Autumn editionPrevious thread >>4479021
>>4482174>>4482176cute
>>4482201
>>4482182This one is good>>4482166Kill yourself
Typical day here from October to December.
From yesterday. >>4482182I like this one.
>>4482255
>>4482256
>>4482254Rhein III
>>4482160
>>4482174>>4482176>>4482255>>4482201>>4482202good
>>4482278ditt rövhål smakar jordgubb din hud smakar mjölk och vanilj ditt bajs smakar chokladmousse dina fisar luktar marabou schweizernöt din andedräkt luktar bakteriefyllt och starkt, lite som en dyr ost vill slita av dig strumporna och gräva ner ansiktet i dina fuktiga och möra fotsulor jag vill dofta på din vidriga andedräkt dina pruttar är guld värd din blöja läcker vill trycka ner min hand i din hals och få dig att spy och bada i din pojkbögspya och dricka det, dricka ditt illaluktande bögsaliv, smeka din bystiga fettokropp, suga på dina saftiga bleka knottriga bögbröst pussa dig på pannan och munnen och lukta på ditt hår vill bara knulla dig sötis breva bild på din kropp
I’m starting to get into nature photography
>>4482360What the hell is this montage
>>4482362Montage?
>>4482362From a museum, obviously.
>>4482269These people refusing to grow up is the most cringe thing on the planet
>>4482255Absolute kino
>>4482435what
>>4482448That’s cool anon, how did you get this lighting effect? Did you use flash inside a lit department store?
>>4482480It was the natural lighting at the time actually. I was in a closed shopping mall and the fluorescent lights in the store go into a dim mode but the spotlights above the mannequins stayed at their regular brightness.
I edited these all in hdr and exported as avif initially, too bad this site is stuck in the 2010s.
>>4482483
>>4482484
>>4482522Hahahaha is this nigga falling?>>4482572Sweet!
>>4482589Thanks, here’s another.
>>4482160old ass lens attached to a dead 1920s camera in an antique shop, adapter arrived, mounted it up, & hot off the sensor w 0 adjustments. Expected a lot worse. Strangely, I don't hate it.
>>4482360>>4482383Go at it, friend. You've got a keen eye for composition. Hopefuly you've got 2 grams of patience as well.Whats your setup? Anyhow, keep at it.
>get first roll back from recent camera purchase>everything is overexposed
>>4482624I dont know much about film, but you're sure better of being patient.
>colours>colours, Japan
I had an incredible view that I wasted because I didn't know about diffraction. Still looks good if you squint, though
>>4482627It's definitely an exercise in patience. It sucks that you don't get the instant feedback of knowing whether a shot it good or bad though. My friend has suggested I get a DSLR to practice on so I don't burn up a ton of film.
>>4482666It’s not so bad. Softness is a worthwhile choice for rendering an image. Sharpness is is only better if you need to display more fine detail.
>>4482709overexposed skyterrible foliage at the edges of the frameall round an ugly picture>>4482710at least the sky isn't blown outbut the foreground foliage is not providing the pleasing framing effect you are hoping for it looks ugly, cut it out>>4482711blown out clouds againtoo vibrant for a cloudy daybut the composition shows some thoughtmaybe you're not completely retarded
>>4482721Blown highlights are fine, that shit only matters if you like HDR slop. But in saying that, his first picture is painfully overexposed with just about every slightly white/grey surface being clipped.
>>4482604looks like a painting
Autumn Batch
>>4482728
>>4482729
>>4482730
>>4482731
>>4482732
>>4482733
>>4482734
>>4482735not recent but recently graded
>>4482693It's always better to capture a sharp image, you can soften it in pp but not really sharpen it>>4482735Hi Ken
>>4482636>Ken Rockwell >:-(>Kenno Rokureru :-D>>4482665Is this forest or forest, Japan?Beautiful, moody yet elegant if the latter.Otherwise ugly and boring.
>>4482617Ricoh GR III
>>4482767I liked that little guy. Fun camera Done a small walk in the neighborhood
>>4482789Why the fuck has it been rotated by 90°? I didn't do nothing!
Will have to go back at some point to get a better shot but saw this dude today
>>4482792that's a nice american halloween decoration
I'm out. Nothing here to care about...
Kino presented itself to me this morning.
>>4482435jesse what the fuck are you talking about
>>4482916noice
>>4483245
New here. I mostly shoot buildings.Tell me how i ruined these.
>>4483323Taken in my hometown.
>>4482723>Blown highlights are fine.No, they’re not. >>4483323>>4483325>Tell me how I ruined these.You lifted the black point too high and now it looks like there’s a thin layer of dark grey smoke on everything.
>>4483370This, both photos look gray and flat. Reminds me of these overused instagram-like filters
>>4483377>5568x4176 pixels>no detailbehold the power of 24mp phone cameras
>>4483378A GoPro actually. I’d rather have used my a6400/35gm, but I ran out of space on the memory card after a long day of shooting I feel grateful to have still captured this cool moment of my trip.
if only you faggots stopped editing beyond adjusting ISO and croppingyou don't know what the hell you're doing in lightroom
>>4482764Love this>>4482728v cool
>>4483377>>4483384Your trip to hell? Why are there dildos around this shrine?
>>4483378>>4483384so far it seems to be truely a goprohttps://www.reddit.com/r/gopro/comments/ptfr1l/gopro_effective_resolution_check_my_math/i never cared about gopros but dindoo know they also did shit like phones, pack a zillion mps and only a 2-5mp of actual resolution, its like painting a wall sized paper with a broom
>>4483429Again, I’m grateful to have been able to capture this moment, so I’m not going to whine about the resolution of an action camera. I’d imagine the original is probably higher quality, as well. 5mp limit here after all. Maybe I’m an optimist.
>>4483429This reminds me of aps-c megapixels not really being real megapixels24mp aps-c is really just 4k unless buying a very, very good lens for itSmall cameras need very good glass and a plastic pancake lens isnt cutting it for large images
>>4483473>24mp aps-c is really just 4kstaring_cat.jpg
>>4483473That's retarded. You're retarded. Pixel pitch matters a lot and on APS-C 24MP is still a noticably larger pixel size versus something like a poverty-tier Go Pro. You get partial credit because lens optics matters a huge amout and total aperture size / iris opening will determine how nice your photo looks.
Can we just take a moment to be grateful the tech exists? I just returned from snorkeling and I got some wonderful pics which will last a lifetime. Poverty tier? You’re a cocksucker who doesn’t know what poverty is.Why tf are we arguing about optics instead of enjoying this whack ass temple scene?What ever happened to gear doesn’t matter?Perhaps instead of being a nofoto pixel peeping gear fag, you could produce some interesting content?
>>4483533lol get triggered
>>4483534lol use faggoty buzzwords.It’s ok to feel and express frustration at this useless board.
>>4483533>triggered by the word poverty>spergs out with a paragraph of reddit spacinglol. lmao even.
>>>/p/GEAR/
>>4483533as a nophoto pixel peeping peckerpopping petaputafag, I just read this entire thread skimming through all your guys' pictures as thumbnails bc that's good enough for me.Thats how little photographs are worth.
>>4482789It’s a very fun camera
>>4483535You seem upset you are not getting the reaction you wanted from us. It’s a shit photo, by the way. If I was you I’d stop taking pictures altogether, sell all my gear and never look back, maybe take up hobby writing instead. You seem to enjoy that.
Is it still a phone pic if my phone takes raws and has a leica camera
Having grain on phone pics is such a luxury I love my chinese phone
>>4483610Nice halation on the lights too
>>4483608Based subway enjoyer
Any tips on using backdrops, hard light, and photographing objects / still life? I am testing it out but find I cannot make it look the way I want.
>>4483667What are you trying to do exactly, make the backdrop mostly disappear?
>>4483668I just want to 1) take still lifes with it and 2) take low-key self-portraits. I was experimenting with it to see what it looks like because I had no idea what it would look like, how hard it would be to shoot, etc. I might try it without the shallow depth of field, but I would like to isolate the objects. I think I lose the sense of painterly photos when the backdrops disappear though, and I like the texture this "satin" sheet has. Maybe I should've chosen a dark red.
>>4483687Try something like putting some distances between the object and backdrop, turning the light up really high and then setting the shutter speed really high.
>>4483697Thanks! That's very helpful.
>>4483700You're welcome anon. I'm interested to see your results.
>>4483687>I am testing it out but find I cannot make it look the way I want.Yes, you can. Do not be afraid to keep experimenting with different angles, different lights, different camera settings, etc., until you reach your “aha!” moment. Pretend you are a boy again and the camera is one of your toys. Play with it.
bump
>>4483810This is a really awful use of wide angle. Why? Because you’ve decided to put some rocks and one tenth of a tree branch in the foreground and two-thirds of the background is a thin distant line of trees without variation. It’s worth mentioning the awful lighting too. This photo might at least be “cool” if it were golden hour. Sell your gear. It’s over.>>4483821A great photo ruined by a stray shadow on the far left. Is it in? Is it out? I don’t know. It’s been cut down the middle and it’s distracting from an otherwise pleasant scene.
>>4483852IndeedIs this less shit? I cropped out some background trees and their shadows here
>>4483852For my defence I was balancing on rocks right over the water and couldn't find a better angle, but I agree these branches are annoying>awful lightingCould you please elaborate? Isn't it what a sunny autumn day is supposed to look like?
>>4483856>Could you please elaborate?It is harsh and bright without any contrast. Saving the shadow of the left-hand rock, even the midtones in the rocks don’t add much contrast. They seem overexposed. Taking another look, I also noticed a dust spot beneath that tree branch and, if you look at the foliage along the right-hand side, you can see how there is only an impression of the foliage because your lens is very low resolution on the edges. Were you stopped down very far?
>>4483864I genuinely don't understand what you mean by midtones being overexposed, or a lack of contrast since the histogram shows quite an amount of blacks everywhere except for the sky and a couple of places on the rocks. Rocks being brighter is what they're supposed to look like, they're reflective surfaces. But you're right the resolution is suspiciously low on the edges for f/8. I'm starting to think that my lens got decentered or damaged. Thank you for the feedback anon
>>4483910I could use this as the prompt for a creepypasta. I like it.
>>4483965>>4483966>>4483553Ive made it habitual take my camera with me whenever i go somewhere with friends, even if its just to get fast food or something. Ive come to find that after a bit people stop being camera shy/feel impulsed to make a silly face when he lense is on them. If anything its just nice practice in many different kinds of lighting and situations but, a friend died about a year ago and at least a third of the pictures that werent from HS were mine. All the worth i need desu
>>4483967is dhat a triple exposure ?
>>4484012single. Had the shutter on 1s
>>4482269Paris metro?
with phone
Should I crop/frame it differently?
I like how crunchy the sharpening is on old digishits
>>4484051Too much microcontrast overall imo and the postprocessing of the sky is ugly
>>4484100Nice. Very nice. Now let's see your kino pano
>>4484051You mixed 3 pics here?
>>4484105Okay, here's my latest
>>4484110>>4484051You both produced very decent panos.Both have about the same HDR vibe I expect from boomer landscape photogs.Burt's has more elements to consider which can be a good or bad thing depending on what floats your boat. Overall a busy, interesting pano. I can't agree that the sky is done weirdly, but I do agree I'd like to see more shadow in the city itself.Looks like he might have used a GND instead of HDR but I'm honestly guessing.Yours is more of a classic look. Quite warm and enjoyable to look at. The only thing that bothers me is how the foilage on the bottom left of the frame looks a bit fucky in terms of color but I'm grasping here.Both are good. /p/ has enough negativity. Remember to raise each other up as well as point out weaknesses for that is how we improve.>pic relis not as good but I want to contribute because fuck the gear board nonsense.
>>4484115Yeah the color on the left part has probably shifted because of the direct sunlight, definitely not an hdr though. Could've used some darkening to prevent it from being noticeable.For yours I'd probably tone down the saturation a bit and see if the blue haze on the distant mountains can be reduced, but on the other hand it contrasts with the orange on the foreground so idk. Maybe try to increase the details in the shadows (hangar and palm trees) ever so slightly.>captcha
>>4484119>the color on the left part has probably shifted because of the direct sunlight, definitely not an hdr thoughYeah fair. It didn't look too out of place but I had to find something to pick on.>For yoursOh yeah after the fact I knew I needed to go back and do it justice, but I made do with what I got. You're right with the saturation and I also know I can do the composition better. I'm going to revisit that spot eventually. Basically this was a 3/10 for me but I still liked the scene.
>>4484115>boomer landscape photogs.mmm well, Thanks for that. Yeah, I need to chill out with the sliders a bit.
>>4484130I also think that what made the image weird is the color balance. Maybe too much cyan/blue and the trees also have a strange tint
I went to Dublin last month. Took a lot of shots, but haven't taken much time to edit and share.Fantastic city, fantastic people.
local fashion & arts experts
>>4484150Anon, this looks suspiciously like dalit delhi, not Dooblin
>>4484169Everywhere once clean and pure is now New Delhi. They could export 1,000,000 browns to every white country on Earth and barely see a difference in their shithole of a country.Being white is the minority. This could be Oslo, Sweden.
>>4484207
>>4484208
>>4484207These talons look nasty
>>4484207>>4484208>>4484209Those things scare me.
>>4484170Go squeek about it somewhere else, chud
feedback welcome
>>4484051city?
>>4484247Nice light here but was using bw a good choice?I also suspect that a slightly wider shot approaching the 16:9 ratio could be nice
>>4484248paris from the eiffel tower quite obviously
>>4484249>was using bw a good choice?yes since I got to focus on tonality
trying out a digital blue filterI think it helps a lot with contrast >>4484245i like thisvery characteristic of cats to do this neck rub thing>>4484236the foreground seems unnaturally light and the chroma noise is ugly, yet overall it's dreamy>>4484166they seem to be suffering from the jaundice but an interesting composition nevertheless>>4484140>snapshitswith that out of the way, I do like the colour gradingperhaps some nice illustrations for a blog post?I think images like this can't stand on their own, they need a story attached, or some thoughts>>4484042no, slightly off-centre is good, feels more engaging to look at, but maybe more contrast? make the light parts lighter, the dark parts darker? seems like there is a lot of midtone
>>4484237Nice picture, but the aliasing on the power lines is killing me
>>4482160Trying to get my inspiration back after a few years of languishing >>4484237Southern Alberta or Montana?
>>4484312I had to nuke the quality to post here. The original looks really good (no aliasing).>>4484315Northern Alberta, but that's a good guess so I'll give it to you.
>>4484317>I had to nuke the quality to post here.>1920x1080>1.29MBBruh, this has to be uncompressed or something I can get 4500x3000 posts to 2MB with 90JPEG compression and the limit is 5MB
>>4484321
Took a photo walk today through my neighborhood along an arterial car dealership district. It was nice to get outside, but it was gloomy outside and I stopped in a very sad Goodwill shop. I thought about how my childhood favorite games and movies were on the same shelf as the childhood favorites of the listless shambling peepee-stained grandmas in there.>>4484321>>4484322Cute monkys anon, thanks for the smile :)>>4484275This IR effect is really neat, I'm curious to know how you accomplished it. The lighting also looks a bit like a museum diorama which does make it feel more like "capturing" these deer, kinda neat. Anyway, thanks for sharing.>>4484237Colors are sick, it reminds me of how Mars looks in sci-fi movies. Winter is so cool.>>4484042Feels like a cool adventure is somewhere in that darkened opening. I think any other comp would lose that.
>>4484357The rest of the shot was too ugly so I cropped in quite a bit. Learning how to use the burst function has been useful though :D
Spot the heron
>>4484430Usually don't like Panos but this one is genuinely great, well done Burt
>>4484430Excellently processed this time
>>4484435Quite a harsh lighting but I like how it ends up looking
>>4484357>This IR effect is really neat, I'm curious to know how you accomplished it.raw ir at the sensor, edit in cap1 > jpg, relight fx on clipdrop <dot> cohelps to have docile deer & suitable environ + clouded skies midday.
>>4484454
>>4484454irtards like to color because we must
the jews fear the urban vaquero
>>4484474
haven't been shooting as much, here's a few recents. I've decided after scanning a couple thousand of my own photos that is better to just let the lab do it until I get a high megapickle digital camera or at least get a different scanner because the one I have feels pretty inconsistent.
>>4484529
>>4484530
>>4484531
>>4484532
>>4484532To accomplish great things, we must not only act dream not only plan also believe
>>4484538Exactly
>>4484531Hey mannebro, how do you deal with reflections in windows? So many photos of mannequins I've taken are ruined by excessive and bright reflections.
>>4483810>>4483852>>4483856>>4483864>>4483881I am neither of these anons but I thought I would chip in with my own fall photo taken recently that maybe addresses some of the criticisms discussed here (or goes too far in some other direction, or has other flaws, by no means is my photo without issues)I don't have other input. This day was not sunny like in the original persons photo, but I thought the sky added interest and mood.
>>4484564Three options potentially:1. Embrace the reflections as part of the composition. Not always possible of course, but in >>4484531 for instance the reflected tree/sky add visual interest to the top of frame while being unobtrusive to the main subject. Especially at night where reflections are often going to be light sources themselves rather than just ambient reflections you can potentially utilize them in a creative way. Shooting at night generally will also help with the reflections issue, but again not always possible (and not always a solution)2. A polarizer. CPL (and LPL I suppose) filters can eliminate reflections and make the storefront windows truly transparent. The drawback is that you might also be eliminating specular highlights or other elements you wanted in your composition. Personally, I don't use a CPL in my mannequin shooting but that's more to do with me (I'm often shooting at night and always on film) than the filters. 3. Wait or change the composition. Not rocket science but if the angle of the sun is causing a streak or reflection then just moving to the side or angling your camera differently can eliminate it or at least remove it from the frame. And if you're set on a specific framing that you don't want to change then waiting for the light to change or coming back another time might be the play since you can't exactly control the sun or other light sources on the street. Hope this is helpful anon, and if you have some mannekino to post I'd be very happy to see your photos.
'og on the 'loud
Just got my first roll of film photographyHate thisMoving to the next roll Maybe I don't underexpose all of them again
>>4484699>SMACK MY BITCH UP>SMACK MY BITCH UP>SMACK M->SMACK MY BITCH UP
>>4484747Same thoughts kek
>>4484777
>>4484777Shame about the sky. Otherwise, the image is great. Could perhaps have a tiny bit more contrast in some of the foliage especially on the left, so you could better make out the different textures.
>>4484533one more
>>4484783Pure kino
>>4484777Nice textures, I wonder if a litlle extra detail on the leaves would work better
>>4484810damn you really think so?
>>4484914>>4484915Quite a red tint you got there anon
>>4484914I really like this>>4484773a bit out of focus, not a clear subject
>>4484810eggleston? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Ceiling
thank you for making such a kind welcome for me in your dreams, anon
>>4484969>>4484974>>4484914These are really nice
>>4484571Thank you! I appreciate the time you took to write that. I have tried embracing reflections as part of the composition, but nothing that comes together especially coherently. I do love shooting mannequins but no kino yet. If it isn't reflections, it's a dirty ass window.
>>4485059happy to do so anon. I like your pic, the poses are fun and sure the window is a bit dirty but I think this is pretty close to being a really really good photo. the reflection here could easily make the story - is someone looking in hoping to get the job? is someone walking away, perhaps rejected? or even just the excitement of the mannequins could contrast with the normalcy of the street outside. give yourself some credit, because (to me, anyway) it seems like you're approaching things from the right perspective and just need to work on some of the finer details. I'll be on the lookout your next shots
