Just take photos of AI slop and you too can become a master photographer.
"oh but fe2fucker i can see the pixels wawawawaaaa this doesnt prove anythingggg"i took these with a cheap copy stand and used my piece of shit oneplus android phone, imagine what one could do with a 4k or 8k screen.
so anyway i totally went to the scottish highlands and snapped this shit
i totally went to yellowstone too
i totally saw some dude throw a massive fucking boulder directly in the middle of a glass bridge and witnessed hundreds of people die
then i totally saw a cute monkey just chilling there
oh and i TOTALLY took this photo of a dude on a horse, very cool dude he was so happy to see mehere are the raw files for whatever reasonhave funhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1c4XjHjsAO2Ei7xClXghWWDSMLGn90vv6/view?usp=sharing
>>4473122He's back with even more powerful engagement bait than ever! Where's poopcam v2, cunt?
>>4473129im not the one who baits engagement, the fucking indians posting ads are.also the poopcam is still kicking, i'll post another thread sometime when i took it with me on my vacation in new york earlier this year
Film does not prove reality but it creates it. Those things now exist because you captured them.
They used film on the moon as well (allegedly).Yes, it can be faked as well, but I do see where those who have consumed social media for over a decade and now wants something more "real" are coming from.
>>4473130LOL. You should make some darkroom prints of these. It's not really that far off from how grandpa did interpositive film duplication to take 35mm film and put it on 8x10 film for contact printing.Also good to hear about poopcam.
why tho
>>4473131>Film does not prove reality but it creates it. Those things now exist because you captured them.
>>4473122makes sense.eventually the viewer will be replaced by AI, as well.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OHQRo3Uz_VQ&pp=0gcJCfwJAYcqIYzv
35mm film is scannable up to 400mp and still show details that are 1px wide, so yes, you can see the pixels. Unless you have coherent AI images that are larger than 400mp this doesn't really work. Especially with how common camera gear that CAN scan up to and beyond that (just use a macro lens that goes over 1:1 if it's just an AI check)>inb4 the redditor that tried that said it wasn't REALLY 400mp!Because it isn't sharp. Reddit pixel peepers have their own idea of resolution, and that is max edge contrast snoysharpness, not actual, yknow, detail. 1px wide details = yes, it's really 400mp. He provided an invaluable service but alas a redditor is still a redditor.These blurry phone scans dont pass muster. It's a cool art project but not a proof of concept. Also, it still looks like AI.Sorry you tried to blackpill yourself but blackpilling has only ever worked on retards for a reason
>>4473141Does that mean that an 8x10 negative would theoretically be possible of capturing 24000 MP worth of information? I've gotten roughly 500 MP resolution off a shitty flatbed scanner from 8x10 using foma100.
>>4473141"i can disprove your point with X gear"yeah and i can counter your argument with Y gear, whats your point gearfag?get pregnant
>>4473144You got btfo dude. Cool attempt at art. But any point you wanted to make doesnt exist. >ggghuys i want gear not to matter okgear will always matter, and it will matter so much people will pay $2k for a bronica s2a and $500 for a 3d printed folder with one shutter speed, one aperture, and an ND filter set to stay ahead of AI
>>4473146The fact my work sucked an opinion and a response out of you and many others is enough proof that this is great art.
Why is OP so fucking gay?
>>4473149Sadly: That’s not the definition of art. Art is beauty and communication. Not anything a person does that gets a reaction. What you speak of is a pseuding contest for people who are not intelligent to feel thoughtful through. Like debating secular ethics, evolutionary psychology, and internally consistent economic philosophy.
>>4473151word salad
>>4473152intimidated esl
>>4473122Congratulations from /p/ on the unoriginal demonstration! Since it seems you're new here, you seem to have made a bit of a mistake in your posts. Luckily, the denizens of /p/ are always willing to help you clear this problem right up! You appear to have used a name when posting, but your identity has nothing at all to do with the conversation! Whoops! You should always remember to stop using your name when the thread it was used for is gone, unless another one is started! Posting with a name when it isn't necessary is poor form. You should always try to post anonymously, unless your identity is absolutely vital to the post that you're making! Now, there's no need to thank me - I'm just doing my bit to help you get used to the anonymous imageboard culture!
> /p is so far gone with genuine schizophrenic gearfaggotry that it no longer responds to trolling.Impressive.
>>4473122wtf anon you just cracked the Content Authenticity Initiative wtf just take a photo of a photo and your camera says it's real wtf
>taking a photo of a screen filled with AI means film doesn't capture realitythe film shows what the camera was looking at with complete accuracy, no interpolation, no enhancements. no computer processed the image to try and enhance what it thought was a face. no algorithm decided this was a daytime photo and corrected white balance and saturation. no software scanned the image to find if there was hidden digital information like a QR code. No sensor determined what color to set a pixel based on other pixels nearby. The shutter opened, silver halide reduced to silver, and the latent image formed. the film captured reality as the camera saw it. the fact that you pointed the camera at something unreal doesn't change that.
>>4473283Obviously the point is that newspapers will be publishing "signed" "photos" and saying, "look, it's signed Mr. Shekelstein, this means it's true".
What is this meltdown cope thread. Why waste a roll of film on taking photos of your monitor
I for one am happy Fe2 is backThought he had fucked off for goodWelcome back lad
>>4473304>I for one am happy Fe2 is backsameone of the few good board contributors
>>4473122Based, I've been saying this for years. >people unironically believe the Zapruder film couldn't be faked>>4473133Another good example
>>4473141OP btfo>f-film doesnt capture reality because muh out of focus scans of out of focus scans>35mm = 400mp+>NOOOOO! GEAR SALAD! THE ENGAGEMENT HAS BEEN BAITED!
>>4473141that is fake af, foolji gfx dont really prodooce 400mp, plus a 100% crop of a 400mp image would be a tiny tiny area, much much smaller than thathttps://www.reddit.com/r/analog/comments/18if5vm/trying_400_megapixels_scans_on_several_film/PD: i like film, but at lets say 160lp/mm youd get 87mp at most
Fantastic. Please post negatives of NFTs and get them enlarged in your next thread.
>>4473391great idea. i could even shoot them on slide film so they can be projected and viewed against a light
