Domain changed to archive.palanq.win . Feb 14-25 still awaits import.
Threads by latest replies - Page 4
Anonymous
Quoted By:
New thread
Anonymous
>>4485108 >>4485109 Yes, Sky-Watcher 300P GoTo. I was going to get the non-computerised one but my dad told me I would regret it and it's worth the extra money and I can still get the fun out of manually finding objects. I have to say I'm glad I went with the GoTo. It's been the same here, I've used it once since I bought it three weeks ago because it's just been shit weather but the radar looks good for tomorrow night so hopefully I get a good night of viewing the outer planets + the Moon. Mine was advertised with 20mm and 12.5mm and that's what I got. Maybe they changed it and forgot to update it. And yes, it's Saturn and Titan (the gold one to the left). I'm going to try and tinker with the mirrors to get them better alligned because I noticed some aberration especially with Jupiter, I want to buy some higher power eyepieces soon. Did you get any use out of the phone holder yet? It seems really chinky and cheap and I don't really fancy messing about with it in the cold trying to take sub-par pictures.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4485111 Nice, I sort of tried the phone mount but it doesn't seem to fit very snug, you can't secure it very tight or you'll just end up gouging out bits of rubber from your eyepieces plus if your phone has multiple cameras you'll have to keep moving it side to side when you manually focus, not viable when your target is zooming across the view in <10 seconds. I read that the Celestron phone mounts sit much more secure with the giant clamp but that only solves one issue. Don't do what I did and get a cheap laser collimator either, you'll spend more time trying to collimate the collimator than using it on the mirrors, only to find when you put it in your scope in the 2" adapter it came with that it wiggles around anyway, just use the collimation cap that came with the scope.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
First attempt at using Pixinsight
Anonymous
Anonymous
Been years since I posted here, photo dump.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489438 >1 photo of a gimmick shot. Nice dump, loser.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>One photo >Dump It makes sense, this being /p/ and all
Anonymous
this is his wowzer shot btw, like the strongest of the bunch, the first blow eh. a cocksucking snapshit.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489591 but it’s black and white with grain so it’s art
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489438 Cool pic. Nice thread.
Anonymous
We rate them on the couch together, looking at them on the TV, then I delete the bad ones from our Linux server before sending a big archive to cloud. We do this process once a year, around new year's. If anyone is interested, I'll link the github. What other tools would you suggest that have a high WAF "Wife acceptance factor" for this process?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489605 Slave morality, imagine taking photos for the approval of others. You're so henpecked it hurts lol
Anonymous
>>4489605 Interesting you make this post just as I began using FastStone as my image viewer. I edit in RawTherapee but it is so bad for quickly viewing photos and culling. It’s way too slow. FastStone, on the other hand, gives me a full-screen view with click to zoom and I can press a button to tag the photos I want to keep then sort out the untagged photos into a trash folder. It’s so much better than RawTherapee.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489609 And interesting you say that, because our previous app was faststone. I just wanted a more couch friendly / dumbed down UX.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Give it straight to me, /p/. Are Leica M cameras a meme? Or are they worth it? Mainly for portraits, and rock and leaves.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4481817 The niche:
>3rd generation holocaust survivor who lives in a western metropol and hates it Anonymous
>>4489483 >artificial countertops Lol. Lmao even
cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6
>>4489594 More like omegalul, eh Tim?
>he doesn't even send catalogs to himself, what a poorfag Anonymous
Quoted By:
The glass is decent and crisp, but the price for that is extortionate.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Posting all his series. Posting first: Early Works (SELECT WORKS) 1984 - 1987
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I want to bust a nut on this
>>4483088 series very erotic and fascistic.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4484380 I couldn't upload all his series due to the image limit, but check out his other stuff hosted on his website.
https://andresserrano.org/series/budapest Anonymous
Quoted By:
Wow, his photography is honestly shocking and beautiful way ahead of his time to be honest
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4483069 >Mexican intellectuals Anonymous
Quoted By:
LMAO most of this is just edgy shit. Technical skill really doesn't matter if it's ugly>but that's the point Don't care, fuck off hack "modernity" shits
Anonymous
So I see some absolutely beautiful sunrises at work this time of year. Realistically what kind of gear would I be looking at to get better than my phone camera (iPhone 14). Not sure on what I’m looking for, but I would also like it to be capable of low light exposure/ night time for aurora. Literally have no idea on what I need and the options available out there are worst than trying to figure out what caliber you need for accuracy out at 300 vs 1,500 yards. Is the iPhone just good enough for my amateur needs?
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489553 >live in Canada >cameras see 0F for hours on end for years >no problems ???
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489553 You don't need the LCD to take pictures, and what kind of dogshit camera do you have that freezes up under 20 degrees? The screen gets laggy on my z6 below single digits but it's still perfectly usable and the EVF has no issues at all.
>>4489541 They look awful because even the "good" phone cameras have shit sensors and can only produce anything decent with a ton of automatic processing that makes them look like aislop.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4489472 >>4489473 >>4489474 proof that location + eye are more important than gear
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>horrid looking sunset snapshits >DIS IS WHY QUALITY EQUIPMENT SUCKS AND CAPITALISM IS WRONG AND PEOPLE WHO SUCCEED ARE ACTUALLY LOSERS get a job and buy a 5div
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:
started looking at photos i shot back in 2008-2010ish and decided to do a dump.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous