Domain changed to archive.palanq.win . Feb 14-25 still awaits import.
Threads by latest replies - Page 15
Anonymous
I shoot black and whit 'art' photos. I print a lot. So i spend a lot of time looking at the details of each photo. especially if they're hanging on my wall. that being said, i have a conundrum which, surprisingly, isn't well covered on the internet:>would you say a leica monochrom, or a medium format (with more bits and more sensor real estate) would produce better black and white images?
Anonymous
>>4487913 Yep, silly me. I totally forgot. Somday I'll stop being such fucking scum. Alas, today is not that day.
Anonymous
>>4487910 I like my nikon zr with its huge ass screen
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4487915 Dope choice, I'd love to get one
>>4487914 Still sad
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4482924 The Monochrom is cool and I'd like to try it sometime. But it's just way too expensive to justify. You can buy a Pentacon Six with a Carl Zeiss lens for $200 and 200 rolls of bw film including development and scanning ($20/roll) for the same price as the Leica without no lens. Double that if you develop yourself, which is half the fun with bw anyway.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4483444 So buy a k-1 mark ii and have it converted to monochrome.
LakersMonsters !!fHCyNHgc7RT
>shot using smartphone C&C plox
Anonymous
>>4489486 >>4489487 >>4489489 >>4489491 >>4489492 crazy vibes need a crazy angle
all these shots are straight on horizontal
get on the floor.
get on your ass
you want a filthy shot? then roll in the mud to get the shot.
its all too sanitary.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>4489555 cope and seethe.
you will never take a good photo.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489559 u know u can just hold a camera low right instead of getting on the ground. how dumb are u bruh
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489554 your highlights look awful, i'll ignore the green tint because its nostalgic to me being y2k af.
your subjects and angles are boring and I dont know what youre trying to say other than "I AM OBSESSED WITH AESTHETICS" and vibes. Its half hearted and you dont commit enough at all to anything at all.
you have to get lower or get high. get close or dont bother.
Anonymous
Continuous LED lights are terrible for photography. This is an approximate $2400 600watt continuous LED light. At a distance of 2 meters, it can manage 1/60 iso400 f8 at full power. That converts to f4.8 iso400 1/200 if you wanted to get up to a barely usable photography shutter speed. And if you want to go down to iso 100, you are now around f2.8 So $2500 gets you something barely usable on your lowest settings at approx 2 meters, any further distance and it wont work. And if you want to use any modifier at all its all over and you wont even be able to have enough light for a photo. In before just shoot at iso 1600, no thanks, im not spending $2400 just to have to use iso1600.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4488580 Yes, they're made for video. Of course there's going to be better options for photography
Anonymous
Bought it because it was more or less it30 but without the need to buy a riser Thought the off camera shooting was going to be a gimmick - a fun one, but a gimmick nonetheless It's not. It's THAT good even with a rather small range of 18m. Just by holding it in your second hand you can get so much creative control. A cheap selfie stick with a tripod and maybe an offbrand diffuser will genuinely let you have studio quality light for incredibly cheap and rather small package.
Anonymous
>>4488982 Why the hell would think off camera flash would be a gimmick?
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4488983 NTA but I havent bought a transmitter despite theoretically knowing the power of off-camera flash.
I envision my first outing with a transmitter, speedlite and softbox to be groundbreaking and literally make me cum from the results.
Anon probably had the same revelation.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Hello dear users of this platform, I would like to share my art made in Paint, of course, it may not be perfect, and yes, I translate all of this through an online translator, because I'm not exactly American and, in principle, not from Western countries, I drew this art with a shaking mouse and my hand, because it is not a stylus with which you enter on a graphics tablet, I may have already tired of you with a large number of words, but that's all I want to say, and sometimes I will post here and write in new threads expressing my thoughts, because I may not be completely alone, but in my soul I am surrounded by an emptiness that I do not know how to fill, so I think someday I will fix this problem, and even though I most often have pissy thoughts, I believe that I can improve, have a good night or day ))
Anonymous
Quoted By:
show me what kind of weird shit you can make with photoshop
Anonymous
Quoted By:
bluring my photos using jpeg artifacts
Anonymous
Quoted By:
What the actual hell is wrong with my editing and photo something looks very wrong in the photo and I can’t decide on what it is I’m trying to get like a vibe Juno claspo but it doesn’t really fit that vibe
Sugar !egyYvoBZV2
This was shot on a Canon 5D 12mp and edited in LR 3.5 on a Pentium 3 1ghz Dell c610 laptop with 2gb of RAM running XP SP3 on an IDE 40gb 4200rpm spinnydisk Your arguments, all of them in this thread, from all of you, are invalid.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>4488199 those star trails bug me, them seem incidental instead of intentional when clearly some level of effort went into taking & editing that photo
Anonymous
>>4489293 Prolly just a side effect of exposing a night scene so long. I feel like anon didn't really care about three stars in the sky having a bit of a tail.
In fact I would have liked it more if they were even longer (but like, 10x as long)
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489294 >Prolly just a side effect of exposing a night scene so long. yes that's usually how you get star trails
I'm saying I would have retouched them out of the photo, or let it expose for like 4x as long
that's already like a 5' exposure, and either dawn or moonlight, so probably couldn't let it expose for much longer or the lighting changes too much
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Should i get a Sony zv-e 10 II new or a Lumix S II. My goal is 4k 30fps with the highest dynamic range possible, 10bit log and fast sensor readout speed (low jellow)
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4488812 You're right about the apertures and f1.4 being a meme for it, but you do need an ND filter, that's the one piece of gear that is unquestionably needed unless you only film indoors.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4481494 >posted it again award Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4488812 You need an ND filter if you shoot any kind of log during daylight, even stopped down
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4488812 >No need of an ND filter If you shoot "cienema" you are gonna be shooting with a 180degree shutter. With a base iso of most cameras at 800, 1/48s outside is going to be fucking impossible. Even 100iso will be a stop over at f16.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4481589 >unzips dick AI porn is so good its unreal. dont even need OF anymore
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Anyone else here working a regular job/day job as a photographer? I've been working as a real estate photographer for a while and still do side jobs for things like corporate portraits/events, and I'm curious if anyone else on /p/ works in photography too.
Anonymous
>>4488755 It's funny how so many gurus and people in your life say to make your job your hobby. Same thing with cars too, I knew a guy that loved cars and then fucking hated them and never did shit to his own car ever again after he started working as a mechanic. He let his car pretty much rot because he couldn't stand doing what he already did for work as an after work project.
Anonymous
>>4488758 Entry/mid level jobs require you to sell your soul to excel spreadsheets or lung cancer for pennies over minimal legal wage with unpaid overtime. Anything that can get you away from today's hellish market is desired
Anonymous
>>4489009 >he thinks the photography/filmography industry isn't also soul crushing or pays more than pennies Lol
Anonymous
>>4489141 I meant that market of regular jobs is so unbearable to people any escape plan is giving them hope. that means escaping right into the trap of even more competitive and ungrateful industry or hell of getting contracts for small buisness survival
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489179 Gotcha. Same thing I did, I was in a normie regular job and jumping into a full time professional photography job sounded like a dream come true, but it just meant getting fucked in pay and essentially being told I was really lucky and other people dream of getting the job.
I've no doubt they replaced in me in seconds but who knows how long the new guy will last, the industry rotates through normal people fast while only the people who are willing to be shit on will remain.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Some photos I took for a friend in Oregon a while back - any good?
Anonymous
>>4486347 That just sounds like post-hoc cope now
But it was worth the effort to defend low effort comments though?
Anonymous
>>4486349 Not really but I was bored desu so I don't mind
Hope you enjoyed what came out of your b8
Anonymous
>>4486350 I did, I made some effort posts and will continue to putting effort into making this board better
Looking at photos and figuring out what was done poorly and what could be done better is a great exercise I would encourage everyone to do
Hopefully you come around and would like to see the board be better too one day
Anonymous
>>4486350 Oh and I'll keep trying to call out low effort useless feedback too, hope you can do the same
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4486353 >>4486354 All you ended up doing was randomly posting in other threads with the "lel that's old" seethe routine and start more fights. You are a loser.
Anonymous
I'm gonna attend a wedding on saturday and i want to shoot some film. It's an african wedding, so there will be loads of bright colors and warm hues. I shoot with a Point and shoot camera (pentax iqzoom), but i own a SLR (Nikon fg 20). I have never shot with an slr camera, and i have no clue how they work. But i reckon the pictures look better on an slr. I have two dilemmas at hand>I don't know which film stock is good for capturing warm hues >I don't know if i should try out the slr camera (or if i should play it safe) i want to capture something reminiscent of picrel
Anonymous
>>4488924 >I think it will be pretty well lit inside, NTA. Don't be fooled. Even pretty heavy indoor lighting is nowhere near the LV of the outdoors.
Indoors with film I'm normally pushing HP5 to 800 at minimum and realistically to 1600 (but I think it looks kind shit pushed two stops).
At 800 ISO I'm only just in a "safe" shutter speed range to avoid camera shake and I need to ask people to stay still for photos indoors.
400 ISO film is absolute minimum for indoors and I'd be pushing that one stop anyway. If you're using colour film then fagghedaboudit
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4488946 Portra and Lomo 800 work fine indoors, if a bit grainy. But pushing hp5 will make the grain apparent too.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4488846 get old gold 100 (2006-2005)
Anonymous
>>4488846 it is possible to mount 28mm (if you have one) to fg-20 set aperture to 5.6 and 3.3m focus and shoot day with kodak 100 proimage
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4488946 Didnt understand half of that but what I got is
>get 400 iso I dont really like the look of kodak ultramax 400 though. It doesn't look warm, and it doesnt have that "film" look
>>4488953 I have decided to use the point anf shoot so i dont think i can make adjustments like that.
I need to finalize what kind of film I'll be using because im going to buy it later today. Ektar100 or kodak gold is what i am considering right now