Kodak Colorplus Edition Previous thread>>4309008/fgt/ daily reminder (courtesy by anon): one stop per decade is (generally) bullshit>negative film ages better than positive>black and white better than color>slow films better than fast>storage conditions (dry/cool) matter more than years>Negative film is shot 1 or 2 stops overexposed and then PULLED in development so that you build more density in the exposure and develop less such that the fog is limited>slide/positive film is shot at box speed or overexposed and pulled.>if you home develop you can also use benzotriazole as a restrainer for the the first developer in E6 processComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
NEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWW
>>4313179How many pictures are you waiting to share? I have a couple maybe. :D
>>4313188just scanned two rolls today!
>>4313179new thread>>4313200>>4313200>>4313200>>4313200>>4313200
>>4313189Well done!
Is the Peak Design Travel Tripod really the best lightweight compact tripod that still gets the job done? >pic related[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiCommentScreenshotColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1179Image Height2556Scene Capture TypeStandard
New kino just dropped. Did you ever want to use your tripod as... HIKING STICKS?
>>4307673Anon monopods are nothing new don’t fall for chinkoid marketing nonsense
>>4299303Manfrotto MSQ6T, works on other heads than just the ones they list. I have one on a MHXPRO-BHQ2
>>4307673It's nothing new, solutions using poles existed for years. The problem is, my two poles are already used as supports for my tent's structure, pic related. Would work for taking pictures during the day, for which I don't really need a tripod anyway, but not for milky way photography.I've yet to find a regular tripod that fits my needs. The only time I need one is when I'm hiking, for which I do multi-days hikes in one go and where I can't justify wasting a full 1Kg on a piece of metal. Especially not when I cut down every little gram to only keep what matters, even on food and water to the point of it being dangerous. As a cope I simply use a shitty 30cm gorillapod weighting less than 200g. I just have to find a rock somewhere for more elevation and it werks fine enough as long as it's not too windy. But it's still a pure cope solution.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 24.6 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Image Width6000Image Height4000Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpcmVertical Resolution240 dpcmImage Created2024:05:11 20:12:11Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width3750Image Height2500
>>4312786>Especially not when I cut down every little gram to only keep what matters, even on food and water to the point of it being dangerous.There's either something wrong with your legs and back or you're doing that shit just for shits and giggles.
TWENTY-FOUR - FIFTY - ONE HUNDRED AND THIRY-FIVE is the way to go AND YOU KNOW IT!
>>4311301>Going all primes is stupid in this day and ageVirtually all supertelephoto requires lots of speed for good results, normally zooms can't cut it. 70-200 is good for portraits and such but after that you're going to be limited if you pick a zoom over a telephoto because you probably are using the reach for sports or wildlife. All the fieldcraft and "just get closer"ing won't save you from a blurry shot when your target does something cool (ie, moves).
>>4302433>>4302443R8 my lens collection[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:PhotographerAJImage-Specific Properties:
>>4311315I specified image stabilisation for a reason, because your main issue beyond 200 mm comes from shake, not target movement.However if you went with primes instead, you'd need at least 5 lenses:>24 f/2.8>50 f/1.x>135 f/2.8>200 f/2.8>300 f/4Where as zooms allow you to get away with 3 (perhaps even 2) lenses, either:>24>50>70-300 f/4-5.6 image stabilisedor>24-70 ish f/2.8>70-300 f/4-5.6 image stabilisedComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4311320The absence of 85 mm in your collection has been well regarded.
21mm and 40mm. Everything else is bloat, slop, cringe and garbage. Not a single good photo has been taken on 150mm+. Get closer
I bought a D700 off ebay some time in 2019ish before the youtube people made it inflate in price.I don't see a reason to upgrade, everything seems like diminishing returns. Don't need any more megapixels, autofocus is fast enough, build quality is great, body is a tank, color science is great, great lens ecosystem.What are honestly the advantages of upgrading? More muh megapixels? I don't see the point when this thing is perfect. Even the newest hottest most basedest 2024 shit is like 10% better at most, and thats in niche scenarios.
>>4310399never send deposits
Does the D700 become a semi D3 when you add a grip?
>>4310399Sure looks like one.
>>4310658Kinda. It still isn't as fast as one, the build quality isn't quite as tough, the shutter will not last as long, and you don't have voice memos, but you are getting most of the D3 experience out of it.On the plus side, the MB-D10 is a fucking massive chunky grip that may fit your hands better than the D3's vertical grip if you have large hands, the MB-D10 also has its own AF joystick, whereas the D3 only has one, which makes adjusting your AF point while in vertical use a big reach for your thumb; the EN-EL3 batteries for the D700 are really fucking cheap compared to the ones the D3 takes.Overall, if I didn't already have a D3, and I wanted to choose between the two of them, I would set a budget of $350 and get whichever of them I could that was in the best condition, with the provision that the D700 comes with at least two batteries and the MB-D10.
>>4304393Underrated post
Industrial town[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakesamsungCamera ModelGalaxy S23 UltraCamera SoftwareS918USQS2CXCNSensing MethodNot DefinedFocal Length (35mm Equiv)69 mmMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.4Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1868Image Height1867Image Created2024:04:24 22:25:49Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Width4000Image Height1868ISO Speed Rating50Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramUnique Image IDL12XSPE01MF-Numberf/2.4Exposure Time24771/100000000 secFocal Length7.90 mmFlashNo FlashMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageScene Capture TypeStandardExposure Bias0 EVWhite BalanceAutoBrightness10.5 EVExposure ModeAutoLens Aperturef/2.4Color Space InformationUncalibrated
>>4308100Nice. Please proceed.
>>4308100how does a Samsung look THIS bad?
>>4308100zach core
>>4308100I helped build that coker. Built scaffold at the top of it. You from the region?Flare stacks at night can make for some great photos, with the refinery lights in the background.
How overbaked is too overbaked?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON Z 6Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Windows)Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern770Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution94 dpcmVertical Resolution94 dpcmImage Created2024:05:05 12:33:51Exposure Time1/400 secExposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingCustomExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypePortraitGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4312326Get a lens with less distortion. Or better yet, a tilt-shift lens.
>>4312330t-s lenses are great but I shoot buildings way too rarely to justify getting one. The pic I posted is a stitch of several shots taken from the same point with a telephoto lens
>>4312326>How the hell do I fix distortions? This shit is impossibleI do it with a combination of shift lens, rectilinear lens (low distortion), and correction software like DXO viewpoint
>>4312509This.
>>4312336>t-s lenses are great but I shoot buildings way too rarely to justify getting one.What about a t-s girlfriend instead then?
I've bought an Epson L8180. How do I find the real DPI of the printer? The data sheet states "5760x1440dpi" but surely that can't be right.
>See anything related about Printing>See everything is gravitating to 300 dpi or ppi Why 300 is the golden number in DPI? Why not 100 or 500 or 1000?
>>4312385>just know there's a reason why people do paperwork with laser printersSPEED
>>4312443>Why 300 is the golden number in DPIit is twice as much as 150, which in turn is the nice rounded number which is twice as much as 72, which is what resolution dot matrix printers had.
>>4312355>The data sheet states "5760x1440dpi" but surely that can't be right.The printer is capable of laying down dots at that resolution. That's how it's able to reproduce so many tones and colors with its ink set. Extremely fine halftoning.However, you may not actually be able to feed that resolution to the printer and expect to see it on paper. Obviously not with shades of gray and colors since you need multiple dots to simulate the tones and colors. Each pixel you feed the printer breaks down into a set of dots. But even with pure black and white line art, the printer driver probably scales input to 720x720 or 1440x1440 before figuring out the halftone.Years ago, when I got my 3880, I remember testing it to try and figure out what resolution could actually be sent to the printer using B&W line art. I seem to remember seeing improvement all the way to 1440 ppi. So on pure B&W, which means one ink, the printer was able to accept/render 1440 ppi. This requires special paper, i.e. your typical office paper has a dot bleed size larger than 1/1440.On color photographs there was no improvement beyond 720 ppi, even on sections that had a pure black line on a pure white background. Beyond that I found that- 180 ppi was acceptable for most shots.- 240 ppi saw a large improvement over 180 ppi.- There was some improvement to 360 ppi, but you really had to look for it.- On carefully crafted images you could see improvement to 720 ppi in monochromatic areas, suggesting photographs are scaled to 720 ppi before halftone. But otherwise there was nothing to see between 360 ppi and 720 ppi.- By that time the scaling algorithms in the printer driver were already so good that hitting a multiple of the printer's resolution didn't matter. 240, 235, 245, 252 ppi etc. all came out the same.
>>4312378>Also if you have images that exist at 300 PPI, you will need to interpolate them to fit 1440 DPI printing or let the printer handle that scaling.>If you're looking for 1:1 input-output with a 300 DPI file you need to use HP/Canon/Brother who use 1200 DPI for their nozzles.By the late 2000's the driver scaling was so good that this does not matter at all. You don't need to scale your 300 ppi image, and sending data at a multiple of the print head resolution or not makes no difference.The only reason to scale in PS is if you have a very low resolution image because you can take steps to try and smooth out jaggies. If you send 72 ppi to the printer it's going to faithfully reproduce it and you will be able to see the stair steps. But 300 vs. 360 vs something odd like 305 is irrelevant. If 300 ppi is what you've got, it's what you're going to see on a good photo paper.>when trying to print a 1800x1200 image for a 6x4 print on an EPSON because it's incapable of directly translating that to ink droplets without INTERPOLATING.None of these printers "directly" translate the pixels to ink droplets. All of them scale to something they want internally and then apply a halftone.
I wanna become one of those "street portrait" guys who makes the videos I see all over instagram reels. Only issue is that I want to start a new account to do this, and don't have any street portraits to post to start, nor do I have any followers. How do I get started when people will inevitably ask to see my instagram when I say "hey I take photos of strangers for instagram, could I take some pictures of you?" and they say "sure, what's your ig name?"buying followers is not an option since that basically gets your account shadowbanned.Pic is not my image, nor is it even a very good one but it came up when I googled "street portaiture"
>>4312279>I think I'm ""ok"" at portraiture and I like itpost>Like I feel like people are going to say no to me because they think I'm gonna put their images up in my goon cave or somethingIf that's how you carry yourself.
>>4312282I'd feel bad posting a portrait of someone on 4chan without asking. I don't carry myself that way but idk I guess I'm very self conscious. It's part of why I wanna start doing street portraiture, getting better at speaking to people.
>>4312272If you see a lot of likes on a "reel" like that, with no much content besides someone taking portraits of random people on the streets, it means they're constantly reaching more people through the algorithm and probably many are bots.Anyways, do whatever you feel like doing. You might create some interesting content for future clients, who knows.
>>4312279>Do you mostly shoot mexicans?no that was the only person i've interacted with whom i couldn't talk to[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelX-Pro2Camera SoftwareGIMP 2.10.36Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)135 mmMaker Note Version0130Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:01:28 01:24:10Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/2.8Brightness4.8 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length90.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3000Image Height2000RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownBlur StatusOKChroma SaturationNormalContinuous/Bracketing ModeOffAuto Exposure StatusOKFlash ModeUnknownFocus ModeAutoFocus StatusOKPicture ModeManual ExposureSharpnessNormalSlow Synchro ModeOffWhite BalanceAuto
>>4311872>How do I get started1.kidnap2.protrait3.rape4.post5.repeat>people will inevitably ask to see my instagramhahaha no worries, they never will
any photo posters[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image Width1623Image Height541Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiImage Created2014:07:25 10:17:08Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1623Image Height541
>>4312254Now, a diptych is a bit of a bitch, i've got plenty of triptychs, so let's "subvert expectations" as the kids say: this is two pictures, just stitched together, so I do declare that this here is a diptych.In essence if not in spirit, and that's good enough for me for now.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Image Width7923Image Height2983Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2017:10:07 22:47:22Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width7923Image Height2983
>>4312254Dunno what to do with my prompt. I'm >>4312020, a reclusive hermit in bumfuck nowhere. Not really in a position to shoot people at all.
>>4312262Have a pet or one of them Japanese anime figurines?The key to artistry is to bullshit what you want to show into a given category
>>4312254I got 84, do I need to take something new? I'm fine with either, can knock it out tomorrow at a sports event if so
>>4312262pull up to the gas station and start blasting>>4312257pretty neat. i want to try more diptychs and serieses but i always forget to think about that stuff when out shooting
If you're not buying a DSLR you're unironically paying more for inferior tech because you were dazzled by gimmicky bullshit you will never actually useDSLR benefits:>OVF has an infinite refresh rate and resolution>Has an actual depth of field preview so you can tell exactly what will be in focus, most mirrorless cameras stop after ~f/5.6 >off sensor phase detect leading to superior image quality>larger, deeper grips>more buttons>lenses are mechanical focus>glass has focus distance markings making it possible to get your shot in focus without even looking through the ovf>manual primes are extremely compact>have a built-in mirrorless mode anyway allowing for the only two real benefits of mirrorless, those being focus peaking and focus punch-in>batteries last 2x-5x longer>often have built in flash>simple and well organized menu systemsComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4311991The absence of an optical finder is the outdated tech tho
>>4312285I know were this is goingI live in a free aka capitalist country therefore i can buy any dumb luxury i want, i can put thought into the things that matter and enjoy my taking and looking at photographs however i wantbut please keep coping over what ultimately amounts to your own budgetary decisions though it's going to get entertaining when you inevitably invent a pseudo-intellectual artistic "ideology" to justify how you spent your money and reconcile it with your need to feel superior to others. surely, your purchases must have been the best ones, because you're the best. everyone else is stupid, wasteful, consoomer, goy, jew, cuck, something something, or maybe poor, dumb, nigger, idk - go on, say a line like that. and prolong the argument. you know you need that attention. such is the life of a narcissist.or dont waste your time and kys instead typical gearfag>inb4 narcissi thinks he has a comeback
>>4312314I'm not reading all that cope. You have and will never take a photo that couldn't look good or even better on an APS-C DSLR.
>>4312305What the point of discussion? Did I say that SLR systems are bad? No. Did I say that DSLR cameras are past? Yes, this is the objective reality. 4 years since the last two DSLRs presentation, while dozens of new MILCs have been shown in the same period of time.
>>4312333what was the point in you opening your mouth if you didn't want a reply? :A)
we must bring back the BIG BENIS camera
>>4302919Any camera I use is a big-penis camera because I have a big penis.I shoot Fuji.
Hardly a bridge exclusive feature.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON Z 7Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 16.1 (Macintosh)Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern880Focal Length (35mm Equiv)50 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:03:24 18:26:14Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/6.3Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating640Lens Aperturef/6.3Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingCustomExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
Super benis zoom[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:
>>4302919>>4307943nor a new one for that matter(yes, i saved this thread from death, your'e welcome.)[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiImage Created2024:05:09 22:57:53Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width474Image Height1060
recently got onealso thinking about getting the P1000
I absolutely fucked my Zeiss Nettar by oiling the mechanism. Now it’s sluggish. How to I unfuck this?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width600Image Height600Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>4311493Of course! Genius.
>>4311492Dunk the entire thing in 99% iso alcohol and re-oil using the correct oil.
>>4311492>I absolutely fucked my Zeiss Nettar by oiling the mechanism.How did you apply the oil? Did you just ejaculate oil into the mechanism or what?What made you want to oil it?>How to I unfuck this?Disassemble the whole thing very very carefully and clean the oil away. Reassemble using watch oil.
>>4311492The entire mechanism doesn't need to be oiled only parts of it. Apply some naptha or lighter fluid liberally in that area and try to work it.The correct thing to do is to disassemble and clean in lighter fluid and lubricate.>>4311849This is incorrect many of these leaf shutters actually used molybdenum to lubricate them, watch oil or oil in general is too viscous and will slow the shutter mechanism down.
>>4311854so just dump it in liqui molyFixed
>creamy>dreamy>soft >fallout>BOKEHMfw. What are some other photography memes that drive you crazy? I get that good bokeh is about the only thing that separates us from phone pics but come on either obsession already.
>>4311933Usually they are referring to things that don't matter like chromatic aberration, corner softness, and distortion. The fact of the matter is that with a few exceptions almost all lenses made since the 60s have been more than good enough for everything except extremely technical photography.But as a reviewer you can't say everything is good because then it it's not really a review. So they create artificial product separation where the differences are technically real, but actually meaningless with regard to the photo output. Same goes for autofocus.
>>4311831'game changer' makes me seethe every time. youtubers can't stop saying this dumb phrase when it clashes hideously with every other piece of their diction. it sounds like something an out of touch boomer thinks culturally relevant young scammers and grifters say. i one time heard it in real life and got whiplash
>>4311817faggot.
>>4311813see>>4311817"It" is singular"They" is pluralThere are two sexes (gender is made up)>>4311815American education on full displayPoor little zoomers cannot even understand basic grammmatic concepts
>>4312009>There are two sexes (gender is made up)Truth
What is you all's opinion of him going over old cameras?https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLbBZM9aUMsjHKIbURZXP3E8i8Fl_xfc2d
>>4308169Go to small town thrift stores in the midwest and semi-rural areas. They still believe digishits are worth $5. Then start a youtube channel to drive up prices after you've accumulated at least 50 of them so you can sell them for $100 each.Boom, now you have a nikon Z8 and an S lense
>>4308160I bought one of the "top-end" mavica floppy disk camera after watching his video about the mavica. Thankfully i found in on thriftstore for around 30 bucks or so.It's one of the reason why I'm into "older" digital camera rn though I'm specifically more into mid to late 2000s camera phones like SE K800 or Nokia N95. My first camera phone is an iphone 3g so it's interesting to use what is pretty much superior camera that came years before
>>4308224I hate his new obsession with garbo quickstart PCs, buy more obsolete broadcast equipment!
>>4308160he uses these cameras in the same way that everyone on this board would
Why is a fucking YouTuber thread up
And all my photos are fucking garbage and I'm realizing my edits look like total shit I think because I subconsciously try to replicate the iphone HDR look. What the fuck do I do? How do I get better at shooting in imperfect settings?
>>4311532>local business group so pretty corporateThey will accept the shittiest of pictures, you're unironically completely safe. Shit could be out of focus and they would still be cool with it.
>>4311534Yeah you right. I'm more disappointed in myself than anything, lol.
>>4311537That's fine too, you'll improve from your fuckups. Just don't worry much about this one.
>>431151248 is reasonable. I got about 38 very good shots on my first shoot (100 mediocre, 800 shite), and 44 (130 mediocre, 950 shite) on my second. If it's going to be used on social media whoever you did the shots for isn't going to use every single one.
>>4311078shoot moreYou're being too harsh on yourself, nobody gives a shit about your pics they either want to see themselfs or see the subject they care about