.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1400
Lens Aperture	f/6.0
Exposure Bias	1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	330.00 mm
Image Width	6192
Image Height	4128
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4381539
Only if you dont develop the latent image. As soon as you develop and grow the silver crystals you're altering the original image.

Even worse if you do enlargement because now you're making a derivative of the original image.

File: 741181_10151347132929814_(...).jpg (265 KB, 688x1500)

265 KB JPG

This photo was taken with a full frame digital camera.

File: hmmm.jpg (169 KB, 688x618)

169 KB JPG

>>4384554
Why does it look layered with erase tool used around the house? Also what's with the bar on the right side? Stars look like they were shot with a fairly long focal length too, some of them are huge.

Not shitting on it, just curious.

>>4384554
My photo is better take both and ask a few of your friends without telling them who is who just what image they think is better.

>>4384558
imagine being this mentally ill to look at some photo at 4000% magnification

>>4384562
It's literally 100% size as opened in my browser. I didn't even need to pixel-peep; the reason I lifted the shadows is because the stars at the bottom are unnaturally dark and fade into nothing. I've never seen this myself, and it doesn't look like thin clouds or fog since they get illuminated by the stars.

>>4384559
Your photo looks like shit op
>>4384562
>688 wide
It isn't even resized, how small is your poverty phone?

>>4384558
Well, I suppose there's a few things. One - this was edited for print. As you're cranking the exposure - you'll see quite a few artifacts from editing that just weren't relevant to fix. I don't know what bar you refer to on the right side?

Second - I suppose it should be apparent this had to be bracketed, based on the detail in the cabin, and the dark sky. Could not have been captured with a single frame with any film or sensor I know of. What might not be apparent is the amount of light pollution behind and around the cabin. I suppose, in post, I could have simply masked out the foreground and moved it up but it was a nice night and I was happy to have everything in the frame just as it was that night.

I don't think some of the larger orbs are stars. There were some satellites or aircraft in the frame and I think I needed to stack 3-5 exposures to get this without getting that motion blur from the planet spinning around. I believe it was taken at 180mm.

>>4384559
Sure. I can certainly imagine my friends might like yours much better.

File: IMG_2973.jpg (640 KB, 1200x1800)

640 KB JPG

So that's phone, MFT and full frame sorted... Fine, I'll post an aps-c one. Anyone want to contribute their MF/LF version of the clichéd stargazing shot?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: IMG_0855-half-dome-last-light.jpg (1.52 MB, 2400x1793)

1.52 MB JPG

also...

>>4384660
gtfo with those muted, dull colors
>>4379463
>>4379492

File: DSC00226-Edit.jpg (4.09 MB, 6000x4000)

4.09 MB JPG

>>4379453
Yes.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7M4
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.4 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	35 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:10:09 13:59:12
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	7.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4379481
Never been on reddit but it sounds like you just described /p/. Well, except for the thousands of posts part.

compelling ≠ iq

>>4389400
Ffs retard, why necro this ass-tier thread