Archived threads in /p/ - Photography - 527. page

File: SAM_4916.jpg (3MB, 6480x4320px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 6480x4320px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	NX500
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	69 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6480
Image Height	4320
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:05 21:41:40
Exposure Time	13 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	45.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6480
Image Height	4320
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

Literally the first thread on page 1 is the sticky with loads of resources, no idea how you could miss that possibly

Do you have a camera, like, any camera? Normally the best place to start is its manual. Read it. It will tell you what all the settings do (and if you don't understand it, you'll know exactly what to search for on the internet), how to hold the camera and how to use every feature of your camera to your advantage.

You could also start with 35mm film, which many people here (myself included) recommend. Manual film cameras and old lenses are pretty cheap, and they don't have any of the automatic bullshit in a modern camera (not even autofocus), so it forces you to think of every aspect of your picture. Of course, that's only viable if you live somewhere where you can actually walk into a lab and have your film developed. The Pentax K-1000 is famous as the student camera, but there are many comparable alternatives that you can get for cheaper, like an old Zenit SLR, they sell for ~$10 with a lens.

>bitches about people saving thumbnails
>uploads thumbnail

File: 1437671331383.png (167KB, 396x912px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 396x912px

>>2736795
ohhhh oh oooh

>>2736794
just put a not really intrusive name on your pictures, it's pretty easy to do that in lightroom

File: castle copy.jpg (431KB, 1420x1157px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 1420x1157px

>>2736750
>>2736750

[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	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:01:05 02:10:39
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1420
Image Height	1157

>>2736750

totally sweet bro can u add some dragons and 2 nymphs for my wallpaper thx bro

>>2736787
Yeah for sure! Have any particular ones in mind?

File: R0000474 (Custom).jpg (190KB, 1000x662px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1000x662px

Going to dump the black and white stuff first

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	GR
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.0 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2015:04:23 16:36:11
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Brightness	2.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.30 mm
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal

File: R0001394 (Custom).jpg (574KB, 1000x1510px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 1000x1510px

It's really annoying to manually type out the tripcode every post. It's not easy being a tripfag

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	GR
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2015:05:17 19:01:39
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Brightness	5.7 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.30 mm
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal

File: R0001817 (Custom).jpg (151KB, 1000x662px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1000x662px

fug, forgot the '#'

:^)

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	GR
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2015:05:23 11:10:38
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	1.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.30 mm
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal

>>2737215

dude fuck you. read the sticky and fuck off again.

I lol'd.

>Will I need to take a picture first to find out?

Yes. You won't find out if the battery (which is actually part of the film) is dead. If it's dead, you have to throw it out. The film in the picture has been exposed to light and so the first shot you take (if it isn't the last) will be blank.

>Any opinions on this polaroid?

I think it has a nice color.

>Where can I find more film?

Internet or a camera store that sells film for polaroids

>Is it worth anything?

Depends on how you look at it.

>>2737213
I can flip tested 600 Polaroids like yours for $30 (with free shipping) on eBay in less than an hour. Even if they aren't tested you can claim they are because they always work anyway.

File: FB_IMG_1449608906478.jpg (132KB, 1365x2048px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1365x2048px

2/2

Yes I realize 1 is color and one is BW but she was not grading the pictures as a set..

>>2737191
shadow on face is distracting sort of

>>2737195
too saturated

not bad though

Was this for virginity class?

>>2736828

Clearly you haven't given this much thought.

As a wedding photographer you can work from grand country halls to city centre hotels. From teepees in a field to rooftop restaurants. You can have old brides, young brides, fat brides, thin brides. Brides with big noses or ears. And you have to make all of them look good. To utilise your surroundings and available light, to augment with your own light, to hide negative aspects and enhance the positive takes real skill.

With regards to the technical side think about the range of shots: up close details of the dress and jewelry, candid shots of the guests, groom portrait, bridal portrait, family group shots, architectural shots of the venue, shots of the food and table details. Most of these you have very little control over forcing you to adapt to the conditions rapidly. You have to be confident in your skills and equipment.

Now, I would agree that wedding photography is not art as art should be created without compromise. Believe me wedding photography is fraught with compromise.

But that doesn't mean it is worthless, to be good takes true skill and to dismiss because of some arbitrary stipulation of its worthiness makes you blinded by your own snobbery.

>photography is not photography
>photography is supposed to be art

I think I know what you meant to say, but you sure didn't articulate it well, hopefully your photogra... art is more clear and concise. Next time make some art to express your opinion instead! :DDDDDDDDDDDD

>>2736833
Checked.
Also, true you get to work with a shit ton of people of different gender, colour, hairdo and whatnot. Okay I agree you are challenged to do light and to make everyone look good. But it's not as difficult as many other types of photography and in my opinion, people who do wedding photography are not photographers. They are in it just to make money, at least every wedding photographer I've met says that they are in it for the money. If you want your photography to represent art, then you will be against wedding photography being put on a pedestal, because it doesn't deserve to be glorified as much as it currently is (outside of the photographic community at least). But that's just my opinion.

>>2736274
Big viewfinder, auto-focus, large controls and handling, durability, high image quality, large high resolution display. Yes, except for the size and social integration, I would recommend her smartphone camera or a small camera like a Leica T w/23mm lens and EVF is that is your budget, or a Sony RX100 IV to fit in a backpack or purse.

Be sure you also get her a selfie stick for it.

You might want to get her something a little bit nicer so she can grow into it.

smartphone.

>>2730100
sony a7r ii + canon ef adapter + sigma 20mm f1.4

Just find a 100$ dslr with a kit lens and see if you even like it first. Think d3100 or the like with a shit tier 18-55.

Is it a photograph of a hologram or something?

>>2736800
image made by cycles rendering in blender

Reflections lack uniformity, shadows lack direction and too diffuse, unaesthetical profile curve for the cup. Try harder and come back again.

>>2736788
Like it!

Yes, a very sweet smile indeed. Shame it's out of focus

File: Trees, picture.jpg (81KB, 720x405px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 720x405px

2/?

File: morning sunrise.jpg (31KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 720x720px

3/?

the corner in the right is a bit of a shame
I think the photo would've been better if it was pointed straight towards them rather than the ever so slight look to the right, could've framed them better in the arches.

that said, it's not a bad photo by any means and I'm sure 99% of couples won't mind any perceived flaws it has one bit

>>2736225
>the corner in the right is a bit of a shame

Came to say this from just seeing the thumbnail.

And yes, with such strong architectural lines around them it really would've done better with them centered in the arch.

The least you could've done is levelled the damn thing - it needs to be rotated a few degrees clockwise.

Wedding photography is no different than sucking 50 dicks at once.