Here we go againPreviously: >>4495770
>>4497705Nice. Comfy.
>>4497718Thanks, I appreciate that
>>4497689love this type of shit, very pleasing to the eye
I tried buying a vintage lens - Takumar 50 1.4, entry level - for the first time and tested it in my back yard. I don't have a mount yet so just held it, but was very happy with the result for only ¥8000.
Bump this beautiful thread and the talented photographers
>>4497804Much obliged.
>>4497807Based M110 Gun Carrier Enthusiast
Sorry about the dust spot
Not all heros wear capes
>>4497828Here's another
>>4497855>>4497836>>4497796>>4497795nice
>>4497919
>>4497919>>4497924Very clean. What settings are you using? And what lens?
>>4497927RF 24-105mm L lens + R8 + Glass UV Filter. f4.0 and shot at 1/40 on IS. Had to hold my breath for each shot.
>>4497930>f4.0 and shot at 1/40 on IS. Had to hold my breath for each shot.Damn man. What was your ISO? It looks really clean (assuming you didn't AI denoise anyway).
>>4497931Okay 1st pic is 32002nd pic is 64003rd is 8000
>>4497890clean
I fucking hate overcast skies
Still learning to edit and take photos full manual, so this one was really bright. I like the composition though.
>>4498229much wow
Panorama of the valley below the Cerro Castillo in Chile
>>4498214I really like this shot. Those colors are crazy
>>4498134wish dof got either everything or nothing sharp. but it's a good shot
>>4498344Is the saturation bit too strong in this?(Color is difficult. Shade, no clouds & sun low, so its all blue. Can it be not blue and better?)
>>4497978Thought this was egg anon from fgt
>>4498361It’s quite high up and far away so there was some really strong blues from the atmosphere that was hard to correct. I noticed I fucked up some of the greens and there was some reds that bled after looking at it again which I fixed in a new version.
>>4498229> doge not in focus
>>4498457Gosh I know.. But that wink still makes it worth it
>>4498528Could have been a cool shot. Did you try to blur the foreground in post or something? It doesn’t look right.
>>4498534If you're not trolling you need some education
>>4498538It looks like shit. Is that better?
>>4498540You seem pretty mad about a shit photo
>>4498534this nigger is rightout of focus houses and trees behind the bridge under the bridge but in focus above the bridge
>>4498571Tell me you don't understand Tilt Shift without saying it.
>>4498572i don;t understand tilt shift, never used onepost the same without tilt shift so i can understand
>>4498572>>4498573Lmao. Nice shot anon, here is how I would have framed it, the shrubbery doesnt do it for me
>>4498572You don’t have to understand the technique to say it looks bad
>>4498577You also don't have to say anything if you're an ignorant bitch with poor taste, but here you are.
>>4498540>>4498543>>4498571>>4498572>>4498574>>4498577>>4498578Pretty sure Burt has posted that same scene with full focus before.The tilt-shift effect is kind of novel and you either like it or you don't, but doing some different should be embraced lest we all take the same boring landscape photos.Either or, idk why you all need to argue over this shit like a bunch of women.
>>4498579Why did you quote me together with the guy that doesnt understand tilt shift? I just said nice shot... maybe dont mass reply until you get the hang of itBtw I agree with your opinion
>>4498578You also don’t have to remove your trip to get mad at people for not liking your shit photos Burt
>>4498534It's a 24mm Nikon tilt-shift lens at full tilt. Some people find it interesting, apparently some don't. >>4498574Agreed. I think it's too wide too, but I couldn't settle on a crop.
>>4498214kinda cool but would've been way better without that big sign in the middle
>>4498584Architecture with a tilt shift for the last four years obviously for a very, very specific reason because I still don’t know quite what the fuck is going on when people make these toy city shots with them. I should really take five minutes and figure it out.
>>4498584t. the guy that don't understand the tilt shiftit's not that i don;t find it interesting it just looks wierd/unnatural. watched some yt videos about tilt shift lenses after your post and still don;t understand why the focus blur behaves like this in your foto.in all tilt shift lenses pics i've see all look like macro pics. out of focus in front the subject, out of focus behind.
>>4498701>in all tilt shift lenses pics i've see all look like macro pics. out of focus in front the subject, out of focus behind.See that's the thing. Using a T-S lens, that's sometimes the goal. To get a different look that you otherwise could not have any hope of replicating without the lens mechanisim. But~, T-S lenses have a couple of more "legitimate" uses.>AIf you want to keep your f/stop low but you want to get things in focus that are not the same parallel distance from the camera sensor. You go form the plane of focus being a (mostly) straight line running parallel across your shot || to something angled that follows the objects you want in focus |/(I couldnt find the pic I think of which is three green apples positioned on a table but all are in focus and everything off to the sides is not)>BCorrecting perspective distortion. This is mostly for use in architectual shots. Software correction is also pretty good these days so it's less of a necessity but correcting it with optics (the T-S lens) avoids ruining pixel-level details.>don;t understand why the focus blur behaves like this in your foto.Your sensor is a flat rectangle. The image plane your lens projects is a flat circle. The two are designed in tandem to have the sensor capture the image the lens projects onto it. The image projection and sensor should be completely flat against each other in theory.With a T-S lens you're moving the angle that the image projection lands on the sensor from 180* to something else like 150* or 200* (in either the X or Y axis). Only the portion of the image plane that still lines up on the sensor wafer is going to be in focus which is now no longer the whole projection.
>>4498707Ty homo
>>4497986What were the colours like in this one? i feel like b/w is not doing justice.>>4498214liked this one a lot
>>4498701Tilt allows moving the plane of focus so that less of the frame is on focus ("macro effect") or get both foreground and background in focus with shallower actual depth of field (useful in large format landscapes). Dunno what was the intention here.(Just a snap)
>>4498839>Dunno what was the intention here.I was trying to isolate the bridge, but it turns out that miniaturisation is actually harder with a wider frame. Too many reference points. I think it would have worked better on 45/85mm TS.
I'm not sure if it's cheating to provide context for a shot: I was trying to get a nice focus and angle on this ornament and in this single photo I happened to get a guy walking past, but I didn't notice who it was because I was occupied with my camera. When I turned around and went to walk off I recognized him as a homeless guy who I've seen around since at least 2014. I felt uncomfortable with the photo afterwards because I tend to be quite sensitive around homelessness, poverty etc.I also think I butchered the lightroom editing.>>4498851I don't really know what I'm talking about but I think tilt shift tends to look more convincing when it's taken from above. I also would've brought the focus in a bit so that the pillars, road, water and maybe reflection are more in focus, and the trees behind the village and bridge are blurred. I don't know if you can do that with a tilt shift lens though.
>>4498892Breakfast of Champions
>>4498892>>4498908False. Where's the traveller pie and DARE ice coffee>Get a high vis shirt in the background somewhere and you've got art, baby.
>>4497831some of the textures in this are really pleasing, colour palette is nice as well
>>4498920Thanks
>>4498848pretty cool
>>4498951Thanks
>>4498963you could have pushed it a little more
>>4498954>>4498969>>4498972Summicron-R 50mm. This is is the shit, amazing lens
>>4498973much better than the 35mm, which costs 3x
>>4498852gorgeous.>>4498750very nice haze. framing feels a little in-between though.
>>4497978wtf
>>4498528Nice, this is my neck of the woods
>>4498964This was my first attempt at this. In which direction should I have pushed it?
>>4498984It doesn't immediately grab me, I have to think, it's cool, but in a class of similar picture that are not good enough to graduate. I'd like more, harder
>>4498981You're right, I should have walked to the right to have the blockhaus ruins take the right part of the frame as well, it feels a little unbalanced.Also the white balance is wrong, it's greenish
>>4498986Anyone agree with this critique?More? Harder?
>>4498908I had it saved as 'Healthy Living' but I think I prefer yours, I might rename it.
>>4499020Ok
>asian drivers
>>4498892Grug Meal
From a recent night out.
>>4498130>>4498361>>4498437>>4498455superb shots dudes
>>4499077
>>4499078
>>4499077>>4499078>>4499079sexy
I love how taxidermy really preserves an animal’s dignity
>>4499077Thanks, I truly appreciate it
>>4499077>>4498981thanks
>>4499186boi
>>4498750>>4499172>>4498463Nice>>4498954>>4498764I like the colors on these ones
>>4498457Dead meme like your culture nerd
>>4499272I like the branches framing the duck
come out and livein a religious communityin a beautiful place out in the country
>>4497689Such beauty! (both the building and your shot). Where's this?
>>4497855That's a very big gun.
>>4499294M110 howitzer I think? Basically a cold-war era siege canon firing 203mm shells that could also be used in direct fire to turn your afghani friend's T-62 into sand confetti
I nearly got ran over by a car, got the cops called on me, and almost pissed off a farmer to get this photo. Hopefully it was worth it.
Tried to photograph the lunar eclipse and learned that my new tripod isn’t strong enough to hold up my zoom lens so it took some trial and error
>>4499294Quite so!>>4499322 (checked)Yes, it's the A2 model.
>>4497930Thanks!
Meant >>4499452 for >>4497919
New 35mm lens. Pretty nice for digital. Wish I had bought in something I could mount on a film camera and digital.
>>4499464
>>4499466
>>4499467
This one is actually from a while ago, but I only edited it recently.
>>4499678Pretty good!
If you guys like these enough, I can make a complete thread
>>4499696curious what ss you used for the shrapnels to be frozen in air and still have some of the surroundings not heavily under exposed, seeing this was at night time
>>44997031/320 and 1/400
>>4499706this shit is amazing
>>4499727Thank you, I appreciate it
>>4499706
Which are better? Color or b/w?
>>4499775This is almost too cooked for me but I kind of love it also
>>4499775I like them both. What the fuck is going on in them? Some sort of festival?
>>4499786Lunar new year celebrations
>>4499775The colour is 100% better, the black and white flattens out all the details
>>4499814
>>4499815
i'm inexperience with raw processing. how's this look?>>4499727landscape and qualities remind me of edward s curtis>>4499769splashy! make the thread
>>4499787>Goggles on head>shrapnel flying everywhereIf it was a third world country, I'd be surprised. But Japan?
>>4499819Taiwan.Do they celebrate lunar new in Japan?
>>4499822>Do they celebrate lunar new in Japan?Japan does not officially celebrate Lunar New Year, but it is culturally observed in certain areas, especially in Chinatowns and among East Asian communities.Japan officially switched from the lunar calendar to the Gregorian calendar in 1873, moving New Year celebrations to January 1st, and most Japanese people now celebrate Shōgatsu (New Year) on this date rather than the lunar calendar. Despite this, Lunar New Year traditions persist in regions with significant Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese populations, particularly in Chinatowns such as Yokohama, Kobe, Nagasaki, and Tokyo’s Ikebukuro district.
>>4499817colors look good, but its too clean imo, dont be afraid of some noisealso i would remove the stones(?) in the middle of the foreground, theyre really distracting
>>4499919I really like it.
>>4499817Queenstown?
>>4499817Crop a little from below, that much close foreground is distracting, at most 10% of width.Also if you have the ability to visit this location again they try doing star trails, i see some bright stars, that will give some good trails.Also the sky would most likely become blue, if you take the whole evening or pre dawn. But i wonder if that purple hue that one gets from a setting sun, if it is possible to capture in a star trail shot, given for how short it exists, maybe fking around with the white balance might do it.Also take a hdr composite, if you feel like adding detail in the hills
