Archived threads in /p/ - Photography - 361. page

>>2882827
>M43

This is absolutely disgusting. M43 is the absolute worse format in the history of cameras. There is absolutely no value in them. Noise on those sensors is unbearable. Also why would you buy a 12 megapixel camera in this day and age? 12 megapixels is barely good enough for a post card.

>>2882856
:^) you're a confused fellow

>>2882869
Just get the A6000 and be done with it.

No.

>>2882569
>dat nasty digital sharpening
gross

>>2882569
I don't see how he could be

Unless in the case of someone has made film as good as it can be however digital media will keep on evolving and hasn't reached its true potential yet

BAMP cause i also want to know

It never happened, and I sincerely iggy is out making money off of your pleb tier snapshits. He just took on more than he could handle (once again) and let us all down.

>>2881348

>downloading photos from emails and shoving them into an album
>hard
>literally could have been done over a weekend or two
>half a year later still hasn't been done

Why doesn't that fuck send photos to someone else then? Hell I'd do it just to get it done.

OP is clearly underage and B&.

This is a +18 site, keep it in mind

>>2887013
just buy any of them nigger for cheap on craigslist. seriously, either a trustworthy om10 or any other film that aint busted. make sure the metering works. thats all folks

File: DSCF1181.jpg (374KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 1000x667px

The EM is a good little camera, but for most people who want to shoot film cameras in 2016 are doing it to enjoy solid metal cameras and full manual controls, and the EM is a plastic camera that's aperture priority only.

If you really really love film and just want something small and light to shoot it with, the EM is a good option, but otherwise you'll probably have better luck with an FM or FE or something. It's also not a good choice for photography classes, because most of them require a full manual camera.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro2
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.4 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	35 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:20 19:09:28
Exposure Time	1/25 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	-1.2 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

>>2887013
Kind of
It's more of an investment than anything else, doesn't take special photos or anything
Just a solid asset

>>2886836
>and take pictures of everyday stuff
come on dude

come on

you can get 4 hours per day without question EASILY

pick your shots carefully and make them count. Earn your pay and you should be able to stretch it right out.

>>2886836

take your shots and just hang about doing fuck all in between, cant turn down getting payed to do nothing

also do your editing on their time too

In Lightroom you could probably achieve that in a few seconds with the HSL tool. Turn the saturation to zero for every color except orange.

I assume photoshop has the same thing but I don't remember where it is or what it's called.

as above said, saturation down on every colour except your desired colour (orange)

then if there is any other orange parts select them with the selection tool and make them black and white too

there is a better way to do this with masks and you just brush over everything you want made black and white with the brush tool, but you can youtube that yourself

can be done in photoshop or lightroom

Tnx guys.I'll try harder.

most paparazzi is staged photoshoots so it is not difficult to actually track people down

you will probably earn more doing other photography

>>2886609
Paps are like a mafia, good luck getting in and selling your photos if you're not connected. There are hundreds of illegals from Mexico running around Beverly Hills armed with a Canon 5dmIII and L series glass, as shown in OP's pic related. If you're starting from scratch, I calculate a person would need at least $25,000 for equipment plus a decent car and enough savings to cover six months living expenses. By then, you should have enough photos in the pipeline to either be making good money or have come to the conclusion that it's not worthwhile.
Pro Tip: helps to habla espanol or fala portugues if you want to get in with the spics and brazilian paparazzi mafia.

>>2886609
I have a few friends doing it in SoCal
It's frequently staged as agents will tip off paparazzi for appealing photos of their clients
It doesn't pay that well, it's competitive, good pocket cash, most paps have part time jobs because major media providers will pay you maybe a couple hundred for a photo, and small tabloids will pay you maybe 15$
Paps make shit money unless they're directly working for a media provider or are frequently liscened
Working event photography like red carpet or film screenings where celebs show up pay much more.

File: DSC_5569-01.jpg (188KB, 1620x911px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1620x911px

It's a sigma 50-500mm zoom lens. A "bigma".

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D750
Camera Software	Snapseed 2.0
Photographer	Peter Swire - [email protected]
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	958
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	500 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:20 02:20:47
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1400
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Tungsten
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	500.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1620
Image Height	911
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2886570
>got new lens
>posts shit image of flag processed in shitty snapseed app
>muh bokeh

Go show off your shitty meme lens elsewhere. Or at least post in the RPT.

File: DSC_5586-01.jpg (332KB, 1620x1080px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 1620x1080px

The focus is a little fussy.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D750
Camera Software	Snapseed 2.0
Photographer	Peter Swire - [email protected]
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	958
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	500 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:20 02:23:08
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Tungsten
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	500.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1620
Image Height	1080
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: Ryan and Nick.jpg (1023KB, 1787x1151px) Image search: [Google]

1023KB, 1787x1151px

another one

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3496
Image Height	1168
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:18 00:29:56
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1787
Image Height	1151

File: image.jpg (401KB, 1545x1024px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1545x1024px

>>2886402
My first camera was a Canon ML super sureshot
I still love it even with the shitty autofocus
No 35mm slr ever gave me as much fun as that sureshot

[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
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1545
Image Height	1024
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2886402
>>2886404
are theses scans of prints? they look weird

>Why isn't an inexpensive but fast and good 33mm prime included with DSLRs like in the good old days?

Because the starter kit lenses are seen as more pragmatic. And they are in most cases.

I agree that it's disappointing, but why exactly are you wishing for the precise focal scale? What DSLR do you use?

Most 50mm lenses aren't even 50mm on the nose, especially as you focus closer, so it's not like those extra 2mm or so make a difference.

You don't see 33mm primes packaged with crop bodies anymore because computer aided design has made cheap kit zooms practical and easy to manufacture. A zoom is more useful to amateurs, and since they are far and away the biggest customers of crop, it's what gets included in the kit.

Well if you want a standard lens (check wikipedia) that's a 43mm on full frame. So getting a 30mm for your crop puts you a little closer to ideal.

binoculars don't have the light gathering for stargazing AFAIK. Get a telescope.

>>2886228

Celestron has some good cheap ones specifically for this.

10x25 and 8x32 are generally going to be poor, as 25 and 32mm don't gather much light. 10x50 is fine.

>>2886228
Binoculars are literally a pain in the neck for Astronomy.

The idea of binoculars for Astronomy is fine (both eyes gives a brighter immersive view) but keeping them steady and viewing comfortably is another matter.

Even with a tripod after a few minutes you will crink your neck. There are elaborate mounts and 45 degree setups using mirrors that help but I don't think they are worth it.

I've owned plenty of binoculars over the years and now have a good quality 20x80mm pair but have pretty much given up on them for Astronomy.

That being said cheap 10x50s are good for hand held casual skygazing and learning to navigate the night sky. Avoid anything that has red "ruby" coatings on the lenses. It's usually there to hide the poor engineering inside.

I'm a city dweller too and binoculars will open up the night sky but don't expect too much. A cheap pair and a planisphere is a great start.

>>2886053
start fucking around with the green/purple slider obviously

>>2886056

in curve?

>>2886053
cool cat

File: EPSON042.jpg (401KB, 1248x2004px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1248x2004px

>>2885828

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SEIKO EPSON CORP.
Camera Model	XP-520 Series
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.3.9600.17415
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	600 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:16 15:10:32
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1248
Image Height	2004

File: EPSON044.jpg (501KB, 1248x2004px) Image search: [Google]

501KB, 1248x2004px

>>2885829

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SEIKO EPSON CORP.
Camera Model	XP-520 Series
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.3.9600.17415
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	600 dpi
Image Created	2016:07:16 15:10:17
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1248
Image Height	2004

File: FullSizeRender2.jpg (534KB, 2560x2560px) Image search: [Google]

534KB, 2560x2560px

>>2885828
The last three shots have all turned out with these marks and I'm 90% sure it's because I forgot to clean my rollers.
Just ordered a spectra+tongue+two packs of film!

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2586
Image Height	2722
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	2016:07:19 19:49:23
Exposure Time	1/33 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	1.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2560
Image Height	2560
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Time (UTC)	18:44:20
Date (UTC)	2016:07:19

what ?

File: modified1.jpg (499KB, 1000x1499px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 1000x1499px

>>2885748
I want to make a more realistic zombie.

I would probably do something like, make her skin more white and blue/green like her face, so there would be no more healthy skin color left. Then I would make blood splatter on her face more red and looking wet. I would also make dark veins around her nose pop and achieve 3D effect if it is possible.

But I don't know how. All I can do is play around with the sliders in raw therapee.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X100T
Camera Software	RawTherapee
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3282
Image Height	4922
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2016:07:15 14:51:01
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	0.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	23.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Off
Macro Mode	Off
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

>>2885752
you sure as hell can't do that in rawtherapee or light-room.
Neither of those programs is for special effects. 3D and texture work take far more than "moving a slider"