/sqt/

why isnt fuji bringing back astia?
;__;

>>2934913
What is "vignetting" and why should I care about it when using filters?
Also what kind of filters I can use on digital?

File: Capture.jpg (181KB, 2020x754px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 2020x754px

Is £30 a lot for a sensor cleaning? I reached the point where I spend more time in Lightroom on spot removal than moving sliders.

Or maybe I should attempt it myself?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	ProTofik
Image-Specific Properties:

>>2934919
>What is "vignetting"
When corners of the image are darker than the centre
>Also what kind of filters I can use on digital?
If you need to, you can correct it in, for example, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom.

>>2934913
When would you use borders? Is it nesesary?

>>2934942
To stop illegal immigrants crossing into my country

...what borders?

>>2934944
Lol, is like frames on the picture

>>2934946
It is never acceptable to put them on a picture. It is only done by the same people that watermark their photos.

>>2934922
Nigga they aren't cleaning the actual sensor. The only part they really do clean is the IR glass filter thats in front of the sensor. Clean it yourself with 99% isopropyl alcohol and some sensor swabs.

>>2934918
because of faggots like you.

Real answer, film is less than 1% of their business. Photography isn't even a huge part of their business either. It's a large corporation with a history in photography that used those resources to break into other, more sustainable fields.
So before you start crying like Bellamy Cunt about FujiNotFilm discontinuing a product, consider that it's not their core business anymore.

>>2934922
If your camera is that bad and/or quite expensive, I'd get it done for me. Then if anything goes wrong, I can have a before and after example and shit down their throat with it. If your camera is an old beater, just do it yourself.

>>2934922
Just buy some sensor swabs for cheap and do it yourself. You'd have to be a literal retard to fuck it up. You can also re-use them providing you're not stupid either.
I usually have one wet swab for water/clearing and a dry swab for finishing.
Still got 8 more of these unopened.

>>2934951
I happened to have over 10 litres of isopropyl alcohol in my house.
>>2934953
>>2934954
Let's say I buy from link below. How do I do it? Dip it in isopropyl and wipe sensor with it, or are they already wet?

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/On-Sale-6pcs-set-Wet-Sensor-Cleaning-Kit-CMOS-CCD-Cleaner-SWAB-For-Nikon-Canon-Camera/32672354196.html?ws_ab_test=searchweb201556_8,searchweb201602_4_10057_10065_10056_10068_10037_10055_10054_10069_301_10059_10058_10032_418_10073_10017_10071_10070_10060_10061_10052_10062_10053_10050_10051,searchweb201603_6&btsid=694e5b05-a22c-4043-afdd-ee7290e8672f

>>2934942
Borders look like shit, that's why everybody hates isi

How do I find jobs in nightclub photography if I have no friends in nightclubs?
I think is a good job for small amount of money. Also, biggest part of photographers in club shoot like shit!

>>2934942
When matting and framing a print the borders help you to position the print behind the mat. Consider the size of the mat and adjust borders so the mat does not fuck up composition e.g. diagonal lines that would normally end in one corner, but are partly covered by the mat.

>>2934990
Ooook, so is like printing or setting up the space for the frame, so the end product does not fuck your photo composition or looking like a bad crop

so my dads got shaky hands, but likes taking pics with an old point and shoot.
doesn't work out very well.
Is there one today for $200 and under that could make up for his shakiness?

>>2935024

one that goes at least 1/1000 plus fast film.

>>2935033
Fast film?
When I say point and shoot I don't mean a film camera, but an old digital cybershot we've had since i was a kid.

File: image.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>2934913
I have a lens filter stuck to this mamiya lens I picked up, i swear to god someone must've superglued the filter to the lens because I can't get it off.
What do you advise? Rubber bands didn't work for me.

>>2935075
break it

File: image.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>2935075
Also the front end of the lens screws off so I only have this much leverage

>>2935076
I want to but I'm worried if I ever have to put on another filter, the filter frame will start to show up in the photo from how long it'll get

>>2935069

then a canon s90 or s100 set at Tv @ 1/400 forever.

>>2935082
Thanks, anon.

Has anyone ever shot golf? I've been asked to shoot a tournament but not sure what to look for in shots.

>>2935089
Im not an expert neither in photography neither in golf but i could sayas any even you shot the epic moments, and everything with feelings and aply the photography to capture it as the preasure of the shot, the calculations that they do, the poses that represents golf, is also always good to ask this questions to your client, i do that in web page and networking

what is the easiest photo management software for a computer illliterate?
It needs to support those audio comments things

>>2935078
grip the bottom half, get yourself a pair of pliers and turn in. Use some oil to loosen it before hand it you need to.

File: 35271358.jpg (159KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1024x768px

If a Person stands 500 meters away from me, how long a focal length should I use to get a reasonably good shot of said person?

500mm?

I'm mainly curious if there is a rule of thumb to this kind of issue.

>>2936071
Best bet is a zoom lens in the telephoto range, something like a 70-200 with a TC or Sigma 150-600. Maybe the Sigma 50-500 if you want to do closer shots too.

>>2936075
I don't have a need for a lens, I'm just curious if there are a sort of rule of thumb.

Say for example if the person is 1000 meters away, would a 1000 mm lens be necessary?
Or do I actually need a 2000 mm lens, or a 3000 mm lens.

>>2934922
Spend that on a sensor loupe, trying to do it blind will lead to more tiny specks ime.

Next most useful tools is one of those gummy stick things, this and the loupe will solve 95% of grime. A sensorpen also works well.

For actual cleaning i use isopropyl alcohol and cigarette papers with the gum removed (they're cheap, lint free and sanitary.) wrapped round an old sensor gel blobby sticky thing. i find swabs solvent with too much water and they leave dampness and spotting.

Don't panic too much, as said, you're actually cleaning the glass filter, not the sensor itself, you don't have to be crazy gentle, if you have ibis it can be scary seeing your camera innards sliding about.

>>2936071

500 meters? Reasonably good shot of a person? It depends on what you consider to be reasonable. Defining facial features?

To get a rough idea though, for a 35mm camera divide the focal length by 50 to get magnificaton. You can correlate this to binoculars. IE, 400(mm) ÷50 = 8(x magnification).

>>2936071
With a 35mm you'll get a full body shot from about 2m away.

So with a 350mm it's about 20m
And with a 3500mm it's about 200m.

For 500m you'll need (35mm X 500 / 2) = about 8750mm

Wheres a good place in the us to go for a photo trip?

I'm just starting out. I'm a reporter for a local paper who also takes photos. I've gotten some actually decent shots without knowing what I was doing, but it's time for me to learn.

On my t3i (it was cheap), I've been using a kit lens with manual exposure and playing with the shutter speed. If I wanted to capture say high motion low light, what are the things I'd need to adjust? I know it can be done, I just don't know how.

>>2935075
scrape the filter with a glass cutting tool in different directions, then hold the lens upside down and carefully hit the glass (towards the side) with a sharp object. remove the glass shards, then you can just leave the filter ring on the lens.

the front element looks very recessed so you should be able to avoid scratching it.

Can you switch lenses on a Nikon F3 without fucking up the film inside?

>>2936416

Yes. The mirror blocks any incoming light.

>>2936405

Right now? What's your range?

>>2936417
thank you anon

>>2936405
Where do you live? You could drop a pin anywhere in the continental USA and find a good place for photography within a few hundred miles.

>>2936417
>Yes. The mirror blocks any incoming light.
Dumbass, on the Nikon F3 what blocks the incoming light is the SHUTTER not the Mirror. Learn how a camera works, retard.

If I shoot RAW files on my camera in B&W mode, can I later change them back to color in post?

>>2936444

The mirror also blocks light, retard.

>>2936449

Raw isn't black and white. It's raw. It only becomes raw when you render it and attach a profile.

So, yeah. The jpeg preview that's cooked into every raw file will be black and white, but the raw file itself will be untouched.

>>2936584
What about the semi transparent mirror in the a99 II?

>>2936625

What about it? Is it also in the F3?

>>2936584
you probably would't like the look of your film very much with the shutter jammed open and just the mirror blocking light whenever you change lenses, unless you're a lomo hipster, you doof.

>>2936587
thanks

>>2936663

Wanna bet?

File: 0869110610.jpg (11KB, 216x500px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 216x500px

>>2934951
>>2934959
please, do not use strong isopropyl on glass and sensor. that will ruin your coatings in the long run. you need to mix it with filtered water or get an already diluted mixture, I use 1:1 and ive heard of others using 1:2 isopropyl to water.

You should also take a moment before hand and see if you can clean the sensor without any liquid at all. use compressed air and stiff lens cleaning paper. only if that doesnt clean the sensor should you try using liquids to clean off the sensor.

>>2936688

70% isopropyl is a more effective solvent anyway. There's a good applied science video about it.

>>2935024
find a camera that supports vibration reduction either in the lens of body

>>2935078
>>2935075
https://youtu.be/qsSds4z2Ruw?t=1m3s

>>2936690
99% still cant be good, ultimately, isop is a corrosive

Why does the viewfinder focus look different that wide open aperture final result?

How do I calculate how many stops I need to reduce manually when using extension tubes?

What makes a man, Mr. Lebowski?

>>2936584
Not completely doofus. They make 0 mirrors with the added purpose of blocking all light.

>>2935076
dont do this ffs

>>2935003
No. Borders are simply for the purpose of having that extra paper size to lay a matte on, and appear naturally in instant film.

When people make them digitally it's ether strickly for design (not art) or because they're autistic and think its a real thing and an acceptable edit to a photo like vignetting.

>>2935024
Any camera that he can set manually to 1/500 about and also has auto-ISO and auto-Aperture

File: FW Gurney.vsm.jpg (23KB, 317x400px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 317x400px

>>2934926
Note there is also "white vignetting" which had the historical purpose for old timey circular portraits. pic related.

You dont see that done pretty much at all anymore. It just wouldnt look right since it's so established with old, sepia, large format photos.

hmm, what if I got an 8x10, expired b&w 50 ISO film and sepia toner and started making replica 1800s photos as a gag. Could be fun to try.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:

Why hasn't Olympus announced a price for the EM1MK2 and a release date? ;;

>>2936701
your camera might let the aperture sit a different f when not shooting. its so when taking a picture on something like a f1.8 you can actually see the whole scene as the lens might rest when not shooting at a higher f .

i dont know your camera so its a guess at best.

there should be an option to preview the aperture. you might have to assign it to a button though.

you shouldn't have to adjust stops.

what camera u using ?

>>2936416
yes you fucking idiot.

how the fuck do you have a f3 withouth even knowing the basic of all basic ideas behind a slr.

>>2936409
come on dude you should be able to figure this out.

high shutter. high iso. low aperture.

there's literally only 3 things to change exposure on any camera.

I'm new the photography. What is the best way to know if you have a good photo or have an interesting shot? I've noticed many here that claim to have interesting photos but then get told its got nothing interesting to look at

>>2937034
if it looks good, it looks good.

its subjective as well.
you took the photo ovb your gonna like it mre than a random person.

but same time a boring photo is a boring photo.

if you like it its good. if others like it its still good but just more so.

>>2937034
It's completely subjective. I think street shots are mostly boring but I love me some landscapes. Some people go nuts over selfies but I think they're boring.

Besides that, an interesting shot could tell a story. If you can look at a picture and infer something about the subject in it, that could make it interesting as well, especially if there's some mystery involved.

What's the difference between AF-A, AF-S, and AF-C?

Okay, /p/. I've learned how to adjust the ISO and shutter speed for the right situation. My only problem now is how do you know what aperture to use for the right situation?

>>2936701
Modern dslr viewfinders won't display an aperture larger than 2.8, that might be causing your confusion.

>>2936995
Don't let him fool you! The correct recipe is:
Close, fast shutter
Low ISO for God's sake

>>2937269

Read your fucking manual, cover-to-cover, twice. You'll learn more in the twenty minutes it takes you than you would in two years of guessing or just avoiding options because you don't know what they do.

Having said that, AF-S is best thought of as "single". You press the button, it focuses once and then not again until you press the button another time. Useful for stationary objects.

AF-C is continuous, you hold the button and it keeps trying to focus as long as you hold the button. It's useful for moving objects, although your hand or body movement might fool the camera and you can miss focus.

AF-A is automatic, where the camera tries to figure out which of the previous two modes it should use based on movement in the scene.

File: Untitled.png (151KB, 1281x521px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1281x521px

Is there a noticeable difference in performance between these two lenses that warrants the price increase? I can find the first one on eBay for ~$100 cheaper than the second.

>>2934918
fuck I just could have purchased astia and didnt. >dat regret

I plan on shooting video with an A6000, and the most regarded feature for me is the auto focus. though the auto focus continuous is pretty good on the A6000, I read that it only works with sony lenses. Is that really the case? or does it work with any E mount lenses as well, like Sigma? (that would make everything so much easier, since you can't find sony lenses under 30mm that are affordable and not shit).

>>2937922
their optical design is exactly the same except for coating. green is old SMC and red is new HD coating

which is weird why the newer coating is less expensive

File: pentax_hd35macro.jpg (152KB, 1000x849px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1000x849px

>>2937936
Thanks! Now I have a new dilemma, deciding between the 21mm 3.2 or 35mm 2.8 macro. I've heard good things about both, so I'm on the fence. Or would you recommend a different lens altogether?
Primary uses will most likely be landscapes and astrophotography.

>>2937922

the older green ring lenses are out of production.

meaning someone with one new in box can charge what they want for it and if you want it bad enough you will pay the price.

go with the new HD lens.

21mm is wide. but just right. i've used my pentax 35mm 2.4 about 4 times in 3 years now.

>>2937996
>landscapes and astrophotography
>macro

>>2938014
Awesome, thanks anon.

File: 29335933473_74765c6a0f_b.jpg (150KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1024x683px

How do I achieve this effect?
More: https://www.flickr.com/photos/tayaiv/

The photo looks like a painting/drawing due its colors/texture, I don't know how to explain.

I feel like there is a simple filter for doing that on post-production. I tried HDR but it was too much. Levels also didn't do the job.

>>2934987
Since you seem confident that you can do better I suggest showing your work to the nightclub owners. Offer to do the job for the same money but better and they will surely take you on.

I'm going to get a Panasonic G7 and I was wondering if I can install plugins onto it, like differerent colour grading things and effects like onion skinning etc that arent on the camera normally

>>2938145
wait for the new g8.
now with ibis.

Question would a Fujifilm X-T2 be able to produce any decent Night photos? I want to dive into the mirrorless cameras, but I love low light/night shooting.

File: Takagi98es.jpg (2MB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1800x1200px

What kind of a camera was used to capture this? It is a photo of Toranosuke Takagi's F1 car in 1998 Spanish GP. I'm confused by the noise and artifacts.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	600 dpi
Image Created	2014:01:25 09:49:29
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1800
Image Height	1200

>>2938399
a very early digital camera.

is the Sony RX100 a good beginner camera?

can someone explain to me what lenses fit into what camera. I've tried googling it and any answer I get is stupid or irrelevant. I have some old school canon lenses and I want to know if they will work with a newer canon camera (EOS M). I don't wanna shill out for new lenses if i don't have too. I've got a Cannon Lens FD 200mm 1:4 S.S.C. lens and some others that fit into the same camera. any help?

>>2938572
google flange distance

If you're still confused and think the answers are stupid or irrelevant then you're probably projecting yourself into the answer.

File: 20161001-_DSC4473.jpg (360KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

360KB, 1000x667px

>>2934913
what kind of flare are this?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D800
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	802
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:02 21:05:18
Exposure Time	13 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	4000
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

Hey guys, after my grandpa passed away I found out that he had around 1,000 35mm slides. (mostly from 60's and 70's)
What is the best way to digitalize them? Keep in mind I'm kinda short on money so I'm looking for the best money/value ratio
>get shit done by professional (1400dpi for 230USD, 2700dpi for 350USD or 4000dpi for 420USD)
>I can borrow Pentacks K-5 or K-10 for free basicaly anytime
>I'm willing to buy some sort of scanner up to 200-250USD

I'm a million years behind on modern camera tech when it comes to manual focus.

If I wanted something that focused with the ease of a split-prism, old film SLR like my Nikon FM2, is that something that even exists? I get very confused every time I look this stuff up because I know modern digital Leica's do it slightly differently, and this whole "focus peaking" in new EVF's seems more cumbersome.

sony's focus peaking highlights things in focus but does it make the subject red or does it create a red outline around focused area?

>>2938771
there is also (by the first option) choice of scanning to .tiff and 48bit depth but thats another 85USD more

>>2938771
>Buy wolverine f2d scanner for 99 or less if used
>use flatbed scanner to scan multiple at a time
>use digicam with macro lens and backlight
I collect slides and just use my dedicated film scanner for those unless it's a shot I want to edit

>>2938739
That flare in the middle? The backwards C shaped one?

>>2938771
I bought a used coolscan 4000 + slide tray feeder (takes ~20 glass slides in one go) to scan our old family snapshits, probsbly is over your budget, tho. It also is a surprising amount of work, even with the automation.

Honestly, having scanned ~800 snapshits myself now, if the quality is good I'd just go with the proffessional service, if you can get it done at those prices (over twice more expensive where I live) 2700 DPI is probably good enough for most family snapshits from 40 years ago.

OTOH if the shop you're looking to use has some shitty plustek -tier machine with no AF and a Dmax ofyour average nigger, look for other options.

>>2938057
fuckin around with the saturation and black/shadows sliders or hipster preset VSCO filters

>>2938776
exactly that one, isnt a lens flare thats for sure

File: shhhh.jpg (490KB, 600x693px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 600x693px

>>2938824
Yeah, I tried fiddling with the blacks (that's what I meant with levels), but didn't quite get there.

Searching for some VSCO emulation tutorials, I think I'm onto something:

- Exposure goes up;
- Blacks go brighter (levels);
- Warming AND cooling filter;
- Whites go brighter (using selective color);
- A bit of noise/sharpen to add grain.

I also did some arbitrary color changes to better suit my tastes.

Would /p/ says I achieved the same "painting" effect as in >>2938057 ? What is lacking?

File: shhhh2.jpg (502KB, 600x693px) Image search: [Google]

502KB, 600x693px

>>2938896
Also v2 with more selective color shenanigans.

File: shhhhps.jpg (729KB, 1608x878px) Image search: [Google]

729KB, 1608x878px

>>2938897
Another attempt, this time without fucking up highlights. Still not sure.

File: aaa.jpg (172KB, 1280x1062px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1280x1062px

How does one achieve a soft, pastel image like pic related? Is it mostly photoshop/lightroom or are there tricks with the gear as well?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone SE
Camera Software	9.3.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:09:03 18:42:43
Exposure Time	1/225 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	25
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	9.2 EV
Exposure Bias	1.6 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2450
Image Height	2033
Rendering	Unknown
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2938917
Overexposing, low contrast, low vibrance/saturation.

Noob question: What is tilt-shift and is it possible to take a tilt-shift photo without depth of field?

>>2938920
Tilt is the rotation of the lens plane relative to the image plane. Shift is the parallel movement of the lens plane in relation of the image plane.

Tilt-shit images are made with lenses or cameras that allow movement of the lens in an up-and-down or side-to-side fashion

File: 1468608024821.png (576KB, 618x720px) Image search: [Google]

576KB, 618x720px

Hey /p/ros. I've been wondering about smartphone cameras. All smartphones that I've owned let you change the ISO but never the aperture or shutter speed. However when I change the ISO from standard 100 to 3200, I can get clear pictures of moving things.

Why is that? I thought shutter speed was the one that made moving things in photographs "clear"? Or do smartphone cameras increase shutter speed when you increase the ISO? I'm confused.

>>2940605
They probably do, as less light is needed for the picture to be taken. Therefore, you have less "real life frames" into the same exposure and thus the picture looks still.

Are you able to get a super-exposed picture 3200? If the camera is compensating the high ISO somehow, that's how it's doing it..

>>2940633
>They probably do, as less light is needed for the picture to be taken. Therefore, you have less "real life frames" into the same exposure and thus the picture looks still.
>Are you able to get a super-exposed picture 3200? If the camera is compensating the high ISO somehow, that's how it's doing it..
Interesting and no, pictures at 3200 ISO on my phone have about the same exposure as 100 ISO ones.

>>2940605

What smartphones have you owned? I've been able to change the shutter speed on every single one, albeit with third party apps.

which framerate (if any) has a more cinematic/filmic feel, 25fps or 30fps? also what are some techniques to make digital footage look more like film?

>>2940682

24 fps.

grading can help digital footage look more like film, though rolling shutter instantly spoils the illusion.

>>2940666
Witch aplications do you use for shutter speed

>>2940692

Depends on the operating system. What do you use? What phone do you have?

I have social anxiety (I suppose)
Never comfortable on the steet, always feel like everyone looks at me / attack me. Whatever.

Too panicky to walk around with a camera.

How do I get over this shit?

>>2940702
you have two options.

one, force yourself to do it anyway. then do it a lot until you get used to it. Usually you won't get any more than a dirty look from people.

two, take up some other kind of photography than street.

>>2940704
I really wish I lived in a country with hills / mountains so I could take a long hike and take pictures.

Fuck this shit

>>2940709

Just go for it. Honestly, something that really helped me get comfortable in public was forcing myself to shoot with a tripod. It takes longer, people don't mess with you because they assume you're a serious photographer and not some kid trying to get some lulzy pix for the internet, and it reassures you that you're making a legitimate attempt at it.

File: crai.jpg (91KB, 960x854px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 960x854px

>>2940709
I wish I could live in a country where I don't get robbed in the first 30 minutes walking with a camera in my hands, so I could take street photographies. Get over your anxiety... for me!

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>2940666
>>2940694
Galaxy S2, LG Volt, and currently a Warp Elite.

>>2940694
Android, crapy lg stylo g, but i will change phoe in a couple months more, and next year i will get my dslr, now i have a bridge for training

>>2940758
>>2940764

Try camera fv-5.

or just search for a manual camera app until you find one that works for you. You MIGHT NOT be able to do this, but it's worth a try.

>>2940768
Will do, thanks.

How can I get lightroom for free?

File: barney.jpg (178KB, 613x594px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 613x594px

How do I make it so this picture is literally just Barney's head? As in, trace it out and make the file just the head on a see-through background.

I have access to Paint and GIMP, is that enough?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2008:10:21 11:56:03
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1440
Image Height	1080

>>2941054

GIMP will do it.

There are probably one billion tutorials on how to do it. "Background removal gimp" is a good search string.

>>2941055
Thank you! I'm going to attempt it now and post my results in a minute or so.

File: barney.png (513KB, 613x594px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 613x594px

>>2941055
Not as smooth as I want it to be but I'll keep working on it

File: barney.png (667KB, 613x594px) Image search: [Google]

667KB, 613x594px

>>2941055
That looks much better

I know this might sound dumb but I decided to get into film and I was looking at the canister and it doesn't have the megapixel count anywhere? Is it different by brand?

File: 1358_xlarge.jpg (133KB, 800x528px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 800x528px

Hi guys, I'm going to Tokyo in a months time and I was hoping to do a test shoot for a model agency over there. What are some promising agencies I could approach?

I have done some Google searching but it is hard to tell if an agency is high end or low end. I'm kinda looking for mid level agencies as I've only worked with a couple before.

Thanks!

What's the easiest way to focus at infinity when you're shooting on a lens that doesn't have a hard stop at infinity? (In my case this is about a Nikon 35mm 1.8 prime)

>>2941861
Use AF to focus on something far away. If the lens lacks markings or an infinity stop, there isn't any other way.

>>2941853
bump for this question

>>2941072
That does sound dumb.

How did you all get back into photography?

I seen to have lost my motivation to take the time to snap the picture, pp it and share or keep.

>>2941072
>and it doesn't have the megapixel count anywhere?
I don't know, does it?

So, max aperture = everything clear or landscape shots while minimum aperture = macro shots?

Thoughts on vest dslr carriers?

>>2941853
I don't know any agencies but I recommend that you get a very good translator. I had a hard time being there, thankfully I met this young blonde girl. Had a really good time, we had a relationship that was very close it love but at the same time it wasn't. I'll miss Charlotte.

File: 300px-Rhein_II[1].jpg (11KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 300x168px

I'm looking for the parody of Rhein II, it was a photo of a house behind a fence, with grass in front of it

thanks familia <3

File: 1425755123510.jpg (248KB, 1440x600px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 1440x600px

>>2942298
never mind, i found it

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	NEX-6
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2014:10:26 20:45:21
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	1.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1440
Image Height	600
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Soft

>>2942264
It would be the other way arround, shooter is like an eye, when you put your finger on front of it and try to focus your pupil expands or opens, and when you try to see the far it make a small open it, thats why you squint when trying t see the far and not in near

Hi /P/
Complete camera illiterate here
I was looking to pick up a decent compact camera instead of your usual shitty phone photos, going to Cuba this January.
Any recommendations? Around a 400 USD budget. Was looking to get it around black Friday too in case there are any price drops so add another 50$ perhaps
thanks in advance

>>2941054
>>2941058
>>2941060
Is he at it again, /v/?

>>2940709
Look up local photographers and see what they're shooting.
A good photographer can produce decent photos anywhere. Don't be a faggot who relies on mountains in lieu of talent or hard work.

Best way to fight the fear of shooting street is to bring a friend.

I accidentally touched the film shutter on my xpan and it has fingerprint marks.. how do i clean it? or should i just leave it since its not effecting the shutter? Dont really like the sight of it.. can someone advice me how to clean finger marks or stains on a the shutter curtains?

>>2942731
Please don't bring that autism to /p/
I didn't think this place could get worse but I just now realised that it can.

>>2942886
If it's not affecting the performance you leave it be.

File: digital_camera_sensor_sizes.jpg (832KB, 1024x808px) Image search: [Google]

832KB, 1024x808px

I always had this question about the cropping factor of lenses: Aside of the frame cropping, is not the lens messing with the perspective as well?

For example, a 28mm FF lens behaves like a 44mm in an APS-C sensor, but what about the relationship of objects in foreground and background? Do they look like they are farther than normal (28mm perspective) or do they look "normal" (44mm perspective)?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Width	1024
Image Height	808

>>2942941
perspective has to do with your distance from the subject.
If you were shooting for example a person at 28mm, then you'd have to get really close to fill the frame, and so the wide angle still picks up more background context.
if you were further away with a smaller sensor (same 28mm on an aps-c) then you have to get further back in order to have the person the same size, and so there is less backgorund.

i dont know if that makes sense but
>tl;dr
44mm on FF has the same perspective as 28mm on crop

>>2942941
perspective stays the same if you use the same lens, regardless of sensor size.

Your FOV will just narrow, perspective != FoV.

If you use a 35mm on crop, it will have very similar framing to a 50mm on FF, but the perspective will be different.

So, why's this all important?

The longer the lens, the smoother your dof falloff will be, the larger sensor, the longer lens you can get away with. This is why large format looks dope as fuck.

>>2942952

>>2942945
here

we're going to have to fight

File: Perspective-650x470.png (43KB, 650x470px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 650x470px

>>2942945
>>2942952
It's confusing but I thing >>2942945 is right. If you intend to frame exactly the same picture, a 28mm in APS-C will have the same perspective as 44mm in FF, but the position of the camera will be entirely different.

"In photography, there’s a common misconception that focal length determines the perspective of an image, but the only thing that really determines perspective is where you put the camera."

http://photonaturalist.net/understanding-perspective-and-focal-length/

>>2942729
I have a bridge one and they are preety cool to start

>>2937931
should work also with sigma lenses for e-mount.

What's the best place for Pentax repair? Something inside my camera is broken and it's driving me up the fucking wall.

>contact only pro repair camera shop in state
>it'll be 250 for us to send it to pentax
>Go to pentax site
>rate is actually 166$
>site is unsecure on the very page I'm supposed to put payment and address on

>>2943141
Pls elaborate? Example or something

File: exposure-triangle[1].jpg (46KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 600x400px

>>2936409

>>2943247

What a needlessly confusing graphic.

>>2943248
It shows how each raises or lowers the exposure and what effect it has on the shot, with examples of the formatting of each of the values.
How is it not the most helpful exposure triangle graphic? lol

What kind of idiot would be confused by this?

>>2934913
What is the best, all-around portrait/walk around lens in terms of focal length.
after that, what is the best brand/model for such focal length worth buying? idc about price, thanks famalam

>inb4 "google it faggot"

i would, but I actually want some of you to give me your personal experience, not some bs bhphoto article, to tell me why you like/prefer such and such brand with such and such focal length

File: Screen Shot 2016-10-08 at 9.09.42 PM.png (1MB, 723x940px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 723x940px

im having trouble understanding this picture and the next.

This first one is shot with a canon 7d mark II with a 70-200 2.8 lens

The second is shot with a nikon d3200 and a 55-200 kit lens

Why would the more expensive setup produce in my opinion an inferior photo. I also dont understand the yellowish hue coming from the canon 7d mark II.

File: Screen Shot 2016-10-08 at 9.11.05 PM.png (2MB, 1416x942px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1416x942px

>>2943262

>>2943262
I would go for the settings

>>2943253
canon 50mm 1.8 on a FF cam is solid. it just feels good.

I have a 1.4 but it's not worth the price jump unless you literally have so much money it doesn't matter

File: posterRepro-01.png (445KB, 3526x2550px) Image search: [Google]

445KB, 3526x2550px

>>2943247
>>2943248
I like this one.

Stupid question so I guess it belongs in this thread:

If I used a film camera with a macro lens and took a 1:1 close up of a negative of the same type of film with the same format, would it come out as a positive of the original negative when I develop it?

>>2943436
Yes. This is how people do internegatives, and how cinema films are turned into projection prints, but the equipment generally isn't a camera + 1:1 macro lens.

>>2943376
Such a pointless chart, really teaches you nothing.

>>2943436
Yes if black and white, no if colour because of the mask.

>>2943251
>>2943248
>>2943247
The problem with that and most other "infographics" that dipshits have been producing for the last few years is that they prioritize artistic style over clarity and effectiveness. The result is an illustration that only makes sense if you already understand the concept being presented.

It may be a clever diagram, but it's worthless as an explanatory tool if the intended audience will need to read a long explanation and study the illustration carefully to make sense of it.

>>2943376
Does a much better job of illustrating the same general information.

File: fdddds.jpg (175KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 1200x1200px

Fuck, do I need more than the Yongnuo 560TX and this wireless contrtoller to shoot? I still need to go back and buy one of those dinky wireless things to put under the bottom of the flash while its off and on a stand/umbrella? im an idiot and the shoot is in a week.

>>2943613
Sorry, meant JUST the FLASH and that wireless controller.

File: GOPR0943.jpg (1MB, 3704x1840px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3704x1840px

I got this for $8 I know literally nothing about photography or cameras. How much is this camera worth? What kind of film does it use?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	GoPro
Camera Model	HERO4 Silver
Camera Software	HD4.01.03.00.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	15 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2015:01:26 20:55:59
Exposure Time	33333/1000000 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	483
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Subject Distance	0.00 m
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash Function
Focal Length	3.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4000
Image Height	3000
Exposure Index	0
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2943649
Google.

>>2943651
I'm trying to get opinions too

>>2942282
Anyone?

>>2943262
Not sure what you mean by yellowish hue. If you mean that the first picture is slightly warmer, it's probably due to the white balance settings, but there are also differences in how lenses render colors.

The first photo does look a little soft. It's possible that the lens was wide open, or an NR filter was applied, or camera shake, or focus error, or who knows what.

Your mistake is assuming that more expensive gear will produce better photos. In good light like that, all modern cameras will be functionally equivalent, and nearly all modern lenses perform extremely well a couple stops form wide open. You need to get far into the extremes to find significant differences in image quality, and even then 90% of it is pixel peeping that's only noticeable to people who are looking for flaws.

I don't get how negative b/w film works.

If there is a dark bw film and it gets exposured then the film lightens where the more light is. .. but that's positive bw film. ... is negative bw film white and then darkens when exposured?

I mean a dark film couldn't lighten when exposured to where the light does NOT fall, since then it would be exposured also whem no light falls on it ..

>>2945449
simplified version:

>film is dark
>film gets exposed to light
>light causes some chemical changes to areas it hits
>film gets put in developer
>developer turns the film clear
>except where the chemical composition got changed by the light
>result: film is clear everywhere except where the light hit it
so bright areas come out dark and sim areas come out light

>I mean a dark film couldn't lighten when exposured to where the light does NOT fall
Experiment: Develop some film that hasn't been exposed. Compare to what undeveloped film looks like.

File: image.jpg (68KB, 394x547px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 394x547px

Should I buy this for $250?

Nikon D3200
>18-55 zoom lens, camera bag, tripod, 16 GB SD card, camera cleaning kit, UV lenses cover, two batteries, two chargers, all audio/visual cables, lens cleaning pen, international plug, SD & Micro SD to USB converter

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Comment	Screenshot
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	394
Image Height	547

>>2945456

if you dont want it i'll take it

>>2943291
ok, thanks. 50mm does seem to be the general consensus on that. one more dumb question: How come a lot of photographers say if they could only have one lens it would be 35mm? wtf is special about it?

>>2945456
ah, so it gets exposured positive and the becomes negative when developed. thx, this explains it.

>>2945491
35mm is a sort of 'normal' for street snapshitters because it's wider, captures more of the scene while being close to your subject

>>2945516
thanks senpai, but do you personally think its really that good for street snapshitting? it seems to me unless you live in a clusterfuck like nyc or chicago/LA, you'd want maybe 50mm or higher, distortion on 35mm seems kinda bad

Aite mates....
if i buy one of these IR 720 filters and attach on my xpro1 camera will it take IR photos even if the sensor isn't modified ??
if i get this correctly you can either
remove the IR blocking filter on your sensor ( which takes better ir photos )
or
you just attach one of these filters that blocks visible light but lets IR through

I want to practice Photo and excercise at the same time, would my DSLR in my backpack get fucked up if i go running/jogging in a park

I know that a m43 lens's focal length is half the 35mm equivalent, but if I put on a 500mm SLR lens will it be 500 or 1000mm?

>>2946031
1000

>>2946033
Sweet, thanks!

>>2945957
need an answer to this pls

>>2945957
It will, yes, but compared to a properly converted IR camera it will need very long exposure times and you will probably get more contamination with visible light because of that.
Some cameras are better suited for this sort of thing than others, the ones with weak IR filters inside them being the "best," and Fujis are apparently quite good for it.

Maybe the local photo store has an IR filter they'll let you take a couple test shots with.
You want bright sunlight and you want custom whitebalance. Otherwise the photos will be dark and muddy and entirely red.

I'm looking to bring out the most of my dynamic range in Lightroom.

I have seen a few people recommending dropping shadows to the lowest, then bringing up highlights to full (may have reversed that), then setting the white and black point.

I don't exactly understand what this yet. Could someone help me out with that?

>>2947050
Shadows +20%
Highlights -15-25%
Clarity +10%
Whites -5%
Blacks +5%

Try it

File: 14-487-025-16.jpg (29KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 640x480px

What is the photography equivalent of a GTX 750 ti? A budget graphics card that can bring a computer to play most current games relatively well that is also only powered through the slot without the 6 pin power connection (very efficient).

>>2947204
Considering that all the software I use for photo/video work is hardware accelerated: I think the photography equivalent of the GTX 750 ti is a GTX 750 ti.

Pretty new to photography.

What are your thoughts on people that commit to a style, whether it's appropriate or not? For example, if I were inspired by Bresson, would it be considered pretentious if I were to shoot exclusively in B&W at 50mm? I'm not saying I want to, it's just an obvious example.

I have been to a few cities and taken very functional "touristy" shots, which are largely unremarkable and I am getting bored and want to feel like my shots serve a purpose other than showing off where I've been and impressing elderly relatives with how high resolution the shots are.

>>2947204

Hmmm... what's a camera that runs way too hot?

>>2947426
I forgot to add, I'm struggling to break away from Auto. Any advice for things I can do to stop this? The most obvious issue this presents based on my shots is the ridiculous brightness of the sky and losing detail on what I actually want to shoot.

>>2947426
>What are your thoughts on people that commit to a style, whether it's appropriate or not?
I think you're putting the cart before the horse with this kind of thinking. Most people don't "commit" to a certain style or medium unless they have a clear vision of the end result they want to accomplish, or they have some challenging limitation enforced by their subjects/environments or knowingly self-imposed. The people who just pick something and call it "my style" are usually the types who are lazy and ignore criticism even when they ask others for opinions.

>>2947490
guy on the internet keeps asking me to check his pictures and criticise
i know that he only wants to hear short and positive things....so next time i told him to hand me over the RAW file so i can really check on it....
open the RAW + xmp file.........
this dude "converted" his images to b/w by setting saturation to -100%
clarity to 100%
no access to individual colorchannel
because saturation -100%

>dude bc that's my style ! pls let's not argue over this now....let's talk another time...you have to respect my style

>>2947490
Thanks. I think that makes sense. I just wondered if people had tried it because I thought maybe if I wanted to shoot exclusively in B&W it would make me think more about lighting/contrast or even the subject rather than the colours. I hope that makes sense.

I was just throwing an idea out there really, I'm just trying to find a way of making what I'm doing a bit more exciting.

>>2947492
I would hate that. Even if it were my style I like to think I'd be critical enough of my own work that other people's wouldn't phase me.

>>2947536
>I wanted to shoot exclusively in B&W it would make me think more about lighting/contrast or even the subject rather than the colours.

I wouldn't call that a "style". That's an exercise. One that almost everyone who wants to improve their photography skills will go through at some point. Same goes for things like shooting only one focal length for a month, or forcing yourself to shoot large format and use the zone system even when not necessary so that you master it.

A genuine style is something you develop over time, not something you choose in advance. It's the sum of all of your interests, preferences, technical skills, equipment choices, etc.

>>2947555
Thanks, that makes a lot of sense when you put it like that.

I think I might try B&W though. I grew up watching a lot of film noir as a kid and liking the lighting/contrast and general mood so perhaps I can pursue that for a little while. Lots of wandering around at night and getting mugged in store I think.

>>2947254

So there isn't a camera that is budget priced that an amateur can use that is also up to modern standards/features?

>>2947597
Of course there is. Your question just didn't make sense to anyone outside of /g/.

Any DSLR made in the last 10 years is more than good enough for just about anything. Digital cameras don't hold their value well, so there are some very good deals to be had with older used gear.

If you want more specific advice than that, you'll have to give more info about what you're looking to do with it. If you don't know how to answer that, just pick the one that feels best in your hands. Most of all, just remember that if your pictures suck, it's almost certainly your fault and not your camera's.

What kind of Jobs you have?

>>2934942
I used to use them, haven't used them in a while. Might look good once printed/framed but never on the photo itself, looks shit.

>>2938739
It's the reflection off the guy's hat

Is a D3300 with a 18-55 kitlens (and maybe an added 55-200 kitlens) a good starting point for a beginner that wants to get into photography ?

>>2948092
I started 5 months ago with the D3300 and the 18 - 55, and it is excellent, however, I regret not getting the 55 - 200 as well, it would definitely be useful

It's a great beginner camera, easy to learn and the image quality is good, you can learn the controls and how everything works rather fast, it will serve you well until you get a better, more advanced one

File: Capture.png (14KB, 1186x335px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 1186x335px

I am ordering some 6x4inch prints.
The shop recommends to export photos from lightroom in 300dpi. What resolution is that gonna be for 6x4?

Sorry for stupid question, I usually never print; It's just for grandparents...
Pic related

File: Screenshot_20161017-195114.png (1024KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

1024KB, 1440x2560px

>>2948099
Its 600 for the following:
NIKON D3300 , AF-P 18-55 Non-VR, 55-200 VR II, Book on how to properly use it for beginners, sun cap for the lenses.
Added a screenshot from my phone.

>>2941853
Models.com gives you a good insight, or try to look for models IG's and see what agencies they are signed up to. Im a high-end fashion model myself, if you got any more questions you can ask me

File: FaceDownAssUp.jpg (193KB, 1920x1440px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1920x1440px

Recently got a em10 ii after 14 yrs solely film. The range of features & ability to set functions to certain buttons is vast, Still trying to find my feet, where to put what.

tl dr- MY QUESTION IS: Can you assign function buttons that are preset to different actions in different modes. so in A you can have iso set to back wheel but you can change mode to S & have it automatically set to a different wheel/function button as you've saved presets? Is that at all possible on any dslr/mirrorless ?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-PL5
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.4 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2014:10:06 21:29:09
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/1.4
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Auto, Red-Eye Reduce
Focal Length	25.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

Lads. I'm in desperate need of your help.
So I was working on some photos on my laptop. I was in the middle of importing things from my compact flash card using a card reader.
My usb ports can be a tad faulty on my laptop so sometimes it won't recognize my devices or it will disconnect and reconnect for no reason. So it did that and now it's telling me I need to reformat my card before using it but doing so will erase ALL my data. This is not ok because I really need the stuff I have on there. Right now i'm running it through photorec but I'm not sure what it can save or what I can do from there. I have over 1000 pictures all in raw too. Can anyone offer this desperate dude some advice?

>>2948107
The resolution is 300 dpi. That's what resolution means. Dots per inch = pixels per inch. If you set resolution to 300, then set height and width in inches, Lightroom will calculate the correct pixel dimensions automatically. But if you want to work it out yourself: 6 inches * 300 pixels per inch = 1800 pixels; 4 in * 300 ppi = 1200 pixels.

>>2948290
if you were just pulling stuff out of the card, it's likely that your data is still there but your os can't figure out how to mount it anymore. Hot disconnection of your drive when writing on it is another story as it can seriously fuck up the table of content. And OSX likes to write stuff on external drives at any time.

Try mounting your volume on another operating system. Windows is pretty agressive and that could restore your partition data. It this fails, you'll have to go through recovery software. Your data is there, but all scrambled.

>>2948302
I actually just managed to recover everything thank god. I used photorec to get it all back. So should I just reformat now? Or do I need to get a new card

>>2942294
Bob pls

>>2948107
I somehow completely missed the fact that you can change pixels to inches.
Perfect, thanks.

>>2936707
desu i get lots of white vignetting cause atm im printing MF on an enlarger for 35mm so i get white coners if im printing right to edge of the film

>>2948304
i was gonna mention photorec, btw different anon,
but seeing you have got it cause your smart enough to recover, i would recommend you buy another card in the near future cause you'll probably get more problem with your particular card in the future

Does anyone use a non-Lightroom/Photoshop workflow like digikam, darktable, or rawtherapee? Are they any more or less difficult or time consuming? How is the learning curve?

What do you use for organizing your image library?

>>2942729
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2016-roundup-consumer-long-zoom-compacts/3
I had one of the previous generations of this model, and it was fine as a starter "better than phone" camera at the time. Nowadays you might want to look at a larger 1" sensor like this. https://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g9x

I'm using a 50mm fx lense on a D3300 dx camera. How is this different from using a 50mm dx lense and should i go buup a dx 50mm?

best compact point and shoot for travelling?

>>2948676
I don't think they make a Nikkor 50mm dx. I've got an fx (g) one, costs about the same as the 35mm dx.

I think with the fx you get better images (less vignetting and and sharper corners). Tony Whitebread Northrup disagrees though.

Also if you go full frame in the future you have a nifty fifty.

>>2948117
I got the body, the 18 -55 lens, strap, hood and some other stuff for about 400 euros including shipping
You could probably get the second lens for cheaper, and I don't think you really need the book, it's more fun to learn on your own, and besides, the internet has everything you may need

File: M0dd16V.jpg (103KB, 500x669px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 500x669px

getting started with video

how frowned upon is autofocus? are there times when you'd use it? how much does it mess with things, what are the actual downsides of it

bls helb

>>2949037

Autofocus is great if you want that "amateur with a camcorder" look.

File: 1415668731410.jpg (38KB, 555x407px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 555x407px

>>2949043
Alright that's clear enough

I'll just get some solid cheaper older lenses with an adapter, ty anon

>>2949037
Depends. Its useful for on the go shit. Film making, interviews, and other situations where you get time to set focus then manual focus is the way to go.

File: babby's first photo.jpg (382KB, 1000x662px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 1000x662px

Hello /p/, /o/ here. My friend just gave me a nikon d5100 and a 35mm lens. This camera is total overkill for what I usually take pictures of and I'm finding out "good" lenses can be over500 bucks a pop. Would a nikkor 18-55mm or a nikkor 55-200mm be good lenses to start out?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D5100
Camera Software	paint.net 4.0.6
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	37618
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:18 18:23:52
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4928
Image Height	3264
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
ISO Speed Used	100
Image Quality	FINE
White Balance	AUTO
Focus Mode	AF-S
Flash Setting	NORMAL
Flash Compensation	0.0 EV
Flash Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
AE Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
Lens Type	Nikon D Series
Lens Range	35.0 mm; f/1.8
Shooting/Bracketing Mode	Single Frame/Off
Noise Reduction	OFF
Camera Actuations	21552

>>2948845
The one you have with you

>>2949073
Since it is overkill, stick with that lens. If you ever feel like you need more, sure, get a new one. And you'll know what you want/need by then.

But zoom lenses are what really cost a fuckton, hence why Id advise against them for now.

>>2949073
If you to want to shoot scenery and landscapes the 18-55mm is a good budget way to go wide.

>>2949075
One thing I miss about my crappy point and shoot was that it's field of view at minimum zoom was noticeably wider. From what I understand, the fewer the millimeters, the wider the field of view is, right?

>>2949078
Thank you

>>2949080
Yeah, exactly. 35mm and 50mm are pretty standard. anything less is wide angle and anything more is more narrow angle (more zoomed in)

>>2949084
Okay, thank you, I think I'll buy the 18-55mm lens.

>>2949086
If you're spending under 400 on a zoom lens you probably not, whatever you have now is better

>>2949089
What could be so bad about it? Could I even tell the difference as a beginner?

>>2949086
Wide end should be quite sharp at f/8-f/11 iirc, which is a non issue for landscape usage.

>>2949089
You're going to be hard pressed to find something wide and sharp on APS-C that is inexpensive other than the latest kit lens.

Looking for a microphone to stick onto my d7100. My mate wants to use it to record his band. Obviously not looking for studio quality and whatnot, I know what the limits are concerning one microphone in a room with a full band.

The built mic didn't do bad considering, was just kissing most of the lowend so I'm guessing I need something with a larger diaphragm. Is there anything below £50? Cheap & cheerful will do.

I put a cheap Tokina 16mm lens on a Canon 5D Mark III I rented, and there was a complete circle around the image like I was shooting with a fisheye. It can't be like that for every wide angle lens on a full-frame, right? I didn't have a wide Canon lens to test.

Film Noob here,

How does scanning negatives work? By that I mean, what would the quality and reslution be nce it is a digital file?

I would like to shoot some MF film and then have it scanned.. What sort of quality and resolution could I expect in comparison to my digital RAWS?

What file type could I expect to receive? AND What sort of flexibility would the file have in pst/ (again in comparisn to a digital raw file)

THNAKS

What is the difference between mirrorless and DSLR? What should someone looking to get their first camera look for between the two? Is a place like Henrys competent enough to go in and talk to the employees or will they shill me something shitty for a sale? Thanks

>>2949237

Which cheap tokina lens? Was it a crop lens?

>>2949332

Mirrorless are typically smaller and lighter than the equivalent DSLR. This can be both a benefit and a drawback. If you have larger than average hands, you might find a mirrorless too small for comfort. Large lenses can be difficult to balance. After you attach the necessary battery grip (more on that in a bit) and have a big 2.8 zoom, the size difference largely between full frame bodies largely disappears. The rest of the time, however, they are much smaller and easier to carry.

The only way to see through a mirrorless camera is to use the electronic viewfinder, which means that they are CONSTANTLY draining the battery. Batteries are also smaller (and less powerful) than their DSLR counterparts, which only compounds the effect. Seriously, you had better get good at battery management if you want to shoot mirrorless, because it is a serious issue. You'll have to stock up on at least two spare batteries, and more if you want to get into heavy commercial photography. Battery grips become a necessity, which is another $200 you have to tack onto the price. The upside is that electronic viewfinders can be a revelation if you've only used old-fashioned optical viewfinders. The ability to see EXACTLY what you're going to shoot is great for beginners. They see in the dark better than you do, make manual focus easier, and can overlay a fuckton of useful information like digital bubble levels, histograms, zebra stripes for clipping highlights, etc. However, many people find the lag introduced by the EVF exasperating and distracting.

Mirrorless has made tremendous strides in autofocus over the last year, though if you're using anything besides the latest generation of camera you'll probably be disappointed by the performance, especially when compared to even the most basic DSLR.

Mirrorless cameras can mount a huge array of lenses with the use of adapters, which is an enticing advantage if you like old lenses or even just have a closet full of them like I do.

>>2949342

Tokina 16.5-135mm f/3.5-5.6

>>2949361
That's a crop lens alright, which is why you're seeing this.

You most certainly can get full-frame wide-angle lenses, at 16mm and even a bit wider than that. They're inescapably going to be bigger and heavier than the same lens for a crop sensor though, all else being equal. And in most cases more expensive.

>>2949364

Oh shit, there are crop sensors AND crop lenses? Argh.

Thanks, anon

>>2949373
Yeah. Many things that are 18-something or 16-something are, since that's 28 and 24mm equivalent (respectively) on a crop sensor. You'll find crop-sensor primes at many focal lengths too. Nikon has both full-frame and crop 35/1.8s. Pentax makes some lenses that are marketed as crop but will cover the full frame if you put them on such a camera. Some crop-sensor zooms will cover FF at some focal lengths but not others.

Anything from Canon marked EF-S is a crop lens Canon's crop lenses won't even mount on a full-frame camera, if I remember right, not sure why your Tokina is EF instead of EF-S.

How do hotshoes work? Do they just act as switches as they connect the circuit when you press the shutter release, or do they give a little spike of electricity?

>>2949280
That depends on how you scan the negative. Film scanners do not work just like regular scanners, which just shine light at an object and scan that. When scanning film, you need to shine trough the negative. Some desktop scanners have the ability to shine from the top cover, you you can scan negatives with them, although the quality is far from superb. Then you have special film scanners, which slowly scan the film frame by frame at a high quality. You could as well get a light table (from an old monitor perhaps), put your negative on that and take a picture of each frame with a DSLR.

>>2949892

Any light bed?

>>2949934
The light needs to be soft end even. If you take a pure LCD panel, you will see the individual pixels... Use filters and such.

File: IMG_20161020_125928.jpg (209KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1280x1280px

>>2949934
>>2949935
I have found a sample of said effect. I took it with my phone, so the quality is shit, but you can clearly see the lcd panel elements (pixels).

Is the Nikon D3000 good?

>>2948117
get the d5100 or 200 whatever cheaper on ebay or something
wtf is wrong with people still paying the same price as 10 years ago just because it includes a fucking how to book ?!

>>2949889
It depends on the system. The old single-pin hot shoes are just wired to a simple switch. The flash provides the voltage (the shoe is hot as long as the flash is on--hence hot shoe, compared to earlier cold shoes that required a separate connection between flash and body). On more modern cameras, the hot shoe is a data bus between the flash and camera that carries a lot more than just a trigger signal. The flash may or may not power the shoe depending on the design. They differ between manufacturers and between generations within manufacturers.

>>2947050
>dropping shadows to the lowest, then bringing up highlights to full
holy shit lmao

Any solid tips for making a t4p ad without sounding like a sex offender?

Why is it that my b/w pics look splendid on displays but hideous blunt when printed?

I know ofc that displays emit light while prints just reflect, but also the high-end 10x8" coated pricey prints look just too dull.
I did adjust the gamma for print, pay attention to them having enough contrast and everything and it is not like that any information get lost or the like. But the very same picture suddenly looks boring af.

Are we just poisened by being used to displays or do I do something wrong?

>>2950592
Good prints should look much better than anything on a monitor.

Is your display calibrated? Does your photo lab know what it's doing? Are you soft proofing using the color profile provided by the lab?

There are a lot of variables. If you're using a competent lab, they should be able to help you narrow down the cause.

>>2950284
That's easy to answer:

First: provide all personal information about you like name, address, contacts etc., maybe even a picture of yourself.

Second: provide example material of what you shoot.

Third: explain the project and make clear what will happen and what not. Declare the locations the shooting will happen and avoid private apartments and stuff like this.

Fourth: offer that they bring a covering person and suggest a personal meeting beforehand at a public place.

>>2950593
It is a very competent lab. The pictures are b/w so it is just the question of gamma. Everything is correct and as I said all details are visible.

I just wondered if there is some common thing I don't know about like 'ofc you need a strong unsharp mask for prints or you have to push mids to the right' or something like this, and I just never heard about that ...

File: teststrip.jpg (96KB, 680x550px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 680x550px

>>2950595
It may be a B&W image, but the printer is color so you need to take that into account. If you're editing in the wrong color space for your printer, the results will be unpredictable. If you're soft proofing with the lab's profile, what you see should be more or less what you get. There are no secret tricks. You're viewing the print under good lighting conditions, right?

If soft proofing doesn't cut it, go to hard proofing. People create test strips in the darkroom by exposing different parts of a print for more or less time. Doing something similar with digital is easy. Make some edits and print multiple versions on the same paper you intend to use for the final print.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Epson
Camera Model	Perfection2450
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Dr David W. Butcher
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	18784
Image Height	23197
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2014:09:29 18:23:03
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	680
Image Height	550

>>2950613
Yo this would be great as an artistic effect.

>>2950593
You need to ask them for an ICC profile and edit with that profile assigned in photoshop/lightroom.

Is it hard to mix lights and mods from different brands? I see people discussing lighting choices as if they were buying into an entire system including a limited range of mods that match the strobes' brand

What do you think of getting (digital) pics printed on metal?

File: _DSC0365.jpg (3MB, 6016x4000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 6016x4000px

How do I fix my autofocus for street photography? I want the subject in the foreground to be in focus, not the background.

pic related
>inb4 "over 1MB"

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.7 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	842
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:23 18:01:47
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	900
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Comment	MORITZ
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2951714
try single point autofocus

>>2951714
Manual focus. And stop shooting at 1.4 dumbass, you're that's not the cover of Vogue.

>>2951731
Thanks. I'll try it tomorrow
>>2951748
I'm too slow

>>2945962
Tie it so it does not bounce around.

>>2936587


not op,
is it better to take pictures in black and white, or just edit them to black and white in post?

>>2952299

I do both. I shoot in black and white RAW for the previsualization, and then process in black and white afterwards as well. I may stick close to what the jpeg looks like, or may go in a drastically different direction.

>>2952321

thanks will do

File: rolls-wasabi-fish-rice-food-hd-wallpaper.jpg (225KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1680x1050px

I have a Konica Minolta DiMage Scan Elite 5400, but I need replacement slides for it. Where can I go to buy some? Sushi unrelated

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

Can I get some book recommendations for portraiture? Either collections or theory, Canadian winter is coming in hard and fast this year so I have some comfy reading time coming up.

best image hosting website?

Why do lenses say 3.5-5 or 2.8-4 instead of just saying 3.5 or 2.8?

>>2953569
if its a zoom lens the f gets darker as it zooms in

its the trade off of having a cheap small zoom.

>>2953569
If its an f2.8 to f4, it will be able to open up to 2.8 in the middle of the range, but only f4 at either end.

File: 2015_05_31_Alchemy.jpg (464KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 1920x1080px

>>2953581
what the fuck did you just say?

Can someone explain the more obscure stack modes in Photoshop to me?

I'm familiar with the normal mean, median and summation, but not the rest.

why do people still buy canon?

>>2938399
>1998
confused by noise and artifacts lol.