I'm just a forester with an OM-D E-M10 Mk IV, who like to take photos when I'm out in the field. Clearly I'm not a great photographer, but I do have fun.Lens is a TTArtisan 17mm F1.4
It has been over a year since I last posted on any boards here. WTF is this captcha?Like seriously WTF?
I didn't know this photo was foreshadowing before I took it...
I call this one, "Your Mother's Butthole"
AT&T, reach out and touch someone.
That is all grapevine and blackberry briars. I've very happy I had no plot points falling into that shit.
After this photo it was all trudging through year old hurricane blow down.
There is a road under here somewhere...
If you ever wondered what crawling trough the top of a downed mature hickory tree was like, I can honestly tell you it is the exact opposite of fun.
At this point I was becoming physically exhausted from working in the blowdown, but I wasn't mentally done.
So you know when Treebeard is going on about old trees with deep roots?It doesn't work like that. The vast overwhelming majority of tree species, so overwhelming that I can't think of the exceptions off the top of my head (they are in SE Asia though), get shallower root systems the larger the stem gets.
At this point I was cutting back down the mountain. Had maybe 2hrs of sunlight left, and didn't want to spend 4hrs retracing my steps through the blowdown. The way down was essentially 50-60% slope followed by a bench followed by another 50-60% slope followed by a bench...rinse and repeat to the bottom.One really steep spot I just ass-scooched my way down, rather than risk a broken ankle. Was like sledding on my butt.
Weird that you can be a full days hike up a mountain, but still damn close to something that pretends to be civilization.
Last one.Tomorrow I'm going to be trying out a vintage Super Albinar 35-105mm F3.5 OM mount manual zoom lens on a Shoten adapter. Not sure it will be a regular field lens for me. It is way way larger than the TTArtisan; worried I'll be constantly hitting it off trees.
Based. I find woodlands photography incredibly hard unless it's foggy. With fog it's ez-mode. Without it's just visual chaos.
OP, most of your pictures suck. Try to put your camera close to a tree and point it upwards. Try playing with close and far plans and blur. For example blurry close up grass or pine and focused mountain on the horizon. Try catch some great lighting when light is beaming through the tree tops.
>>4491434>/p/'s biggest attention whore and worst camera operator posts ultra shitty snapshit for attention.
>>4491458>and gets attentionwhew
Factory worker using a Canon Powershot A3300 IS. Vibes.
>>4491471
>>4491344Sorry about the homeless m43 gearfag trying to ruin your thread. He has been having a huge meltdown after losing his home from a brutal divorce settlement. The poor guy barely knows how to operate a camera and got absolutely btfo by your pics in this thread, which is exactly why he is attention whoring in it.>>4491461>ruins other anons infinitely better thread with the worst snapshits on /p/.You deserve being called out at every opportunity. You are literal cancer on this board.
The image quality is pretty bad. Almost headache inducing. Enough to outcompete the mediocrity of the plain, i was there and moved on nature of the photos. Shitty little low res cameras arent good for messes of sticks and harsh contrast. You can mitigate this by learning to shoot handheld panoramas for more resolution and bracket and merge to HDR for better contrast handling but its hard to do bothTo use a shitty camera for nice photography you must get close to everything and avoid having a lot of distant detail and wild contrast in the frame. Thats why micro four thirds is fine for macro shots of tiny bugs and zooming way in on tiny birds. Proper cameras still look better, but its fine. Photos like these are digitals weak point and unless you can swing a d810 around or afford a modern ff like an a7RIII or nikon z7 they would look a lot better shot on 35mm film, and them scanned on the olympus in pixel shift mode (film does in 1 shot what digital needs 4+ to approximate). Well shot 35mm film can be scanned for over 100mp of detail, if your camera can do it.
I like these photos. Thanks for sharing OP. Sometimes your white balance is weird >>4491374 >>4491366 >>4491359but otherwise it's nice. I like the colors here: >>4491368and the dramatic shadows here are cool >>4491344
>>4491511last two photos I got flipped. Anyway here's a forest photo of my own
>>4491512OP here. I like your photo. Will be posting more I've taken with my new to me lens, a Super Albinar 35-105mm F3.5 OM mount (researching its serial number, it is likely from a lot made in Japan by Sun, for Best Products Company. I vaguely remember them being like a really shitty Ocean State Joblot (Which if you are a Rhode Islander and have been to an Ocean State Joblot, you know how shitty they are), but that was the early-mid 90s before their 2nd bankruptcy. I've figured out that at some focal lengths it can focus past infinity and at 105mm it can't quite seem to hit infinity; like it is fraction of a cunt hair away. Not sure if I need to shim or sand the adapter (Shoten).Also, tried taking some shots of wildlife for the first time. Fuck it is hard to get a good photo of a bird. I think I have a bit more understanding on why serious wildlife photographers invest big in big high quality lenses. Not super sure I found it too fun to do.I'm wondering if the Tokina 35-105mm that they made special for Olympus (it apparently has a slightly different design than the one they put out under their own name) is a significantly better lens. Looks more compact than the Super Albinar.
This captcha is going to drive me fucking insane.
I kinda like the reflection off the beaver pond in this one.
Rooster is missing most of his tail feathers due a fight with an escaped husky puppy (not mine). Did exactly what a rooster should do and fight for his flock.
This is the stray cat that decided I belong to her.
Something I like about this lens is that I can get shots of things that I think are interesting, but just can't get close too. Didn't even realize I had that problem before with just the 17mm.Like this isn't a great photo, but I though the snag rot was interesting, but there was just no physical way to get the combination of close+high to take a photo of it.
My beavers have been busy.
Of course I took this photo right before I spooked all of the ducks.
Last one.Next set of photos will probably be after I get a UV and polarizer in the mail for this lens, or after I find time to go out to cliff with a hell of a view I know of. (lots of people know about it, but it isn't officially a designated recreation area...probably because if you slip you will die, or be left in a state where you regret living)
>>4491344>I'm just a forester with an OM-D E-M10 Mk IVNo you're not just a forester, anon. You are also a gigantic faggot and a victim for buying into the OM system
>>4491999Show us on the doll. Where did Robin Wong touch you?
>>4492010>wong touchKek.
