Archived threads in /p/ - Photography - 325. page

you dont need classes or "tips" for street photography. its a ridiculous notion.

>>2916176
I agree, though I believe insight can be useful. I find it nice to view other's methods on creating their work.

It's in no way necessary, but it can be beneficial depending on the individual.

>>2916176
Agreed. It's either something that you get or you don't

I have no answer to your question, but have my own.

If I would get a Nikon DSLR with WiFi, can I access camera's memory card over network using SMB?

>>2916589
>Nikon
>sane features
>also camera with networking capabilities other than the ethernet-enabled cameras

>>2916161
>third party app for a closed, proprietary system
remember to use open sores next time


>Nikon
>consumer friendly UI and software
tiptopkek

>>2916161
Wifi is pretty uniformly shit no matter the brand. Just use cables.

Guess I have to sell all my Nikon gear now

At least Nikon hasn't the same camera with two totally different names

>you shoot with a t2i? how noob are you! Look at mine brand new Canon 550D

>>2916122
>wait until you look at my Kiss camera

btw, having a Kiss is pretty badass, but thats to be expected from nips. Rebel is a fedora name.

>>2915993
google food styling

>>2915998
I could tell from the thumbnail that's a good looking shit on a plate. A little watery though, try eating something drier.

>>2915953
go to youtube and watch all of phlearn's videos, then practice. If you're lucky, there is a small handful of skilled retouchers who post here from time to time, but quite honestly it's an art and skillset entirely unto itself.

>>2915953
>Her skin is similar to this already processed picture

O RLY?

UPLOAD THE FUCKING REAL DEAL OR DONT EVEN BOTHER YOU CUM SUCKING PIECE OF TRASH. JESUS CHRIST ANON.

>>2915958
I'm saying that's what her skin looks like in real life you dried up cum sack.

>>2915822

You check out their work and check the quality in comparison to others within the same price range.

There is nothing more important than you being content with the product you purchase, it's wedding photography for fuck's sake.

look at the stuff they blow up big and think looks good. If you can't keep your eyes inside the image for more than 5 seconds and looking around at the subjects of the image....they don't know composition.

Our eyes are naturally attracted to bright spots and when the image has bright spots on the edge of the frame, your eye will go to that spot and then right out of the photo.

Thanks to DSLRs, the main qualification for a wedding photographer is having a camera, a zoom lens, a nifty 50, a flash and a gary fong difuser. You won't get quality, you wont find someone good, you will find a second or even third rate photographer who will probably hire someone else at minimum wage, to shoot your wedding (if he is smart), while charging you a mint for the album.

But don't worry, the wedding photos are only going to be important for the first 6 months of your new life together. That is before your divorce.

>>2915504

What's your budget?

>>2915766
~250 or less

>>2915706
steps in lightroom
1. select the shadow
2. make it darker.

alternatively
1. make all shadows darker

File: 3833-1920x1280.jpg (301KB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1920x1280px

Is there anything I can do when I am taking the photo to get such a clear and direct shadow?

File: LadderKast_KastLadder_8830-1920x1439.jpg (352KB, 1920x1439px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1920x1439px

Another example.

>>2915675
Jesus I thought Australians were good photographers

This is worse than the /p/ book

>>2915675

>not putting quotes around "professional" instead

remember friend, there's no such thing as a professional photographer. the proper term is "commercial".

Yeah pretty shit. Ill be sure to enter it next year if this is the talent pool in Aus. They hardest part is probably getting a photo into be judged as i can imagine its some committee of friends all voting for each other.

>>2915642
>Is candid photography a meme?

I'll answer your last question first to save you some time. Yes, it's a meme. Street photography is a played-out genre perpetrated by guys who are just moving out of their zoo photography phase. It's a dead genre pursued by photographers with bad intentions.

Now, onto the meat of your post:

Depending on your country, you don't need permission provided you don't intend to publish the photo for commercial purposes (like, you see someone wearing nikes out in the street, you can't use them for a nike ad without a press release). There is no reasonable expectation of privacy when out in a public space, and so you are allowed to shoot away.

Other countries, notably Germany, require written permission from the subject before you can use their photo, period. If you live in some weird country like Slovenia, you had best look it up.

Oftentimes, it's better to just snap away rather than ask first. Ask for forgiveness rather than permission, etc.You'll also get more natural photos.

Don't take pictures of kids unless you want to get stabbed in the head (literally). No one cares about pictures of stupid kids anyway, unless they're dusty brown kids who had a parking garage fall on them or they got hit by a stray drone shelling.

Don't take pictures of the homeless. It's exploitative and demeaning, and easy-mode "OMG SO DEEP AND TENDER".

I want to use a person holding a cup of coffee and focus on the hand, cup, steam, lighting and all that. But I need a person.

>>2915642
your best bet would be to ask a female friend if you could shoot pictures of them, don't be a creep about it just say you need
to develop your portfolio or something of that nature.

have her pose and what not and after all is said and done send her some good shots so she can upload them to her Instagram and have her tag you in the pic to link to
your instagram and there u go, u get seen by her friends and gain interest of the people around you

File: 20160901_213540.jpg (3MB, 4128x2322px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4128x2322px

>>2915465

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	SM-N9005
Camera Software	N9005XXUGBPB1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4128
Image Height	2322
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:09:01 21:35:40
Exposure Time	1/59 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	50
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	4.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash
Focal Length	4.13 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4128
Image Height	2322
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	D13QSGI01OA

File: 20160901_213622.jpg (3MB, 4128x2322px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4128x2322px

>>2915465

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	SM-N9005
Camera Software	N9005XXUGBPB1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4128
Image Height	2322
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:09:01 21:36:22
Exposure Time	1/75 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	50
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	4.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash
Focal Length	4.13 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4128
Image Height	2322
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	D13QSGI01OA

it looks like a projector lens.

learn to google you fucktard.

might be worth nothing or 50/100 quid.

>>2915198
You don't need a lot of lenses, nor do you need giant lenses. You'll get really tired really fast of lugging around all that shit.

The best lens is the one you'll shoot with. If you like that 35, then that's your lens. For a walking around lens on a crop body, that's a solid choice. It should cover you for street and architecture.

When you say you like nature but not landscape, what do you mean? Why types of photos do you want to shoot?

File: 17395735203_f37923929c_b.jpg (305KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 1000x1000px

I've done quite a bit of traveling and one thing I've learned is that the mantra "less is more" is definitely true. It's better to be limited to 2 primes or 1 zoom and work with what you have than to have a lens for every possible scenario that leaves you with a heavy pack and the desire to constantly switch lenses. If I were you I'd say the 35mm for general walking around + low light stuff and the 18-55mm is perfect. If you want a bit more reach the 18-70mm is supposed to be a fantastic lens (though I cant remember if that would work on 1.3 crop).

Here's a marmot from British Columbia.

>>2915198
I took half my gear with me for the holidays and found that when I went out walking and hiking I always used the 35mm.
If you really want some wildlife then take the 70-300 only bring it out with you when you only go after wildlife.
For the travel shots the 35mm will be the best choice.

>>2915156
Too much space above head, not enough beard.

Pros
>good sharp focus
>nice tonal range
>beard texture is really cool

cons
>not enough beard
>too much space at top
>would look good with neck and full beard in photo
>would look better without cap, allowing hair texture to come into photo

>>2915156
muh s/w low-key with overly sharped textures. babby's first artsy fartsy.

File: 1472598018643.jpg (543KB, 563x1000px) Image search: [Google]

543KB, 563x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	KAZAM
Camera Model	Tornado 348
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1872
Image Height	3328
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:30 23:59:47
Exposure Time	10003/500000 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	87
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	3.50 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	563
Image Height	1000
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

are you serious? like how difficult can it be to actually go outside for a walk and take some photos yourself man?

>>2914832

what the fuck is this thread?

go outside and take pictures if you want pictures

you dont even need friends

File: P1000563.jpg (2MB, 4776x3543px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4776x3543px

Do you guys like this one?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-GM1
Camera Software	Capture One 9 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:30 15:51:30
Image Created	2016:08:30 15:51:30
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/22.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/22.0
Exposure Bias	-1.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	20.00 mm
Image Width	4776
Image Height	3543
Exposure Mode	Auto

>>2914689
Should've had more of the buildings on the right in frame. the clouds are dope tho

>>2914689
Switch to aperture or manual and bring that f number down.