/p/ - Photography » Thread #3565210

[38 / 11 / ?]

57KiB, 571x430, bf7bdedbc5b546438faf2df4428302f5.jpg

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 12:06:32 No.3565210 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3565235 >>3565336 >>3565364

Does the selfie revolution mean that people are getting used to the way that shorter focal lengths look, to the point that it starts to be preferred over the longer portrait lengths?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO focal-length-comparison.jpg, 430KiB, 1354x1508

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 12:17:31 No.3565213 Report

Quoted By: >>3565214 >>3565248 >>3565306 >>3565340 >>3565348 >>3565355

OP again.

Speaking just for myself, I find I've become accustomed to seeing a photo that looks like it was taken with the camera up close to the subject as more intimate, friendly, even sexier - further away looks formal and stiff.

Both pic related and the op pic are best at 50mm imo.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 12:24:29 No.3565214 Report

Quoted By: >>3565218 >>3565227

>>3565213

I think 85mm looks best. For a bit further away, 50mm looks fine, but that picture is too close for 50mm to look natural.

Cell phone 28mm is way too wide and makes people look terrible.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 12:32:18 No.3565218 Report

Quoted By: >>3565327 >>3565351

>>3565214

but remember there's now a whole generation for whom phone 28mm is what "nudes from the person I want to have sex with" look like, it's the zoomer equivalent of the playboy centerfold

that's gotta have some effect on real photography

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 12:56:27 No.3565227 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565214
35mm looks okay when it isn't a headshot, portraits with some body and interesting angles benefit from it while still being intimate. Not my favorite choice, which is why I use a 65mm but sometimes I want to get close without being halfway across the room.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 13:11:11 No.3565235 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565210
Just means when someone takes a good photo of them they will appreciate it more.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 13:49:31 No.3565248 Report

Quoted By: >>3565755

>>3565213
16mm is the best. i'd shoot everyone like this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 16:55:41 No.3565306 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565213

> 16mm '90s commercial
> 35mm intimate look
> 50-85mm normal face
> 200mm small eyes big head

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 18:12:47 No.3565326 Report

Quoted By: >>3565327

Your average zoomer is confronted with far more commercial photography on a daily basis at a young age than we were. That photography still follows the classic rules for focal lengths, lighting, composition, etc.

So, no, in the same way that my 34 year old ass didn’t develop a fetish for low bit rate porn or grainy print film, I don’t think your premise is going to happen either.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 18:15:32 No.3565327 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565218
>>3565326

Plus it’s worth noting that a lot of those nudes and sexy selfies are still taken in a mirror in an effort to double the distance at which the photo is taken and thus create a more pleasing perspective for proportions. Even young sexy teens still grok the impact of subject-distance ratio.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1573235082777.jpg, 320KiB, 1840x1833

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 18:37:29 No.3565336 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565210
No people slowly think there's an even bigger 'ugly gap' between them and the models in the media they consume. Which is good. The less access people have to getting themselves a quality portrait the better - because most people don't deserve it. Only for real friends or those paying.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 18:52:06 No.3565340 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565213
Someone teach this bitch how to smile.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 18:56:05 No.3565341 Report

Quoted By:

>3565340
>(you)

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:09:57 No.3565348 Report

Quoted By: >>3565356

>>3565213
>shit
>shit
>shit
>good
>good

if a person shoots portrait using anything under 85 i immediately know its a pleb who has no clue about photography.
go play nintendo instead

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:13:21 No.3565351 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565218
this is an interesting perspective

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:24:05 No.3565355 Report

Quoted By: >>3565362

>>3565213
It's always been 50-85mm for females, 70-120 for males because the longer focal length makes you look wider and bigger which is good for men but bad for women. 50mm isn't selfie tier, that would be around 28mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:25:38 No.3565356 Report

Quoted By: >>3565361

>>3565348

real pleb take my dude. do you have all of your human interaction from 20-50 feet away?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1561378858474.jpg, 72KiB, 1080x1020

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:31:25 No.3565361 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565356
>real pleb take my dude.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1526023223024.jpg, 75KiB, 628x534

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:33:53 No.3565362 Report

Quoted By: >>3565411

>>3565355
>50mm isn't selfie tier, that would be around 28mm.
selfies arent taken at 28mm you brainlet. the main cameras of smartphones have focal length of 24 to 28 mm, but not the front facing cam.
you redditors need to get your numbers right.
and still shooting portraits under 85 is youtuber-baby-tier

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1482390243177.jpg, 440KiB, 2000x1859

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:33:56 No.3565363 Report

Quoted By: >>3565369

>3565361

oh no he called me a nu-male and attacked my tone instead of my argument guess he wins!

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:34:28 No.3565364 Report

Quoted By: >>3565368

>>3565210
I'm sure it has, just like myspace angles and other ways to keep you from looking how you actually are. I'm waiting to see if it devolves to the point where selfies become abstract avatars

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO iu[1].jpg, 202KiB, 640x360

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:38:27 No.3565368 Report

Quoted By: >>3565424 >>3565438

>>3565364
aren't the snapchat and instagram filters that soften your face, etc, basically one step away from that?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1565380565573.jpg, 112KiB, 785x731

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:38:37 No.3565369 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565363
>oh no he called me a nu-male and attacked my tone instead of my argument

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:41:06 No.3565371 Report

Quoted By: >>3565372

>3565369

>filenames start with 15

that's a yike from me dawg

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO wegr.jpg, 22KiB, 429x343

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:44:14 No.3565372 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565371
>he doesnt know how to quote posts
>he doesnt know how to spell 'yikes'
that's a yikes from me, back to r*ddit you go

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 19:54:51 No.3565380 Report

Quoted By:

>3565372
>he doesn't know about green arrowing a post rather than feeding a obvious troll his precious (you)'s
>he doesn't know what a yike is

confirmed for newfag tourist who came here a few months ago because he heard it was the sick as fuck school shooter nazi frog website and stayed for the wojak memes.

beats me how you managed to find the photography board and form such a pleb opinion about focal lengths though.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20191109_050726.png, 294KiB, 1440x929

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 21:08:52 No.3565411 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565362
Yeah my bad it's more like 23 and 26mm.
>being clueless and calling other people brainlets and redditors while posting le epic funny wojak xd meme
you're a fucking idiot and should seriously consider suicide

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 21:28:34 No.3565424 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565368
I mean going deeper like, some girl takes a selfie at a concert and the result is totally unrecognizable from the source material and context

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 Nov 2019 21:59:50 No.3565438 Report

Quoted By: >>3565632 >>3565726 >>3565911

>>3565368
And it bleaches the skin. Like there is no beauty that could come from darker skin tones.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 09 Nov 2019 04:29:17 No.3565632 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565438
That’s actually an interesting observation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 09 Nov 2019 12:27:08 No.3565726 Report

Quoted By: >>3565727 >>3565728

>>3565438
>there is no beauty that could come from darker skin tones
yes

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 09 Nov 2019 12:28:18 No.3565727 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565726
>>>pol

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 09 Nov 2019 12:30:42 No.3565728 Report

Quoted By: >>3565729

>>3565726
>>pol

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 09 Nov 2019 12:34:00 No.3565729 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565728
that is not how you crosslink, newfriend

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 09 Nov 2019 14:02:07 No.3565755 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565248
I shoot most people with 9mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 09 Nov 2019 18:12:41 No.3565882 Report

Quoted By:

if it's just a face shot how would you really know anyway unless you knew the person. You wouldn't notice their face is too round

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 09 Nov 2019 18:48:03 No.3565907 Report

Quoted By:

Longer focal lengths make you look wider and fatter. Doesn't look natural

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 83b1f8e5a7977641ef272547.jpg, 215KiB, 1285x873

Anonymous Sat 09 Nov 2019 19:04:21 No.3565911 Report

Quoted By:

>>3565438
Depends on what you are going for.

If you look at any bodybuilder competition they go for darker skin because muscle definition on pale skin is awful.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches