I havent been here in a whileWhat happened to the exif data?
4Chan website got its back door smashed in. Loads of stuff smashed up and data stolen.Site barely survived. Anything which might possibly be used to smuggle in code was removed. EXIF removed.
check the catalog next time dipshit newfag
>>4458058are you the same faggot that cries whenever a thread gets made and not posted in the generals?
Why, did you wanna send moop some catalogues?
>>44580494chan devs couldn't figure out how to get it working again after upgrading site security, so it's gone. It's also ended gearfagging in /rpt/ so it's not all bad news.
>>4458262>It's also ended gearfagging in /rpt/ so it's not all bad news.>50% of /p/ functionality gone>This is fine
I wondered this too, I thought something might have been happening weird on my end. Can't parse a string in 2025
>>4458264Gearfagging is retarded crap, all that matters is how the pictures turn out.
>>4458282Gearfagging is a different hobby than photography and most gearfags hate photography. What they love is memorizing statistics and arguing about cameras and lenses. This way they can feel superior to others without having to actually take any good photographs. It's highly autistic.
>>4458264>>>50% of /p/ functionality gone>>This is fineThis brings mirth and joy to my heart. Gearfaggots have chased away 80% of quality posters on this board. I have just recently noticed the drop in gearfag threads. The day of rope came so late. But still it made me happy. I'll be the happiest if they'll have just on contamination thread at all times.
>>4458284You can thank the jannies and the m43 guys for the m43 gear thread ban lmao.
>>4458285>You can thank the janniesI've has beef with them in the past but that's very based. >the m43 guys for the m43 gear thread ban lmao.KEK What happened?
>>4458264>>4458283you make it sound like its a bad thing but im just hearing the positives here
>>4458289Light trolling lead to lots of seething and spamming shit loads of weird and sqtddtot type m43 threads in the catalog. >>4458291Why do you say that?
>>4458299>50% of /p/ functionality gone>This is finegee i dunno what gave me the impression that you were being negative
>>4458301No to this >>4458283Why is having a bunch of soulless chart nerds perpetually arguing about minute details that will never make a difference in their god awful photography(if they ever posted any) be a good thing?
>>4458303Something I will miss about EXIF and the gearfag stuff is that I'd only recently started editing my EXIF data to show as different cameras and models just to fuck with them. Like posting images from a Sony camera but labeling it as Canon in the EXIF, then having Canonfags goon over how good it looks. I also did that with Nikon or used some really weird obscure camera models, it was some fun that I'm going to miss about gear threads.
>>4458305The husky guy did that a lot with m43. It was pretty funny. Gearfags and brandfags deserve it.
>>4458285MODS = GODS
>>4458255lmfao lost )))
>>4458305unfathomably based
>>4458391I found blank EXIF to be more effective at causing seething.
>>4458387>>4458317Very important photo contest. We need judges if you wouldn't mind placing a vote. Everyone is welcome to vote, but I was hoping the tripfriends could be the main judges to avoid any shenanigans.>>4458499
>>4458262>It's also ended gearfagging in /rpt/ so it's not all bad news.If you post shots from a Sigma and don't say anything, totally fine and no one caresIf you mention a shot used a Sigma, nothing but gearfagging about how awful Sigma is
>>4458282Having the exif data is useful for new photographers.
>>4458523This.Also helps to prove ownership. Losing EXIF was not a good thing, especially for the noobies. Now we just get lots of questions asking about how a shot was taken ON TOP OF gearfagging.
>>4458501Why would you not just start a thread for this.You start threads for competitions.
>>4458526True. It was kinda just a challenge for this one guy, but then I decided to open it up to anyone in fgt. Next time.
>>4458525Gearfag hereMostly im afraid of asking people what phone they used in case it was actually a $2300 fuji xh2s and starting seething i didnt plan for. I have to be in the mood. Now i just assume photos from xt5s and om1s are some newbie with a rebel/iphone.
>>4458525What are you talking about? Everyone here faked EXIF to win arguments all the time. It was a pointless feature that led to threads getting fucked.
>>4458526If I did make a contest thread would you mind judging? Having /p/'s tripfriends be the judges is the only way I can think of to have a "fair" vote.
>>4458523People can always just ask what settings someone usedHearing someone explain what and why they used a setting is 1000x more useful than seeing number values in a vacuum>>4458534Why would you be afraid? That's sad>>4458536EXIF was hardly ever faked and usually just by 1-2 of the dog people
>>4458309Except the snoy colors gave it away
>>4458555I've yet to see anyone seethe about Sony in /rpt/ since the EXIF removal, so I'm doubting that. Gearfags are at a loss with what to bitch about now and it's pure kino.
>>4458595People just assume shitty photos were shot on phones and low end gear nowAsk people what camera they think you used if you want your feelings hurt
>>4458537yeah why not. I'm used to the abuse.
>>4458283Most Based comment at /p/
>>4458283There's some value in gearfagging I guess. If your subject is not particularly interesting (your dog, the moon, etc), you can devote yourself to making the most high-definition photo you possibly can, which requires gear and technique and what not.
>>4458773Dogs have innate sovl so you dont need to gearfag to shoot your dog beyond wanting competent autofocus because dogs move around a lot. Just disregard panasonic, fuji, and olympus and you're golden. Which is good advice in general. Anything that is good for shooting dogs is also good for shooting women, since all the sexy photos need some movement involved unless you get a very talented model.Now if your subject is really boring, like google street view photography, cars, benches, street signs, building corners, etc you dont need to question film vs digital, and you dont need to care about resolution. There is no detail or color of note. There is nothing to care about. It's filler photography.
>>4458776trvthcompetent dog portrait on a 5dii with blazing fast super accurate canon autofocus >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> boring backs of heads on a loomix
>>4458049test
>>4458773I don't think owning nice gear is all it takes to be a gearfag. It's mostly your attitude about the gear and a little bit what you shoot with it.If you actually use a nice camera to its fullest potential or try your best to on something other than test charts what is the problem?/p/ gearfags and the anti gearfag gearfag counterparts have severe goldilocks syndrome and it plays exactly into my first post. If your camera is too nice/nicer than theirs you are bad because gearfag. If your camera is worse or not the right brand you are also bad and your pictures are all shit because of it. Only their camera is the acceptable choice. It's all autism all the way down.>>4458783>>4458776Based, but you do not need autofocus for dogtography. It just makes your life infinitely easier. I guess it depends what you're trying to accomplish really.
>>4458243Yep, that's him.
