Things you hate hearing

>>2748429
>hey anon, can you take your camera with you to the party?

>how much zoom does it have

>>2748457
i should have added this one, good lord i fucking hate when people ask that

>>2748462

You two are insufferable fags.

>>2748470
sorry for wanting to enjoy social activities :)

>why would i need a DSLR my iPhone takes amazing pictures

>How many megapickles does it have?

>>2748472

If you can't enjoy it while shooting photos, give up now.

>>2748478
ever tried taking photos in a stuffy club and a beer in your hand? it's not a very fun combination.

>>2748482

Dozens of times. My d300 is still sticky from champagne, specifically around the flash. It makes me smile. Cameras are just things and can be replaced. Memories are rare and precious.

You'd be surprised how much an instax and $20 worth of film can elevate a party.

>>2748429
>My camera was $1700, how much was yours?
You're a filthy poorfag if you can't easily out dick wave your normie friends when comparing how much you've spent on gear. I don't care if you're a broke ass college student drowning in debt and your friends are a bunch of trustfund babies. That shit is unacceptable.

>the best camera is the one you take with you

>Did you just take a picture of me?

>>2748485
>Memories are rare and precious.
Until you get Alzheimer's.

>what's the best camera?

>>2748495

I would say that they become even more rare and precious when you get Alzheimer's.

>>2748510
o snap

>>2748429
>oh wow, a film camera, can you even buy film anymore?

No, fuckwit, I carry this heavy piece of shit around as an ornament.

>>2748587
>people wanting to start a conversation
Fuck them, right guys?

>>2748588
Yes.

>>2748587
>No, fuckwit, I carry this heavy piece of shit around as an ornament.
there are probably people who do exactly that.

>>2748487
how gearfags really think

>These photos are great, your camera must be really good

>>2748650

To be fair, it probably is really good compared to cheap P&S cameras they're used to.

>what compact camera do you recommend? that one? hmmm, no I want something with more zoom.

>>2748587
this happens to me all the time
>fuji xt1

>>2748587
>No, fuckwit, I carry this heavy piece of shit around as an ornament.

You just described half this board.

File: QoqOby7.gif (2MB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x250px

working part time as best buy in the camera department is fucking hell.

>20-something couple looking at P&S cameras

>"Hi do you have any questions about the cameras?"
>She asks best camera for $200
>Tell her they're all pretty much the same, but recommend Nikon b/c my autism
>"What's the difference between THESE (points to DSLRs) and THIS ($100 Nikon)
>"The DSLRs take way better photos, better capabilities, interchangeable lenses blah blah blah"
>She says she wants to start shooting weddings professionally
>Tell her to buy a DSLR, probably a full-frame if she even wants to consider getting paid to take wedding photos, a couple lenses, a couple flashes, a whole fucking setup
>"I don't see why any of that is necessary"
>"Well I have experience shooting weddings, my aunt needs an assistant during the summer so I help out a lot"
>"Yeah but you didn't START the business, everyone starts somewhere"
>I warn her that it's in her best interest to go all-out instead of buying a P&S
>"I'm not spending thousands on a camera to take pictures at weddings"

>She bought the fucking coolpix

>>2748754

>Tell her to buy a DSLR, probably a full-frame if she even wants to consider getting paid to take wedding photos, a couple lenses, a couple flashes, a whole fucking setup

thats not really the best thing to tell beginners, but yes this whole scenarios would piss me off, personally after a customer ignores my advice i pretend to let them know what THEY think is a good idea so they can fuck themselves in the long run

>>2748754
Yea. People sure are dumb.

> Can you make me not fat?
> I don't like my eyes in this one. Can you take my eyes from this other picture and put them in this one?
> I took pictures one time at band camp. I should show them to you because they're awesome.
> I don't know much about this stuff, but shouldn't you have one of those enormous lenses? Like those guys at football games?
> So do you work for a newspaper or magazine or something? (Without waiting for answer...) What issue will these be in so I can look for it?
> My dad/uncle/fourth cousin takes pictures too. Do you know them?

>>2748754
>Tell her to buy a DSLR, probably a full-frame if she even wants to consider getting paid to take wedding photos
I've seen wedding photographers use crop bodies plenty of times, so she really wouldn't need full frame for that.
That being said, nobody would use a coolpix superzoom for professional anything. She'd be just as well off trying to shoot a wedding with her phone.

>>2748754
Hah, I work at Best Buy in cameras too! It's really fun most of the time. Just talk about cameras and photography then go home. I've even made a few connections with other local photographers through the job.

You liking the Sigma accommodation?! That thing and the Nikon one will keep me at BB through any amount of retail bullshit

>>2748457
nightmare mode: you were invited to the party normally and when you get there host says "I thought you'd bring your camera :c"

>>2748812
i experience this all the time

the worst is when you do sometimes end up bringing the camera to the party to satisfy the people, you are the only one who has to take the group photo and not be in it

>>2748812
Yeah. Also upfront people.
> would you like to drop by for a coffee, i miss you
I sure would!
> great! Take your camera with you too I need more photos of my vagina! (I wish, only kids, cats an dogs irl)

>>2748811
I'm at John Lewis, it's basically the British equivalent. It's always really nice when you get customers who actually listen to you and respect that you probably know what you're talking about, but yeah, we get some utter fuckwits

When you're giving someone advice about cameras and how to shoot them, as a Best Buy employee, their first and only thought is "If you knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't be working at Best Buy."

Consider the source.

>>2748820
It helps a LOT if you start with non-product stuff that GENUINELY interests you first. It makes them less suspicious of you as a retail robot who doesn't know shit. Instead of asking if they have any questions about cameras, talk about the weather, sports/school (based off of clothing logos) current events, etc.

I've had a bunch of 10m+ conversations that way, some of which have ended in a sale despite the person not even coming in to look at/buy a camera

>>2748820
>and respect that you probably know what you're talking about,
The guy working for commission suggests I spend literally 10x as much money and tells me that it's the only way I'll get good photos! Of course I trust him without knowing anything about him or his qualifications other than as a salesman!

>>2748759

she was being nasty. I'm usually not like that with beginners but she was implying that wedding photography is an easy thing to "just do"

>>2748457
>fuck you, no
Always

>>2748588
>>2748603
>>2748703
>>2748733
>These are exactly the replies I wanted :^)

But also
>cool, my dad has one of those somewhere I think
(no he fucking doesn't, this is a 20 year old camera $ lense that I paid a thousand dollars for today)

>anon, I've seen your pictures, wow tey're beautiful
ten minutes later
>why do you take so many pictures anon
because this is what it takes, you fucking idiot

>you should come to my gig!
fuck no

>>2748759
>thats not really the best thing to tell beginners

But it's true.
You can do it without full frame (but it certainly helps), but you definitely need a couple of nice lenses and flashes. It's not something you just get into without an initial investment.

And a beginner has no business shooting weddings professionally in the first place.

>>2748904
There are TONS of wedding shooters out there making a living with T5i + kit lenses.

File: muhgear.jpg (285KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1080x1080px

>>2748703
my compatriot

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X100T
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:20 17:32:00
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Brightness	5.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	23.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2748907
Yeah, there are tons of wedding photographers taking shitty pictures and getting shitty pay.

Im more annoyed by people coming up and asking what Im using then saying they JUST have (instert gear here).

>at a local show at a club where my friend's band is going to play
>guy B-lines it to me
>canon or nikon?!?
>I shoot with cano(cuts me off)
>whats that!?! 24-70 f2.8!?!
>yea
>thats expensive
>yeah but I shoot weddings so I kinda need the 2.8
>yeah I just have (whatever the fuck Nikon crop body)
>that probably gets the job done no worries
>nods like we are homies and walks to the stage and proceeds so fire direct flash at the band

>>2748907
>>2748909
Lol it's funny to me you automatically think someone that can get by on lesser gear is shitty.

>>2748813
>what is self timer

>Can you photoshop this regular thing into a more absurd thing?

I recently got a request to take a smartphone snapshit and photoshop it into some ridiculous production that required so much more than photoshop. I was actually pretty offended since it was a dumb idea but I bit my lip and said "Okay, give me several naked women willing to pose for this picture and I'll take a photo. Otherwise you're asking for shit I can't do."

>>2748474
>megapickles

Come talk to me when you break into fuzzy pickles, friendo.

>>2748754
Fuck man, where were you a few years back when I was starting out?

>>2748813
>you are the only one who has to take the group photo and not be in it
That's the point you tool

>That one person that keeps trying to be in every group shot you take.

>>2748908
My favorite part is the max flash sync is really 250.
I wonder if the xt1 will get the new ACROS film simulation.

>>2748457
Can't see what's wrong with this

>>2748429
>I dunno $600 for a wedding seems a bit steep, my wife's nephew says he'll do it for free
If this is a quote from someone you closely know, I'd do it for lower or cheap. If it's a client, fuck them.

>>2749255
>lower or cheap
lower or free*, woops

>>2749255
it shows they only invited you for you to take photos, not for you to exist as a fellow human being

>>2749255
ive yet to shoot a wedding for a close friend or family member, but yeah half of my clients have asked me that bullshit

>$600 wedding

That's cheap as shit. I make around $400 to show up and shoot as a 2nd with no editing or headache at all.

>>2749271
i know its cheap, once i get past my 10th wedding, and my catalogue looks grand enough, ill start charging those fuckers by the hour

honestly the only thing more over priced than diamonds is wedding photos

>>2748907
T5i a 700D?

Whats wrong with the 700D? just got one as my first DSLR

>>2748813

I like that part because then I don't have to say I associate with fucking normies

>>2749291
Bad at low light, most people who own one usually dont have the money to put good glass on it either.

>>2749291
Nothing. It'll do you just fine. It has a smaller sensor than full-frame cameras and lower dynamic range though, which means that it is ultimately a less flexible tool than a more expensive camera with a bigger and better sensor. Plus it's noisy, but you'll be right.

File: 1435656823559.gif (2MB, 300x164px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x164px

>>2748603
A couple years ago in like my sophomore year of high school, there was the qt azn that I liked and one day she showed up with a Canon A1 around her neck.
After class I was talking to about the camera and what not since I was getting into film photography then, and she said it actually was her older sister's and she just thought it looked cool.

>>2749327
How does it stack up to the 600D? My gf and i both recently got into photograpy and own a 600D/600D

>>2748811
>>2748754
Fellow best buy part time employee here, I'm connected devices though. Wearing my 100$ Klipsch headphones I got for 30$ atm :^)

>>2749259
Maybe it's for both at the same time.

But the idiots generally don't realize how much gear and work is required to shoot a wedding well.

File: image034.jpg (587KB, 1000x686px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 1000x686px

>>2748457
>>2748462

Idk I love bringing a camera to parties. Usually not my DSLR but I just bring my analog rangefinder and people usually have a lot of fun with it. It's a neat icebreaker and gives an excuse to talk about cameras for a few minutes. You let em take a few snaps explaining how rangefinders work.

Afterwards you can get it developed for 2 bucks and have something you can give to people. In my experience they really appreciate the analog style photos

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.2 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2013:02:20 17:09:56

File: 1449991627647.png (529KB, 1015x1527px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 1015x1527px

>wow these photos are so beautiful anon, why aren't you making money of these?
>sure, how much would you pay for a print?
>receive awkward attempt at dodging the question

>>2748429
>my (current) phone takes waaaaay better pictures than my point and shoot

> :^)

>>2748909
lots of pro photographers use rubbles as their backup bodies, senpai.
like >>2749327 said, it's less flexible than fool frame, but if you know what you're doing you can get the job done.

>>2749386
If you just started it'll be great. Dslr now are all at a level where you can make awesome stuff if you have dem skillz. Also learn to cc

>>2749568
CC?

>>2748923
How is the 18-55 gonna beat a 70-200 f2.8 at portraits?
I get where your coming from with the whole person make good photo, not gear, but there are still reasonable limitations to a t5i + kit lens

>>2749638
It will beat it when the operator of the 2.8 is an average gearing and the operator of the shitty kit lens is a portrait photographer

>>2749557
trying to sell stuff to your friends seems impolite

saying "you wanna buy one haha" jokingly is alright, but the way you spelled it out just seems to turn a compliment into a situation that's uncomfortable for everyone involved

>>2748429
All time worst comment is:

>your camera takes really good pictures

>>2749676
hihi thanks for that one lad now i have another thing to trigger photographers with besides the good old "photography isn't art" bit

this one's really good since it's a compliment too im loving it

>Oh let me see!

>>2749391
Nice, which?

>>2749551
I'll usually take a small RF almost anywhere I go that can fit into my pocket just in case something happens, then if I know the person I took a photo of I'll just give them their picture after I scan it.


>People that argue with you over how similar their model of DSLR is to yours even though yours has significantly better features.

It's not gearfagging if they are stubborn and discard everything objectively right you say to them. And I know I'm not the only one here who's experienced this.

>>2749680
Ebin

>>2749373
>not talking to her probably even qter older sister
baka desu senpai

>>2749676
One of my friends asked me to take photos at his wedding based on my camera, despite already hiring a photographer.
He apparently liked my photos better than the official photographer though, and he now thinks that canon "takes better pictures" than sony, even though neither of us were professionals.

>>2749373
Qt azns with cameras are my fetish

File: 1448129640871.gif (823KB, 260x173px) Image search: [Google]

823KB, 260x173px

>mfw having a real profession, not a meme psuedo-profession like photography

>mfw i never have to deal with any of this bullshit

>want to be considered seriously in a hobby
>don't have any money to actually get into it
lol anti-gearfags

>>2750280
i treat it as a hobby that gets me money every now and then

other than that, im a marketing manager

File: .jpg (70KB, 520x678px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 520x678px

Is it best to ignore these kind of demands?
My friends try to take over my work a lot.

>>2748429
Things I hate hearing:

Do I really have to take off my bra/clothes?

>>2749211

If you expected this thread to not be pretentious, you expect too much.

>in a really dark chill cocktail lounge
>group of people who've clearly never been there before
>want to take a group photo
>flash lights up the entire joint
>everyone in the lounge turns and even though it's too dark to see their faces they know they fucked up

All the lights in there would make for amazing bokehballs though. I've considered bringing my camera with

>>2750385
Yes

>>2748587
I actually had someone ask me if my camera was an accessory once

>>2749557
You fucking autist.

> whoever: "That's a fancy looking camera; does it take good pictures?"
> Me: *shrugs* "Depends who's holding it. Same as any camera."

It's either a put-down to people who think being a photographer is just about having a good camera, or encouragement to people who only have their phones that it's still possible to take a great photo if you know what you're doing and are willing to learn.

File: lil-bub-cat-photo.jpg (186KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1000x1000px

>I love photography! I'm really into photography! I want to be a photographer!


>Pirated LR catalog contains only 50 lens test images of pet cat
>36,550 post on dpreview
>member of circlejerk camera brand forum
>argues all day on /p/ about 'FF' vs crop, Sony vs Fuji, mirrorless vs dSLR....
>loves to critique images for inane technical points (especially Magnum photographers)
>obsessed with high iso noise
>only ever views images at 100%
>hates 'art' photography - those people lack technical skill and don't know enough about high-iso noise, CA, barrel-distortion.....
>buys new camera every 12 months calling it the 'best camera ever - all others are shit'
>sells previous camera with shutter count of just 1,420 (90% of that is high-speed burst of the back of a chair to test AF)
>cameras always in pristine mint condition - almost as if they've never left the house.
>subscribes to aspirational photo mags called things like "Pro Photo Camera Photog Pro Professional Pro Pro" that have zero photography content just gear reviews
>once did leave the house to take a photo. took a long-exposure shot of traffic. it looked shit. blamed the camera. went home and started pixel-peeping shopping for upgrade
>obsesses over perceived faults with camera mentioned on dpreview even though working pros have zero issues and churn out amazing stuff day after day
>zero knowledge of metering, flash, lighting, so adopts ambient light is the true way flash is for fakers attitude


The 99%

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1000

>>2751298
this projection is reaching embarrassing levels

>>2751299

Struck a chord with you, gearfag?

>>2751285
You're a passive aggressive cuck who nobody respects.

File: 1449749075683.jpg (20KB, 250x324px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 250x324px

>>2751298
>stop caring about the only thing that technology is improving in cameras
someone's poor

File: 1450406851540.jpg (43KB, 330x319px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 330x319px

>>2751298
>he's so poor he strips exif info
it just gets better and better

>>2751330

>implying that pic didn't come from google images.

Why you so stupid?

>>2751349
>google images
>exif

Dhdhdh

Lojff

>>2751351
>>2751352
i hate when that happens

Rtg

deedde

Ne

Fuuu

>>2751364
Kolifdtijvfghjhh

>>2751366
asda trtecvfnnad fosdpdf ?

mad /p/tards

>>2751376
Is /p/tards really the best thing you could come up with?

Not even /p/haggots or something?

>>2751377
>thinking you deserve a creative moniker
no

>>2748835
>He thinks BB employees are paid commission and not bare minimum wage
Get a load of this NEET.

>>2751298
Show me on the doll where Ken Rockwell touched you.

>>2751330

Homeboy is definitely not the owner of Lil' Bub, fuckwit.

>>2751328
That wouldn't exactly make me unique around here...

File: 420_10.jpg (81KB, 306x200px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 306x200px

>>2751298
spot fucking on

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2015:05:19 23:29:04
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	306
Image Height	200

>>2751330
I know a guy who saves his images again in Netscape or something like that because he does not have a genuine PS and does not want anyone to know he's using it

>>2751298
couldn't have made this more accurate

>>2751300
omg my thoughts exactly

>>2751330
you sound too dumb not to be poor lol

>>2751299
>>2751330
>>2751876
lmao

So I'm a poorfag and I started shooting in film and got really into it, here are some of the questions I usually get:

>Is film better than digital? Why not? What is a "medium format"?

> I think film photography is falsely popular since it gives you the "perception" it's good because you have to do everything yourself

> It's a dead format, why bother?

>Which camera makes the black and white pictures?

I mean, it's OK to be ignorant to what's out there, but at least be curious and listen if you are pretending to be interested. And don't make fucking stupid assumptions.

It's so tiring to show pictures and someone turns around to say "oh nice, I saw that on Google Images", meanwhile you sweated for 5 hours over enlarging and printing a picture. Demoralizing as fuck.

File: image.jpg (25KB, 251x242px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 251x242px

>>2751298
Oh god yes.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	251
Image Height	242
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2752125
>"oh nice, I saw that on Google Images"
That doesn't even make sense why would u say that when someone shows you a pic lol.

>>2752125
>"They still make film for that?"

Gets me every time. Nah mate, just been carrying it around and putting it up to my eye for shits and giggles

>>2748488
TFW quoting Chase Jarvis and pretending its your quote

>>2752137
I had this moment where I printed out a picture from Lake Balaton, and my mate is like "oh wow, it looks exactly like a stock image on google". Like, fuck you.

> Mmmmmmm yeeaah... do you think you could do me a favor and take corporate headshots of all (over 200) staff?

> Mmmmmmyeeeah do you think you could make an iconic photograph of the office so we can post it in some cryptic 5-page-deep subsection thumbnail-sized space of the corporate website? I think it would be great exposure for your work.

>>2752252
Yeah, I hate when people offer me work too. It's terrible.

>>2752252
Note: Sent the boss to go fuck himself on both cases.

>>2752253
Unpaid work? I bet you love it. So does the client's nephew.

>>2752255
>Yeah, I can do all that. My hourly rate for photography is $50, including editing time. I'd love to do it for free, but the knowledge and equipment necessary take a lot of time and expense, so I can't afford to do it for free.

>>2748429
Photography takes no skill. I'm not saying this is something I hate hearing but as something that is objectively true.
Why should you get paid anything when a toddler with an iphone can do just as good a job?

>>2752282
1/10 No creativity, finesse, or timing.

>>2752282
too obvious. The first part was okay, the "objectively" was maybe a bit over the top but could've worked. However the second part with toddler and iPhone ruined what coul've worked. Next time try to go a bit lower and maybe add a bit more, two sentences for this level of b8 aren't enough.

Post more if you want some more CC!

> "You should come take pictures of my metal band. We're playing a show out in *insert name of middle of buttfuck nowhere town*."

"Pass."

>"Nice camera, my buddy and I have an idea for this youtube social experiment vid-"

"Pass."

Why are you people so autistic? I just do this as a hobby and I still know where to apply "professionalism".

>>2748772
>> Can you make me not fat?
Sorry, I'm just a photographer -- I only do minor touchups. Here's contact info for a professional.
>> I don't like my eyes in this one. Can you take my eyes from this other picture and put them in this one?
Sorry, I'm just a photographer -- I only do minor touchups. Here's contact info for a professional.
>> I took pictures one time at band camp. I should show them to you because they're awesome.
Absolutely :)
>> I don't know much about this stuff, but shouldn't you have one of those enormous lenses? Like those guys at football games?
Those lenses are for when you're really far away...
>> So do you work for a newspaper or magazine or something? (Without waiting for answer...) What issue will these be in so I can look for it?
My photos get purchased sometimes, but mostly I'm just a hobbyist :) here's my card with my site/flickr so you can find your photo!
>> My dad/uncle/fourth cousin takes pictures too. Do you know them?
No I don't. What was their name again? X? Hmm, I'll look them up when I get home, thanks! :)

Like shit guys, contain your aspergers for a few minutes when you deal with the general public, eh?

>>2753155
You sound like you have coping mechanisms developed from literal autism lmao

>>2748815
This happens to me often. My go-to response is to ask then how much they're willing to pay. Usually that will shut them up, but sometimes they'll actually be happy to give me money for photos.

>"Is that a camera?"

No shit sherlock.

I get that they're trying to start a conversation, but every time I hear that it sets off my retard alarms, especially when I have a DSLR out.

>>2752252

If it's my employer asking to do it, I'd be fine with not actually being 'paid' for the photos. Shit is essentially a free 'get out of the office' card.

>wow, great pictures. your camera must be really great

replace "great" with "expensive", or "pro"

>>2753643
I carry a camera everywhere I go, on a thin shoulder strap, every day, for the last 9 or so years, and have never once been asked "is that a camera"

>>2753710
Do you not have a job?

be at zoo taking pictures of animals

>can ya shoot through the fence with that lens?

>>2754046
so can you?

>>2754050

no i'm just taking closeups of the fence

>>2754055
cool you use a macro lens?

>>2753710
that's probably because no one wants to start a conversation with you lol.

Not something that people say but rather something that people do.
I hate when people stop walking if you're taking a picture or ask if it's okay to pass. This happens to me at least 3 times a week and it never fails to annoy me.

>>2748820
>I'm at John Lewis, it's basically the British equivalent
I hope you're not that Nikon shill who kept asking me if I could live with 16 Megapixels when I just wanted to see the X-T10. Flat up lost a sale because he didn't know about the camera and started giving me a Nikon sales pitch while I was looking through the menus.

>>2748794

Did I mention anywhere in my post that I don't put a professional face on when these situations come up?

We all know know the answers to give people. We also know know the answers we would like to to give people. They obviously aren't the same.

So how about you contain your own fucking autism and learn to laugh at a rant/bullshit/lulz thread without white knighting all over the place.

>>2754128

Replied wrong. Meant for

>> 2753155#

This is somewhat of a philosophical dilemma but I am the 'best' photographer that my girlfriend's family knows, and now my girlfriend's grandmother wants me to photograph her birthday party for her (for free, not like I would charge her anyways but that's besides the point).

I don't own any flashes nor do I have any wide angle lenses (widest is my 35 mm APS-C prime) and this party is probably gonna be in some dark country club.

I hate doing portrait photography and don't have much experience with it. I'm not really enthusiastic about being drafted into being a party photographer just because I enjoy photography in my free time and I'm somewhat good at it.

Should I just suck it up and take some noisy high ISO pictures with no flash? They'll probably be shit and I hate showing people shit photos that I took, there's a reason I only do this as a hobby.

>>2752125
>I think film photography is falsely popular since it gives you the "perception" it's good because you have to do everything yourself
this is true in most part. specially in art photography because it implies you made a unique and singular print to bump up the price

overall you're a faggot for thinking that your work on a shitty composed stock image is meaningful in any way because you spent more time developing it than planning it. you're the only cringeworthy aspect of your post.

>>2752282
Taking a picture doesn't take much skill or knowledge. Iphone cameras are sometimes considered the best because you always have them with you. you shouldn't really get paid, its a dying industry in terms of that.

its also a great medium for art, however. which takes a lot of thought into making the images themselves (as opposed to pressing the button)
anyone who opposes to this is just a butthurt hobbyist desu.

>>2754173
I'd recommend testing out your lens with some low-light or night shots to get an idea of how your pictures are going to look. Primes (in my limited experience) tend to take really good low-light photos. Maybe get a cheap tripod to make it easier on yourself.

Otherwise, if you know they won't be picky and just want you to document it, use the flash or higher ISO. I'd bet good money on them having no idea (let alone caring) about noise and all that.

>>2754173
Unless you're making large prints or showing them what it looks like at 100%, just apply generous noise reduction then resize to sharpen them up again

>>2754214

I personally don't like em, but a shitty monopod might be useful.

>>2752125
35mm film is a dead format in terms of any relevancy in any commercial/professional application. You'll get the offhand guy who makes money selling pics or doing work somehow but it's extremely rare.

Large format and medium format to a lesser extent remain relevant because when they are scanned in they can compete with - or even surpass - digital at base ISO, and they offer up lens movements for cheap.

>>2748478

What an utter twat. You certainly don't get invited to parties, with or without a camera.

>>2748429
>That camera takes really good pictures... It's definitely not the photographer.

>>2748650
Damn straight my gear is good. Here, let me show you some benchmarks. Look at how well this IS let's me stop down handheld. Do you see this dynamic range? Doesn't that just make your pussy wet?

>>2754046
Tell him that the negative properties of shooting through a fence are minimized when you are close to the fence and the subject is far away. The poor guy probably wants advice from the perceived 'expert' because he's never been able to get a usable result through a fence.

>>2754221
>35mm film is a dead format in terms of any relevancy in any commercial/professional application.
*citation needed

>>2754094
it must be awful that people don't want to ruin your shot

>>2754173
I would suggest getting a cheapo speed light and mounting it on camara. it can really improve shots, and it doesnt even look like the awful on camara flash

>>2752282
That's quite true. Very easy learning curve in the beginning, subjective art at the end.

>>2752251
take an original pic then m8

>>2757013
Only if you suck my dick.

That first ones pretty easy to deal with, literally just "ok then bye" there is no reasoning with shit like that.

another good one

>wow why is the that thing so slow at shooting? Shouldn't it be fast like my phone??

>>2751876
holy shit too much kek

>>2749575
Color correction aka learn to use Photoshop, even just curves will help you a lot. Also composition

>>2753318
survival

>>2754094
It's that same mysterious principle that makes people walk weird and super careful if they cross a wet area where someone is washing the floor. They still walk across it just the same, but seems like they are straight out of the ministry of silly walks.

>>2748487
this. every pro photographer has like 10k+ worth of gear no joke

>>2748587
>shooting film
but why

>>2748754
she aint about that life. normies don't understand the need to spend on gear

>>2749373
ya so teach her the ways senpai

File: 1444973163273.jpg (68KB, 480x700px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 480x700px

>photography takes no effort, you only have to press one button
These mouth breathers still piss me off, they are as bad as those kids who tell to an artist "i could do that with a filter"

>>2757867
>"my five year old could do that [insert modern art painting here]"

well he fucking didn't did he?

>>2757867
Please don't get me started on this fucking shit.

"LOL, anyone can do this!"

Yeah, but you didn't - did you?

My gf is a fine art photographer, and her work borders contemporary with classic print photography techniques - when I first met her I scoffed at this. But then I saw how fucking hard it is to do it - do anything really. It's the confidence you need to put something out there that you feel good with, it will show through the piece.

>>2754221
>35mm film is a dead format in terms of any relevancy in any commercial/professional application
What about movies?

>>2757876
>My gf is a fine art photographer, and her work borders contemporary with classic print photography techniques

show.

File: IMG_0301.jpg (145KB, 1500x888px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1500x888px

>>2758086
Do people shoot 35mm films?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T1i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:31 21:40:12
Exposure Time	2.5 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	-1/3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2758092
?

>>2758092
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/help-star-wars-kodak-ceo-848593

>>2749249
I'm considering the xt1 seriously, but I'm currently leaning towards the xt10

>>2758116
I have an X-T1 and have used the X-T10 a lot. If you have any questions, ask away.

>>2748457
Say yes and shoot things irrelevant to the party

>>2748473
>Phone? You can't take good pictures with that. Get a real camera.

>>2757876
Something tells me it's shots of brooding white people laying in bed

>>2758595
This is a great idea, I'll have to try that next time.

>>2754055
Goddamnit lost my shit on this one

>>2758123
Looking at both, and looking at my budget...

I think that xt10 is more my style.

Recommend any good lenses?
I see a zeiss 32mm prime for sale used, and that intrigues me.

>>2758611
Can't be more wrong. But that's OK, assume what you want.

>>2748429
I love teasing the wedding photographers. You guys are such insufferable pricks and only one in thirty of you has any talent.

>>2758633
>Recommend any good lenses?
Everything but the 18mm is good, even the kit lenses and zooms. My least favourite lenses are probably the 27mm f2.8 and the 60mm f2.4 macro.

It really depends on what you want to shoot, but you can't go wrong with the Fuji lenses. You can get away with using other lens mounts via adapters as long as you're not using them in low-low light.

>>2749214


This

>>2748429


>we love our wedding photos anon!! We know you delivered way more than promised (in the contract), but can we have more? (We didn't give you the list of photos we absolutely needed to have we we promised to find you (in the contract), but) we want all the raw files from the wedding. You don't have to edit them out anything!! :)

>No.

File: image.jpg (37KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1280x720px

>Walk into urban outfitters carrying my camera because I just finished a shoot
>employee notices and tries to strike up conversation
>tells me he went to school for photography and complains about not being able to find work
>mfw I tell him I work full-time doing lifestyle and wedding related stuff

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1280
Image Height	720
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2758745
same. hate this so much, but I'm getting used to it

>>2758745
>>2759442
y not tho?

>>2758745
just give them the photos you stingy fuck

Can I assume this is just a rage thread?
>Work at camera store
I could write a fucking book.

A guy came in and wanted me to photoshop the background of an image into focus, he actually wanted me to change the focus point of a shot he took 30 years ago. Just to confuse him I told him about the lytro.

A woman wanted some photo paper from us and asked us if she could see it, so I handed across the counter to her, figuring she was just looking to confirm its what she wanted. She rips it open right fuck there and says "yeah this looks like paper". I was actually speechless.

Guy says "I can't get that misty/smooth water look, like in those waterfall photos, no matter how long i set the exposure". After a few questions I found out he was photographing his small fish pond. He then argues with me when I tell him the water has to be moving.

I actually spent 45 minutes tester day trying to teach a 15 year old how a 2 stage shutter works. They just kept jamming it all the way down and saying "the photo is blurry, this camera sucks".

As a joke we put a price tag for $6999 on a Holga and put in on a display case. We got a lot of smiles and knowing nods from people. But then one guy comes in and insists to his friends that he only payed 4500 for his, because he "knew a guy".

"Wow you guys are still open? I thought all the photography store went away"

95% of people pronounce pictures as "pitchers".

I could go on and on...

File: aweyeah.jpg (26KB, 310x264px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 310x264px

>this thread

In my experience, bringing a camera to a party is always fun. I just bring an Instax/Polaroid. Instant photos at a party are always a hit.

It's a great way to break the ice and helps if you're somewhat anti-socal

>>2760138
>>2760138
>I could go on and on...
bls do, /p/ is the place for your raeg.

>>2759441

lol so you flashed on a retail employee making probably half of what you do when he was trying to be nice? and you're bragging about being employed full time? too funny bro.

>>2754221

[citation needed]

you don't know this, because you don't work in the industry, but tons of commercial fashion work is currently shot on 35mm.

>>2760150
>anon, i want professional pictures, what is this plastic thing?

>>2760138

Retail stories are always kind of amusing.

Not camera related, but I had a 20something jackass insist that the rifle his dad gave him was a 50 cal, when it was pretty clearly a .30-30. It even you know, had the ammo it took stamped in the side, and there was no way in hell anything bigger would fit in the tube.

>>2760213
You don't know this, because you don't work in the industry, but nearly absolutely none of commercial fashion work is currently shot on 35mm. There's more digital medium format than there is 35mm film.

>>2760399

I know my experiences are just a small subsection of an industry, but...

Played 'security guard' for a bunch of 'outdoor brand' shoots (REI, Columbia, what have you). I have never seen a single film camera at those things unless it was for video, or someone who brought their own for shits and giggles.

>>2760405
Your experience is fairly representative. There are a couple of photographers using medium and large format film still, but 35mm is very very much out of the picture, other than maybe a few photographers who still hold on to it as a "gimmick". All the major fashion houses are using DMF, and all the more minor players are using normal APS-C and full frame digital. I'm not sure what percentage anon was implying by saying "tons" but even if we assume he meant 10%, he's still so wrong it's funny.


The slow pace, the lack of ability to check results on the scene (massively important to art directors and other staff), the lack of editing flexibility, the complete lack of resolution and detail, the risk of development errors and damage to the film... there's a LOT of reasons to not use film at all, and 35mm doesn't offer any of the benefits of MF or LF that would outweigh them.

>>2760413

I've never seen anyone using LF, and I've only seen a single instance of a MF camera being used, and that was in a warehouse that they had rigged up with a shit load of lighting. Even then, the majority of what those guys were doing was with Canon digital. When I think about it, I'm pretty sure most of the cameras were Canon, with a few Nikons here and there.

I'm always just there as the 'land owner representative' leeching off whatever food they brought out though.

>>2760421
Some of the really big names who have been around forever still use it when their clients aren't asking for a style that it doesn't work for. Last I checked, Roversi was still doing a lot of film work (but it's been a while since I've done any reading about his process) but it doesn't matter. Anyone claiming any film is any notable percentage of any work these days is out of touch and objectively wrong. No comment on quality, or "look" or whatever, just cold hard math about usage.

>>2748460
don't be mad anon they don't know it's called focal length

>>2748908
>shutter priority

>>2760448
>what is freezing motion without caring much about depth of field in bright light.

>>2760448
>Aperture Priority

File: leica-m-monochrom_typ246_weiss.jpg (387KB, 1572x1072px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 1572x1072px

>>2752125
>Which camera makes the black and white pictures?

>I am so hyped for the 1d x!

>>2753155
>>2753318
These are normal and legitimate responses

>Shoot film
>Take a picture of someone
>"Cool can I see it?"
Everytime

>>2754503

I second this. I learned about this trick by accident one time shooting birds in a massive bird park. I told everyone I met for a while, thought that trick was wicked.

Especially handy when you have a long focal length fast prime. I had been shooting for a little while at the time but just never thought about it!

File: hipster.jpg (411KB, 2075x1642px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 2075x1642px

>>2760138
>As a joke we put a price tag for $6999 on a Holga and put in on a display case. We got a lot of smiles and knowing nods from people. But then one guy comes in and insists to his friends that he only payed 4500 for his, because he "knew a guy".
lol holy shit what a tool.
was he dressed like any of these, out of curiosity?

File: 1401662787715.jpg (66KB, 544x468px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 544x468px

>>2760138
>She rips it open right fuck there and says "yeah this looks like paper".

This hurts my soul.

>95% of people pronounce pictures as "pitchers".

I think you should move to a place where the IQ reaches triple digits.

File: 1437311408184.gif (607KB, 800x792px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 800x792px

>>2748897

>>2748794
What's full frame?

>>2759441
You make a living with shitty shots like that?

>>2758658
Any examples? I'm actually curious?

>>2761782
...

Not really something people say, but has anyone else seen this new trend going around edgy tumblr kids where they take a picture with their nice-ish camera, pull up the image on the camera's screen, then take a picture of the camera's screen with the picture on it? It fucking pisses me off. Wish I had examples, but can't find any.

File: childsex-0001.jpg (41KB, 750x750px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 750x750px

>>2761889
I personally know some of them

>>2761889
>edgy tumblr kids

anon not everything you dislike is edgy

>>2748429
>my wifes nephew
you had one job, its
>my wife's son says he'll do it for free

I'm part of some photographer group in my town on facebook and whenever somebody posts there looking for a wedding I tell them I'll do it for $75 and atleast 4 times now they give me at least $200 when the job is all said and done. They end up going with me every time lol

>>2762031
But they are edgy tumblr kids

>>2751876
most underrated post on /p/ - you just made my day anon

>>2754046
>>2754050
>>2754055
>>2754063
STAHP! (don't stahp)

>>2751876
kek'd

>>2760138
I had a speech impediment when I was a kid. It took me a couple years during elementary school to get rid of it and I still work every day to maintain my speech. I can't fucking stand it when people say "pitchers," because I start catching myself doing the same thing if I hear it too often.

>>2761974
the fucking camera screen isn't in focus. fuck your friends man

>>2761974
This is exactly what I'm talking about. It's worse when they try to be all artsy about it

File: dwi.jpg (156KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1000x750px

>>2762607
Modern version of being artsty by presenting a contact sheet as your final product.

>>2749273
>by the hour
Don't be an idiot. Charge a day-rate. Trust me, telling clients you charge $150/hr won't go over well. Remember, most people work for 1/10th that and wouldn't consider you and/or photography worth $150/hr, but $1500 for the wedding is fine. People are stupid.

>>2748650
Not really dawg. I got tricked into buying this Sony mirrorless crap

>>2763203
>I got tricked into buying this Sony mirrorless crap

Sounds more like you don't know how to use it properly, m8.

>>2763215
>Sounds more like you don't know how to use it properly, m8.
Sound like more like you don't know what it is

>>2763217
Doesn't matter. It's Sony, and it says at the bottom of his check that he must defend all Sony products, even against their own owners who know exactly what their drawbacks are.

>>2763218
>check
Oh how I wish, anon. shilling for money? Sure, why not. I'd gladly do so for Ricoh and Sony.

But as of right now, I am simply convinced by the qualityof the latest products from both manufacturers.

I have an oldish full body camera that my gearfagdad gave and Iam really afraid to shoot, because people assume I know what I am doing and honestly I don't. I am so insecure Iam going to buy a6000, so it wouldn't look professional.

>>2763246
>2016
>not having realized SLT is masterrace

>>2763357
The technology behind the concept of SLTs is actually quite nice. But then, the cameras Sony has produced - including the a99 - feel cheap as hell and have kinda bad ergonomics. Plus, the Bionz processor wasn't that great back then. Got an a77 from a friend for a while do I could fiddle around with it, but strong noise at ISO 400 (!) really did disappoint me. Sonys current mirrorless lineup however does impress me a lot.

>>2752136
Fuck you and all the other fuckers who think this is funny. And know, I am not one of "those people."

The only thing I hate to hear is the loud CLACK-CLACK sound of a Nikon. I know they make great photos but it is fucking irritating I can hear them fire off from across the street full of noisy people on a street festival.
How the fuck Nikon r&d couldn't come up with better dampening, Pentax is quiet with almost no mirrorslap, Canon is also reasonably quiet, even Sony shutter is comparable to a Canon DSLR.
Seriously, the 645Z makes less noise than a Nikon.

>>2763417
I got a Canonet partly for this reason. The shutter is a near silent *click*.

>>2763326
It is professional you dunce. The A6000 is a top tier camera. Sony makes the most professional cameras. I'd suggest you go for the A6300 since it blows away the competition. Seems like Sony is YEARS ahead.

>>2763434
I know that it's professional, but people don't. A6300 costs a lot more, is it worth the money?

>>2763447
Yes! The A6300 makes cameras look like absolute toys. It's no wonder MFT, Pentax, Fuji, and Canikon are dying.

File: 1412186398616.jpg (211KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 800x600px

>>2763457
>Sony makes a camera with some cool features
>Sony is boss, all other brands are kill!

Every time.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2014:09:25 18:33:25
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	800
Image Height	600

>>2763459
>Some cool features
You mean class leading features?

>>2763460
Right. Some cool features. Which will be second-rate 4-6 months from now.

>>2763459
Is that, Terry?

>>2763461
>second rate
>sony A6000 still competing even after years since release.

>>2763463
>still competing

With what exactly? I know exactly nobody who shoots an A6000, let alone "professionally".

It's not a bad camera by any means. It's also not God's gift to photography.

>Sony releases a rehash of an old camera with mildly sealed body
>offers no weather sealed lenses
>Sony fags lap it all up
Ayyyyy

who the honest fuck cares if your camera has nifty features? if you only take 24mp test shots of your cat does it really fucking matter?

taking a good photo is entirely independent of having a good camera. all you cunts seem to worry about is specs and features and not improving your photographic skill. it's like buying a racing car only to dickmeasure the power with other losers who also bought a racing car to dickmeasure instead of hopping in the car and learning to fucking drive.

just go take photographs. it matters very very little what camera you have

>>2763472
>4k full sensor read out scaled down from 5k to 4k for extra crispness and noise reduction. S-log 3
>1080p 120fps
>god tier viewfider with 120hz refresh
>400+ AF points with class leading speed and pin point accuracy
>completely new sensor

>>2763473
t. mft user

>>2763475
unsure what mft means since I'm not in the gear scene but I can say with reasonable amount of confidence that I take a good deal more and a good deal better photographs than you

>>2757112
And still i see pro photographers working since the '70s with hundreds of thousands of euros of gears shooting shitty pictures.

>>2748473
This is true desu, when people come to me asking how to start taking good photos they usually just want to know what camera to buy. I answer to try taking good shots with cheaper cameras and then buying something cheap like old dslr to learn how everything works, even film if they're interested.
Or they can go the wrong but easy way and buy a d3200/1200d

>>2756077
it looks exactly the same. unless he bounces it.

>>2758658
>>2757876
shut the fuck up and show her work

>>2748907
>>2748923
Not the first anon but yes from that equipment, if they would be better at photography they would know that there are cheaper and better solutions like used mid range DSLRs and vintage lenses or primes.
That combo costs quite a lot and it's quite shitty.

>>2754173
I don't own a flash and I never needed it since it's not my style and I don't shot events on commission, anyway if they just want the damn pictures don't be afraid of the internal flash, if you want to take more interesting pictures get a prime (35 f2 or the cheaper 50 f1.8 for example), set your camera in manual, widest aperture, safe time (1/60 or less) and automatic ISO and have fun. You'll experience the joy of a good picture in natural light, your relatives are not used to those kind of pictures. Of course they'll look a bit grainy but with newer cameras this usually isn't a problem

>>2761889
>>2762273
Tumblr is the exact opposite of edgy. it's called "faggy"

>>2763523
faggy and edgy are synonyms.

>>2763473

After a certain point though, the equipment really does make a big difference. I can get some nice shots on my phone if it's sunny, but my Nikon blows it completely out of the water in pretty much every single case.

>>2763474
>all these video features
>all these af features

Not as meaningful to me. And having held the A7 at a store I can say I prefer the size and ergonomics of my D810 more than mirrorless.

A6300 is great on paper if you need to argue about camera brands on the internet. Otherwise, just shoot what works best for you, not just what has le superior specs.

>>2763561
Yeah but he's talking about the completely negligible differences between two similar cameras with similar specs. Those are the cameras people argue so furiously about on the internet; you notice nobody compares a 5D III to a 1200D, but everyone compares the new D5 with the 1DX II and argued over 1-2 difference in FPS.

>>2763485
Even if you get some sort of diffuser on there? I'm going to be picking up some cheapo yongnuo soon and want to know what extras I need if I can't always bounce the light effectively.

File: IMG_2247.jpg (4MB, 2592x3888px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2592x3888px

>>2765530
Try playing around with the BFT for a start:

http://neilvn.com/tangents/about/black-foamie-thing/
https://vimeo.com/20809045

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 40D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	280 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	280 dpcm
Image Created	2015:11:11 15:05:15
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Today a drawer told me that photography is dumb because if you want to make art you draw it, if you want too see things as they are, you just look at it with your own eyes.

Please help me disbelieving this shit.

>>2765575
Friend, you've got to find your own motivation and what photography means for you. If you can't find your own way around that critique of photography, then it might not be the field for you or you might need to learn a lot more about it.

Profundity is never, ever found in simple statements. Short epitaths always oversimplify.

>>2765580
Thanks, homie, you made a lot for me

>>2765575
>a drawer told me
Stop taking advice from your furniture

>>2763482
I bought a D3300 and feel like I'm learning and progressing, what did I do wrong senpai?

>>2765570
I dig it thank you anon!

>>2765587
I meant an extractor told me

File: extractor.jpg (560KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

560KB, 1024x768px

>>2765596
The ex-tractor has much wisdom to impart, but can be a trickster.

>>2763617

Then he's retarded.

>>2765590
Nothing

>>2763459
that image is...... jarring

>>2765699
Uncle Terry for ya

>>2765591
You are very welcome.

Learning how to work with off camera flash or how two properly bounce the flash without light spilling directly on your subject is one of the most eye opening and satisfying things ever. It teaches you how to emphasize the three dimensionality of objects and how to avoid highlights and burned out spot by correctly placing your light sources.

File: IMG_20160210_195338.jpg (125KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 480x640px

cool story bro

>>2765782
Don't make me come down to Cook County and smash that longhaired sissy boy ass, I know where you live girl. Make that ass the color of your dirt road. Unnnf.
Spit on it boy.

>>2748754
You're telling me, I have the same job in a town full of Indian contract workers
>hello my name is pajeet
>i wish to buy camera to take pictures of daughter's graduation
>please to tell me the quality of this camera
>points to open box coolpix going for $50
>it's shit m8
>he picks it up, we go to the register
>will you give me any additional deescount
>do you have any deal
>can I speak to manager I wish to get deal
>it's already half off you filthy cunt

>>2748811
>tfw used to work at Best Buy and worked out a shady deal with my managers where I'm still on the employee roster but they don't give me any hours
The managers bonus based off employee retention so they get to make more money and I get to keep the employee discount.
>tfw haven't worked there in over 3 years

>>2748485
So is my friend's fullframe cannon, it eventually died to a pitcher of shock top
>he mocks me for wrapping my strap around my arm
>mr no strap dropped his fucking $2500 camera in a pitcher of beer

So many memories taken by that camera

>>2766065
That sounds reeeeally bad. I'll pray for you

>>2765872
Get in line, toots. That girl's face is my playground. You want some of that, you gonna get some of this, too. I'll spit on it, all right. With my dick. No offense, I'm just that kinda girl.

I'm work for a sports photography studio but in my free time I take my personal camera out to games in my area for fun

>sees soccer mom taking pics of her kid at a game
>she has 7d, I have 70d
>try to make small talk about camera
>she's shooting Full Auto
>bitch paid way to god damn much for what is ultimately used as a point and shoot

Mfw I slowly walk away and avoid her complaining about how her camera is too complicated

>>2766767
lel it's her money why do you care

>>2765675
How is that retarded?

I'm saying, what's what people mean when they say "your camera doesn't matter". And hell, even then some people just don't care. We as photographers get sucked into the gear and tech specs and talking about noise/grain and sharpness and all that good stuff but some people just do not care. I had a guy come into the store I work at the other day telling me his $100 point and shoot he bought from us was the best thing ever. He asked me what he would benefit from with a D-SLR or something and I told him about improved sharpness and clarity, better low light performance and interchangeable lenses. He didn't give a shit because he didn't want to put up with the weight. Honestly, it was refreshing to see somebody be able to enjoy a simple camera so much. There isn't a lot of that level of appreciation for a cheap, simple product amongst digital photography or any other current technology.

>>2763218
>check
Anti Sonyfags are fucking retarded

It says SONY at the bottom of my 'cheque'

>>2766772
>There isn't a lot of that level of appreciation for a cheap
I've got appreciation for your cheap mum m8

>>2766767
Why is it wrong to shoot in full auto? Can't you just post process everything?

>>2766772
I experienced this with videocameras, my best stuff was shot with a hv30, I have an a7s now but Im noticing not being forced to work with limitations as big as before is damaging my creativity.

>>2766922
I feel the same. Its odd, when I buy a new piece of gear there is this "delay" of 6-12 months before I start using it more consistently.

File: cat approves.jpg (49KB, 540x960px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 540x960px

>>2766849

>>2766767
What kind of lens did she have? My cousin has a DSLR, not because she wast to be all pro-photographer and shit, rather the zoom is better for getting her kids on the field.

>>2766875
yea ok not really
a big part of getting a dslr not point and shoot is to have control over everything and being able to make the shot just like you want. Also dlsr's have good settings usually like low noise and (depending on lens) good aperture range so not utilizing these good settings is FUCKING annoying

>>2765587
>>2765603
Laughed more then I should have.