Stupid Questions Thread. Ask stupid questions here.

File: DistinctLackOfHue.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Why does street photography look better B&W?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS Rebel T6
Lens Size	18.00 - 55.00 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.0.1
Lens Name	EF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:26 02:57:30
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	55.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	750
Image Height	444
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Av-Priority
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Evaluative
ISO Speed Rating	Auto
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Large
Focus Mode	AI Servo
Drive Mode	Continuous
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	160
Color Matrix	135

>>3009991
BW is used primarily when the image itself has nothing at all attention-worthy or interesting in it.

Oh, look, a snapshit of two ugly random nobodies on a bench. If it were in color it would have nothing to separate it from being a scene of two ugly random nobodies on a bench that everyone can see 500 times a day just looking out their car window or walking down the sidewalk.

By making it BW you somehow fool hipsters into thinking that a completely meaningless snapshit of ugly people is artistic.

>>3009991
B&W is an insta-art crutch
Look at old martin parr for decent colour street.

I've been shooting in manual. Aperture priority seems like it would be more convenient for my needs. Is there any reason why I shouldn't just switch to aperture priority pretty much all the time?

>depth of field is the only thing I absolutely want to control
>I have the minimum shutter speed set to 125 so I don't get any camera shake from having too slow of a shutter speed
>I don't care about noise so whatever auto iso lands on doesn't matter to me

Are there any situations where shooting in aperture priority isn't advisable?

Anyone know a well priced UK printing company?

File: C28FCC1C-7B07-4199-88D0-88018C9B3E33.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3010000
>>3010008
As much as I hate to admit, you two aren't wrong

However I will say b&w has saved my ass when I went to shoot street photos at night and they came out looking like literal piss

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Panasonic
Camera Model	DMC-GX8
Camera Software	VSCO
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	41 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2016:12:24 10:50:20
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/1.7
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	20.00 mm
Comment	Processed with VSCO with b1 preset
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1008
Image Height	672
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	High
Sharpness	Hard

>>3010206
when you have a lot of time to set up a shot, like you're shooting something in a studio and you want absolute control, you should definitely use manual

if you're on the street and want properly exposed photos without having to constantly mess with your gear then aperture priority is what you want

should i use jpeg, jpg or png to save my pics?

I'm planning to get into film again and do my own B/W developing, beyond the tank and chemicals, is a changing bag necessary? What else would I need to worry about, equipment wise?

What's the best cheapest camera I can buy?

>>3010293
Craigslist niggaaaa

File: Untitled.png (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Is there a general guideline for how much you can fuck around with these sliders before you go full retard with them?

I mostly want to edit some portraits. The colors look kinda dull. What's the general amount of contrast/saturation I can add before it starts looking like shit?

>>3010206
Learn the exposure triangle and you'll know which situations to use every mode in.

>I only care about DoF (meaning Motion Blur ruined pictures)
>I don't care about noise
then whatever mode you use won't matter, you might as well shoot auto because your pictures look like shit anyway.

>>3010256
Dng

>>3010256
there is no difference between jpg and jpeg. these are synonyms. the difference between jpg and png is mainly, that png compresses lossless while jpg compresses lossy (in 99,9% of cases).
So in regard to remain the quality png is superior to jpg, but ofc also needs more disc space.
that said, it should be mentioned that png is not the optimal format for raster graphics. you might use something like tiff (or mentioned dng if you are comming from raw data and want to keep it). there are several other professional formats like exr and so on, but for a matter of fact you can go just as good with png for most of your cases.

>>3010293
There will be so many different opinions. I generally would advise to look out for old digital cameras, like 4-7 yrs old. Mostly they are not really out-dated, but the manufacturer just skettled the shekels by giving it a new number. Since so many people fall for it you get the older version for very cheap inspite it is not significantly worse then its next 3-4 "generations".

>>3010719
Experience. And coming back a few days later to reinspect your pictures is a good idea

By the time you think you're approaching the limi, you already went way too far

>>3010719
There is no scale for "fucking around". Also every software uses other values. Some from 0-100, others from 0-127 or 0-255. Some even just 0-10 or something like that. Also there is no standard how strong a step will affect an effect. And some behave lineraly others exponentialy or logarithmicaly.

So, nobody could give a serious answer like 'never more than 25%'.

As a rough rule: most people tend to overdo. So rather a little bit less than you think in that moment would be wise. E.g. when I sharpen I overlay a high-pass layer and set its opacity percentage to what I think looks good (without looking at the numbers). Then I half the value (number) and go with that. So when I felt like 74% opacity looks good, I go with 37%.

But other people tend to do too less .. then this is a bad advise ..

I bought a prism off Amazon for $15. How do I get those dumb light refractions? Do I need a light source coming straight into my lens/behind my subject with the prism right up on my lens? Should I use a prime lens for best results?

>>3011172
>prism off Amazon for $15
Didn't you buy the adapter? kek, you're fucked. The refractions don't work without it regardless of the f ratio.

How the fuck did Instagram get so popular? Is it worth making an account if I already use Facebook, Flickr and occasionally tumblr to share my photos? posting the same sets of photos on four different websites seems like an excercise in futility.

>>3010719
The easiest method for beginners is to use some fraction of too-far. Like "1/3rd of too far"

Nobody can notice the difference between 49% and 50% vibrance, it's literally beyond human capability.
But the difference between 40% and 60% is easy. That's why region matters for the sliders, not the precise value.

To get to an acceptable region, the easy method is to keep moving the slider until it's clear you've gone too far. Then use your fraction.
So if you applied 60 saturation and it's now "too far" and sickening, so you apply your rule of one-third or half and now you're at 20-30 instead. It won't seriously matter if you ended up at 22 instead of 24, the important part is that there's now a serious distance between the current value and the TOO FAR value.

The method is useful because 1/3rd-of-too-far works regardless of the program's number values.
If saturation is +0-255 or +0-100, two different scales, the Fraction-of-Too-Far method would work identically well as it doesn't care what the scale is, so long as there is some scale.

When you go out shooting in the street, how expensive is the gear you carry around? I have a rabbal and a 50 1.8 that I wouldn't lose sleep over if they got stolen or damaged. But at the same time I kinda feel bad knowing I have better gear sitting at home.

>>3011482

Between five hundred bucks and five grand.

>>3011186
You should definitely use instagram. It's not like you'll get feedback (except vague props from people) but it's what everyone uses which makes it very easy to get a good feed of great photographers going. And you'll get way more eyes on your work than you ever will on tumblr or Flickr.

>>3011482
Unless you live in the third world or some such rough place, don't be a pussy. DSLR's are a dime a dozen, it's not like people in most places will be eyeing up your shit

>>3011186
>posting the same sets of photos on four different websites seems like an excercise in futility.

You can link your instagram to all three of those, so one post on there means a post on all four simultaneously which is nice.
The overall format is pretty intuitive too.
Join us friend

File: 15825900_10154441742318702_4460456371213470002_n.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

This Canon Rebel T3i is for sale for $400 it has an 18-55mm lens, battery, charger, and original box with manuals included. Is it worth it? If not then what is it worth?

File: brobama.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3011399
This seems really helpful, I think I'll try this next time I edit. Thanks for sharing

>>3011498

Told you in the gear thread $350.

File: 1485162747001.png (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

New to film, got in my first roll right now, Fujicolor 200C, just the cheapest I could find.
Got 4 questions, would be very glad if someone could answer me these because I can't seem to find a proper answer.
>I set the ISO at 400 while the film recommends 200, did I fuck up here?
>Can I change the ISO through half the film for one or two steps higher/lower? The manual is saying something about "exposure compensation" but I do not understand it properly.
>Isn't setting a higher ISO than required overexposing and lower ISO underexposing or is it different for film and digital?
>When putting in film, do I have to advance the film like 2 times till I get to the actual first frame? Frame counter had it under "1" even tho I put in the film and advanced it once.

>>3011517

>I set the ISO at 400 while the film recommends 200, did I fuck up here?

Maybe, maybe not. You should set print film to an ISO lower than the box speed to be on the safe side.

>Can I change the ISO through half the film for one or two steps higher/lower? The manual is saying something about "exposure compensation" but I do not understand it properly.

You should keep the ISO at one speed for the whole roll for simplicity's sake. Exposure compensation is something else, although it has functionally the same effect as changing the ISO on a film camera.

>Isn't setting a higher ISO than required overexposing and lower ISO underexposing or is it
different for film and digital?

Higher ISO makes your camera assume your film is more sensitive to light than it is, so you're underexposing. Lower ISO results in the camera overexposing. Overexposure is actually fairly beneficial to print film.

>When putting in film, do I have to advance the film like 2 times till I get to the actual first frame? Frame counter had it under "1" even tho I put in the film and advanced it once.

Depends on the camera, but yeah. That film is already exposed anyway, as it's the amount you had to pull out to get it onto the take-up spool in the first place. By burning two or three frames, you're spooling up spent film and pulling fresh stuff out of the canister. You can theoretically get an extra two or three frames if you load your film in a changing bag.

>>3011498

You asked this in another thread and already got your answer. Get out reeeee

File: VCZBTr.png (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3011522
>although it has functionally the same effect as changing the ISO on a film camera.
What
Pic related is what it says in the manual, I do not get wheter this means I can theoretically change it or not.
I know that since this is film, when it gets developed itcan't get developed differently for every frame, but isn't adjusting the ISO better than a completely fucked up shot?

>You can theoretically get an extra two or three frames if you load your film in a changing bag.
Wait so if you are supposed to have a roll with 24 pictures, do the ones you automatically when putting in your film automatically?

I thought you are supposed to use higher ISO when there is less light, so this is not the case? Explains why I didn't get the over and underexposure stuff.

Thanks for answering

>>3011542

Changing the ISO on a camera does nothing to the film inside the camera. It just changes the shutter speed that the camera decides it needs to use to get a good exposure. This is the same as exposure compensation. On your camera, it's even the same exact dial operated the same way for two different things. This is not the case for every film camera.

If you have a roll with 24 frames, you really have enough film for 26 or 27 frames, but they always consider the fact that you lose film when you load it. You aren't getting short changed.

You are supposed to use higher iso when there is less light, it's true. But since changing the iso on the camera does nothing to the film, making the camera assume it has a more sensitive film than it actually does results in underexposure. I'm going to make a quick and simple analogy to help clear this up. Let's say that you have an ISO 200 film. It can absorb 10 photons in one second. If you had a film that was twice as fast (ISO 400), it could absorb either 20 photons (twice as many as iso 200) in one second (the same amount of time), or 10 photons in 1/2 a second (same amount of photons in half the time). If you tell your camera that you have ISO 400 loaded when it's actually ISO 200, your camera is going to assume that the film can absorb 10 photons in half a second when it can REALLY only absorb 5, which results in underexposure. It's the same as using negative exposure compensation, which even your combination ISO/EC dial should clear up for you.

>Taking photos at night or low light
>Seem fine on camera LCD
>At home on laptop/monitor its underexposed as fuck

Why does this happen? In terms of brightness surely my SP4 or MBP would be about the same as the LCD in my 60D?

>>3011679
Camera displays as well as Electronic ViewFinders are not designed to give an exact representation of the image, but to show as good as possible the motive that was shot. It is thought as more crucial to see the content than to see the precise exposure. So the camera will adjust the exposure to a specific point in order to let you see what was shot.
When you want a relyable feedback pay attention to the level meter and/or view the histogram of the picture.
Also realize, as long as you did not underexpose (aka lose information) you can correct the exposure of a raw file in post. To an astonishing degree actually.

>>3011679
One important point is the LCD only displays a post-processed JPEG.

The RAW image itself usually differs from the jpeg engine with different range and brightness.
Annoyingly, the histogram itself is also using the JPEG engine, so it might tell you the highlights or shadows clipped when none of them actually clipped. Or it might tell you that you still have room to go, in situations where it's already clipped.

In other words, unless you spend time getting to know your camera's hidden limits, just go with safe exposures that the light meter says are near the middle.

Or just take the same picture with 5 exposures and pick the best one.

File: crushedblacks.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3010246
>>3009991
>>3010008

1. How do you make a color digital image into a BW with out looking like you just used vsco?

2. I've heard the term "crushed blacks". What does that mean? Does it mean that all detail in black is lost? Like in the pic?

>>3011784
Yes, it means when the blacks are a flat 0% black with no recoverable detail.

>>3011784
shooting in color gives the greatest possible control over BW.

There's a whole pile of sliders in lightroom that let you determine what shade of black/grey each color will map to, so people can turn a color image into hundreds of different BW end results, whereas if you shoot it in the body, there's little variation.

>>3011784
there's a much higher signal to noise ratio in bright areas of a photograph, whereas shadows have not much light to compete with the electronic noise.

Usually important details of scenes aren't in very dark regions, so they're more often than not primarily noisy and a little distracting.
Crushing the blacks (making all the different noisy variations of near-black into pure black) gets rid of lots of noise/banding in those areas and gives a strong solid black, which is a big improvement if there isn't important texture or details in the black area.

I don't very often crush the blacks when it's a close up of black clothing though, that defeats the point as it's getting rid of non-noise texture as well.

File: B002876-R3-26-11.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

I shoot with a Pentax MX

I have a good setup, sometimes I even take 2 bodies with different speed films, a 50mm and a 135mm tele

here are my questions:

how do I fight the urge to buy a shitload of new lenses and cameras? I want to be happy with what I've got

I read that it's better to stick to shooting one film for a while and getting to know it - but which film should I choose for this? should I go with colour for now? I was thinking of buying a box of Portra 160 but I could also just buy something cheap instead.

given I'm shooting manual, are there some guidelines on how to use the settings in different conditions? how do you know when to keep the lens open while increasing the shutter speed, and when should you stop down? is 1/1000th too fast?

>>301071
Just started with RT today. Raw therapee is deep af

Got an old camera with film inside. Can I scan the film with a DSLR directly after taking it out or should i take it to a photo lab first? Does film = negatives?

>>3011847
no, it has to be processed first.

exposed film, inside a canister, is still sensitive to light until processed.

I'm currently using Photoshop CS5, should I bother getting a newer version or using Lightroom?

>>3011694
>>3011781

Thanks - I knew it displayed a jpg. I can usually kind of save the photo but at a lot of noise (desu probably about the same level as higher ISO).

I'll just be careful to expose a tick more.. I usually do this when I don't want to bring ISO up and look at it and say "Oh that looks fine with exposure compensation down 1" or something.

It's usually when I'm doing it on buildings and shit at night.

File: canon6d_004.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

How exactly are you supposed to use the Canon 6D's autofocus points? Everything is clustered in the middle and none of the points hit the face/eyes of the people I'm photographing. Are you expected to focus and recompose every time? I heard focus and recomposing will make you slightly out of focus. Would this be better than using the flexi zone single focusing mode?

>inb4 manual focus
My eyes are really fucking terrible and I can't tell if something is in focus until I take it home and blow it up on my computer.

How wide should a lens hood be to not vignette a 28mm (ff) lens? What about 35mm?

File: DE1MP-wlj5M.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3009989
How the fk that was done 100 years ago?
water is soft. fast moving objects are sharp, but
reflection has the same softness of other water surface.

is it fome kind of Collage?

>>3012506

The gondola wasn't moving and that's a long exposure which smoothed out the water.

>>3012511
its about 30+ seconds (maybe much more) as i can see
gondola and some niggers cant hold on water for this period of time without shaking or moving or whatever

>>3012512

Sure they can. Venice has pretty calm water and they're literally stabilized against two solid surfaces.

>>3012514
ok, maybe you are right
and those men are just good at posing

File: 1472493631707.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

I have a Zeiss Ikon like pic related. Does it work with any 120 roll film?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon PowerShot G7
Camera Software	Nikon Capture Editor 4.1.0 W
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2008:05:10 18:14:37
Exposure Time	1/25 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	9.85 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	900
Image Height	1200
Image Number	100-1714

File: 3277351184_1_6_ttClzwK3.gif (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

How often do photo labs get negatives of illegal stuff like Murders and CP?

>>3012525
I've wondered this myself. I remember a news story back in the early 90s about a guy who got arrested after having a roll of film developed at a local shop. Turns out he forgot that the first few shots on the roll were of him doing some illegal sexual things with his toddler daughter.

>>3012525

There was an AskReddit post about this just in the last few days, if you're really curious.

I bought a used Canon 7D and used it for a few months with a variety of rented and used L lenses and I don't think I've taken a single photograph that I feel is totally, absolutely razor sharp. Everything just seems this slightest bit soft, even under the best lighting circumstances.

Is there a test I can do myself somewhere to test the focus of the camera, or is it worth sending in to Canon to check out?

> inb4 canon

>>3012554
Focus calibration

>>3012534
Stuff like that is very para, I once saw a documentary where these Australian pedos had binders full of negatives from "photoshoots" they had.

>>3012547
Can you link me to it?

>>3012519
probably - but there are some models that take the slightly larger 70mm wide 616 film, now long since extinct.

>>3012589
Would Ilford Rolo FP4 Plus 120 work?

>>3010282
If you want to take it to a science build a computer controlled Sous Vide Cooker. With this you can precisely control the temperature of your chemicals. Adafruit has a great write up for an arduino controlled sous vide. I made a huge one for my chemicals and its the best. Makes B/W and color a cinch. Plus my results are super repeatable.

How do I hashtag on instagram for more exposure.
Any advice?

If I'm only going to be printing at 18"~ x 20"~ if 6x4.5 enough? I'm thinking 6x7/6x9 would be overkill

File: zNWbzqW.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3011796
Black Details Matter

>>3012491
Canon 6D's autofocus setup is complete trash made to punish people into spending a thousand more on a 'pro body'.

Essentially you just have the middle AF point and nothing else. The middle point I recall being something like a double-cross type with better sensitivity so it was able to autofocus in low light even better than the 5d-III (a 2x more expensive body)

Of course, night time autofocusing isn't nearly as useful as the 5dIII having actual extra AF points other than the middle (which canon knows, hence why they intentionally sabotaged the 6D)

this might sound stupid so I'm thankful for this thread

for taking city pictures at night, sort of street-type, not big skylines, can I get away with it without a tripod/huge ISO?

>I only have a kitlens
>I'm a complete beginner

or will I just have to find something stable to leave the camera on for ~1 second exposures?

if anyone has examples I'd be more than grateful desu

tl;dr
how to street photo at night without a tripod, I guess

>>3012931
These setting options would be useful in socioeconomic studies as well.

>>3013112
Yeah, you're just gonna have to shoot wide open and keep your camera steady or set it down on something like you said. You'd be surprised though, if you use mirror lockup, learn how to tuck your arms the right way and control your breathing, you can shoot handheld at a pretty low speed.

What's the best guide for a total newfriend to learn how to use their camera and what each setting does?

>>3013131

The manual.

>>3012921
you can print 18x20 with a crop sensor or a 35mm, many have
the perspective difference from doubling your film size is a more important consideration than sharpness

>>3013112
without a tripod or other fixed position and no lighting, night photography will be completely unreliable. You might occasionally get a non-blurred keeper out of a pile of misses but handheld night photography is such a bad idea it's not even a real genre.

http://www.youtube.com/negativefeedback/

Which Lightroom presets do you think he uses?

File: aeGigsT.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

What steps to take in post to achieve this look?

>>3013550
i believe this is film

just google how to achieve film look, usually its just turning the blacks gray on photoshop

>>3013551
Thanks, that seems to be it.

>>3013324
Protip: perspective does not depend on film size (or focal length, or aperture).

File: Korra faceshot.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

How do I take interesting pictures of my cat/animals?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	970
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	82 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6016
Image Height	4000
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	2017:01:29 22:00:24
Exposure Time	1/20 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	55.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6016
Image Height	4000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

i'm looking into a wide angle lens for shooting landscapes and general snapshits. how wide can you go before you get distortion like a fisheye lens, or is that a completely different lens style/construction? i've heard the term rectilinear thrown around but haven't been able to find any answers without it being about focal equivalency between crop and FF, which i understand already.

>>3013628

Rectilinear means that it doesn't have spherical projection like a fisheye. The widest rectilinear full frame lens in the world is the canon 11-16 f/4L.

Keep in mind that wide angle isn't always better for landscapes. There's a tradeoff between "getting it all in" and distant object detail. You might be standing in front of some majestic mountains, and then have a 12mm lens render them as a thin blue strip on the horizon.

Panoramas are a good middle ground for this if you're willing to do the legwork.

How close should I get to a person when taking their picture?

>>3013595
Follow them around for an hour or two and take like 100 pics, then pick the best couple.

>>3013724
Enough to fill the frame with the subject without cutting things off unintentionally. Distance varies depending on focal length and type of shot; full-body is farther off than headshot, and so on.

File: Quads double results 2.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3010000
I've always kinda felt the same way but could never articulate it the way you have. Good job.

Also is no one checking those quads!

>>3013981
>Also is no one checking those quads!
That's because that is /b/-tier faggotry.
>>3013981
>I've always kinda felt the same way
That's because you're both massive faggots.

I want to photograph some protests. How exactly do I find the ones organizing near my city? Like what do they use to get organized and advertise their gatherings so that people will know to show up? Facebook? Twitter?

File: IMG_4862.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3014035

i swear guys! I'm not a cop! I just want to know where the rest of us kids are trying to have the next kickin' protest! Heck yeah! Stick to a man!

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	600
Image Height	348
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3009989
Hi. If I accidentally ate a polaroid from the impossible film project before it finished developing how much trouble would I be in?

>>3014035
same way you find all the good house parties, just go to the nearest church and or town hall and take a look at what's pinned on the cork board

>>3011498
No, it's not worth it. But considering you've obviously been told this before it looks like you just want validation to buy it. Do what you want op who cares if everyone tells you it's overpriced and you're wasting money because you're either too stupid or too lazy to do the research. We'll probably see a thread in a few days of him doing an unboxing of his new piece of shit. And I'll be there to sage it.

>>3013982
Autistic basement-dwelling hipster wanna be confimed. How about I let you in on a little secret?
>your photos are shit with or without color.

>>3014310
yeah but in color the shit really pops out at you

>>3014035
Twitter. Use a throwaway (with icon/info/a couple BS tweets as there's blockbots that auto-block egg accounts) and follow some of the prominent "movement" accounts as well as who in your area are retweeted.

>>3013117
>>3013375
so I was lucky enough to have the opportunity of a protest earlier today (9PM, so obviously at night)

I gotta say, it's a nightmare trying to take pictures of moving people, at night ;__;

left ISO on auto, and it stayed at 3200 so eh

I managed to get acceptable ones at about 1/60 1/80 shutter speed, and tried a few at 1/20-1/30 or so, but those ended up moved/blurry

I can't really tell if it was because of the moving people or because of my moving camera, tried to do the whole "under grip" thing

so my question really is:
for an average joe such as myself, what "speeds" can I hope to achieve with better technique, whichever that may be? is 1/30 doable if I practice somehow?

I also tried the exhaling thing, where I'm supposed to exhale before taking a shot but can't tell if it's useful or not desu

How do I take photos/video of me physically handling objects for the purposes of reviewing them? The objects would be about arms length or less away. My current lenses blur when that close - normally I have to stand several feet away in order to have the subject clear and filling the frame.

I'm using a NEX-5N and only have an Industar 50-2 and Industar 50 lens (one on an M39 and the other on an M42 adapter) currently, so what sort of lens should I get for this purpose? I am poor so something old I can use an adapter for would be ideal.

Googling led me to believe I need a macro lens but it seems like everyone wants to "not get too close to the subject" which is counterproductive for my purposes.

File: IMG_20170204_131704.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Which mount is this?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	FEVER
Camera Software	MediaTek Camera Application_
Equipment Make	WIKO
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:02:04 13:17:05
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Not Defined
Focal Length	3.50 mm
White Balance	Auto
Image Width	3120
Light Source	Other
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Exposure Mode	Auto
Image Height	4160
Flash	No Flash
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Scene Capture Type	Standard
ISO Speed Rating	242
Exposure Time	7999/200000 sec

>>3014442
rule of thumb for a minimum is 1/2*fl
So if you're using a 50mm, that's 1/100th, 35mm is 1/70, etc.

If you have some sort of ibis/ois/vr/etc then I tend to stick to 1/fl at the slowest.

>>3014502
A macro lens will give you all the versatility you need and will be very sharp, however the sigma dn 30mm has a minimum focusing distance of just 30cm, will give you a nice "normal" fov, is sharp as heck, has autofocus for your body and is under $100 second hand.

I bought a M42 28mm Soligor lens at my local thrift store the other day but I can't seem to get a sharp image from it.
I used a simple M42 to Nikon adapter without a focus to infinity lens in it.
I do get a proper image from a 200mm lens that also uses the M42 connector.
Is the lens faulty or do I need a different adapter?

>>3011482
Take the gear you want out, unless you're in a really shitty area you should be fine. Keep your wits about you, maybe carry a knife or a gun if you want.

>>3015505
Looks like konishiroku

>>3015546
You need a different camera, the nikon flange distance is too far, so you won't get infinity focus on any lens, you will get closer to infinity on longer lenses.

If adapting lenses is what you're interested in a 2nd hand sony nex 3 or 5 can be had VERY cheaply and any lens can be used on them.

>>3009989
how do i get started with photography? What should I learn first and where? I don't know any technical stuff, I just like to take pictures.

>>3009989
How can I lower the weight of my pictures to post them here ? I resize them but even at 1000x1000 they still weigh a lot more than most pics I see on this board

>>3015582
You need to increase the jpeg compression.

>>3015579
the exposure triangle (aperture, iso and shutterspeed) & stops

that's all you need to know to use any camera ever.

the 35mm photographers handbook is in every thrift store and explains all the basics and some more advanced things really nicely.

>>3015582
if you're using adobe, export at 85% quality, there's no perceptible difference and a big saving in file size.

How can you get a lot of stuff in focus at a low aperture? I've seen people shoot wide open on night streets for example but if I do it I can only get a pole or something in focus

I've seen shots at 50mm 1.4 with lot of the street in focus and others with some tiny lightbulb in focus

is it based on distance? can you focus on more if its further away?

>>3015588
the closer you focus, the finer the dof.

>>3015577
damn that sucks,
I'm not that interested in using weird lenses, it was more because it was a cheap lens and I wanted something to experiment with.
At least I didn't pay that much for it.
Would something like this remedy it somewhat?

https://nl.aliexpress.com/item/Foleto-Focus-Glass-M42-Lenses-Lens-Adapter-Ring-For-M42-Lens-to-for-NIKON-Mount-Adapter/32723798562.html?spm=2114.13010608.0.0.Gy4IEw

Is there a difference between exposure compensation on the camera and in lightroom?

What's the difference between doing -2 stops on the camera and going -2 less on the raw in post?

>>3015590
that adapter will make the image quality significantly worse, but yes it will work.

>>3015591
if you drop 2 stops in camera by dropping the iso then you will have more dynamic range and less noise in the raw file. If you drop it by 2 stops in camera by shutter speed you'll have less motion blur, if you drop 2 stops in camera by aperture you'll have more dof.

So yeah, it rarely makes sense to take a photo with the intention of making it darker later, especially as it's much easier to blow an area to pure white than it is to crush it to pure black.

>>3015587
ok, thanks,

>>3015598
I meant exposure compensation as in the actual compensation setting, plus and minus 3 or whatever. Not by using the exposure triangle settings

As far as I'm aware that setting doesn't affect aperture, shutter or ISO values and is it's own thing

But if you were to set it to +2, would that come out differently to taking the raw at 0 and raising it to +2 in LR?

>>3015613
exposure compensation just adjusts those 3 settings to make the compensation.

>>3014502
Wide angle lens, stop down.

I currently have a d3300 that I've had for half a year now and I've been thinking on getting the fujifilm x30 for its compact size and features. Is it worth it? Or should I go with a Sony camera?

>>3014442
Keep in mind the minimum shutter speed to freeze things like arms moving/people walking. It's a constant battle between that and it being bright enough.

>>3015655

As a second camera? Sure. As a replacement for your d3300? Nah.

How and with what fabric would you clean your lens with if you didn't have a lenses cloth or anything?

I can buy a used d7100 with a 18-105mm kit lens for 600$. should I? I trust the seller and it's in great condition.

I've read some poor to so-so reviews on that lens. Is it a good one to start with?

I already have the 35mm 1.8 lens from my d5100, which was stolen...

>>3015655
Upgrade to a D7200 or D750 or something or get a Sony.

>>3016043
Dunno. It's the better camera and that's what you might have started with, but I couldn't tell you if it's worth your $600 for the difference from the D5100.

> Is it a good one to start with?
You should decide if that's probably a lens you want to end up with.

In my case it would not be. Not sharp at all, not bright, and doing this in focal lengths I shoot often and that I'd want to be covered with top notch lenses instead.

>>3015655
If you go sony you have a complete upgrade path and lenses for every budget.

>>3016043
D7100 is good, 18-105 is meh. Value seems about right, but you could try haggling for a bit.

I don't have a lens cloth or a blow brush. How do I clean my lense with something house hold?

>>3012503
short. it should be quite short. 2cm or something.

>>3011930
no. algorithms tend to net become better very quickly. in fact you still work with algos from the 80s. the only thing which MIGHT get better is usability.

>>3016287
Thanks. I'll shoot some test photos and see what happens.

File: underexposed.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

Is this photo underexposed or it's alright?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSLR-A230
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.7 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:05 18:21:23
Exposure Time	1/3200 sec
F-Number	f/1.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	6.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: underexposed2.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3016346
Sorry, wrong photo.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSLR-A230
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.7 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:05 18:28:22
Exposure Time	1/3200 sec
F-Number	f/1.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	6.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3016346

They're both underexposed.

I'll be in Tokyo for a week. Anyone have experience shooting street there? Anything to avoid?

This will be my first time shooting street as well, what shutter speed should I be using at night you think? Could i get away with a higher speed since all the neon lights?

File: IMG_4892.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3016389

And FYI, this is what a well-exposed version would look like

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSLR-A230
Camera Software	Snapseed 2.15.144832640
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:05 18:21:23
Exposure Time	1/3200 sec
F-Number	f/1.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	6.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1366
Image Height	915
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3016396
Nobody gives a fuck there. Probably going to need to shoot at atleast 1600iso to pull off 1/30th or faster.

Dear god, please shoot something interesting. All these Japan photos look the fucking same.

File: 1486326527098.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>3016350
Nice night shot m8

>>3009989
Do you use VSCO (or any other non-personal) presets? Does it make sense to use them as a beginner? Or am I better off just doing pp from scratch?

>>3016695
>>3009989 (OP)
Related question: since details can be better recovered in pp from underexposed than from overexposed images, does it make sense to shoot deliberately underexposed pics in order to keep ISO lower for instance? If yes, how much underexposure is tolerable?

So when I'm taking pictures in low light the LCD display is so grainy I can't even tell what's in focus but then when I take the picture it turns out fine, no grain. Same with the viewfinder. What heck?

>>3016695
If you're starting out, in lightroom get the hang of your basic exposure sliders, rgb curves, camera colour profiles and the hsl panel first, and make sure you're familiar with every function in that right hand panel, then look at vsco.

Yes, just clicking a vsco preset can make a pic look good, but they work MUCH better as a starting point that you then build on.

>>3016698
Colour accuracy is based off exposure, expose for your subject (i.e a models face). Unless you have a lot of bright white areas in the image you feel need texture - for example a brides dress, then drop by maybe a stop. If you use sony mirrorless you can set blown area zebras so you can always keep bright details just off from being blown.

If you underexpose then raise in post expect to see your colours muddied, noisy shadows and an unnatural roll off giving white/bright areas a jarring look.

>>3016699
What camera
And yes, it will look grainy as its having to refresh 20 times a second meaning it takes photos at 1/20 and boosts the iso to give you your preview.

Hey /p/, i need help.

I like small primes on my sony a700 with battery grip attached BUT to the girls i shoot for recreational purposes this combo (big body small lens) is odd and not pro-alike aestetically, i feel like i need to have something similar to minolta 28-135 4-4.5 to impress.

Hod do i aqure zen and stop caring about opinions? Or should i?

>>3016713
Go see a psychotherapist to deal with your insecurities.

>>3016705
thanks anon

File: press.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

So does anyone have any experience of shooting for campus news papers, was it worth it, what experience you had from it?
Did it pay out on the long run e.g: did you guys get contacts for finding real paying work etc?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand

>>3016876
What sort of real paying work are you trying to get? Photojournalism?

I don't have direct experience with this, but having work experience as a newspaper staff photographer in 2017 is probably not that useful now that most papers are just using freelancers. I guess it could help you develop an eye for shooting the kind of shit that newspapers are looking for, which will help you become a better photojournalist and in turn help you sell your photos.
But on the other hand, you don't necessarily need to work as a staff photographer to do that - you could always jump right in to shooting the same shit and actually shopping it to local papers, which would get your name out there as a competent freelancer much more directly. It really depends on how confident you are in your skills as they stand right now.

Does the gear matter? Can I be a great photographer using only an entry level DSRL?

>>3016935
of course it matters. you need to have a camera that's suited to the sort of photos you like to take, and one that's capable of taking good quality pictures.

but when people say "gear doesn't matter" it's because in the end your camera won't make or break your work. a good photographer with a Barbie toy camera will be able to wring as much potential out of it as possible and make some OK pictures, but a shitty photographer with a Leica & Noctilux is still going to produce crap work.

>>3016935
At a technical level there is practically nothing that differentiates a d3300 from a d7200, they both use the same sensor, and it's the same sensor in all of fuji's current lineup of mirrorless cameras, any of pentax's from the k70 to the kp and sony's a77ii, a68, a6000,a6100,a6300 and a6500.

There's only really 2 sensor manufacturers canon and sony, canon are about 5 years behind in terms of technical stats, but Sony provide to everyone else.

So, yeah, you can take fantastic quality images with an entry level body.

Lenses on the other hand, no lens actually outresolve the resolution of a modern sensor, if you want higher quality images at some point you are gonna have to spend more per lens than that entry level body and kit lens cost. The basics for a pro (weddings, events, etc) are one full frame body, one crop body, a 24-70 f2.8, a 70-200 f2.8, a 35mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4.

>>3016940

There's more than 2 sensor manufacturers, but not many more.

>>3016940
Thanks. I starter to make some money with food photography some time ago, eventhough I am only a beginner (2 months since I learn the basics). I use a sony DSLR from 2009 (entry level) from my girlfriend. Alpha230 is the model I think. I don't know if I need a better camera. I like portraits, street photography and food photography. I thought about buying a d3400 or rebel t6 for the dof preview, exposure lock and the overall better quality but I don't know if I should buy something better.

>>3016946
For the live preview too.

File: 1485556875106.jpg (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

I have a D800 and some good lenses.

Could I (realistically) use it for video? What are the basic necessities for a film-making setup?

I guess I need a good microphone at the very least.
Some dark filters (shooting video in broad daylight makes everything completely white, no matter what F stop I'm at)
A cheap dolly?

this is not a stupid question. just a question.
soo in my school (normal school not some kind of photography school) there is going to be valentine days ball. and my room-mate said that i should go and take photos of people. like that love corner in films.. but im really insecure about people judging my photos. should i take that job? i wont get any money for that anyways.

>>3016953
if it sounds like fun to you, i wouldn't worry about other people criticizing your work. everyone will just be happy and excited to see photos of themselves... they'll just care that they're in the picture and that they look good, nobody's going to be giving you an in-depth critique

>>3016946
Your body is getting a little long in the tooth and you may enjoy the better quality from an upgrade.

the d3400 and t6 are ok cameras, but personally I'd recommend to a beginner a mirrorless camera, an evf shows you what is in effect a live preview, so what you see is what your pic will come out like as you change settings, it's a great way to get a really strong grasp of the exposure triangle and to take more creative photos. Fuji tend to be more style over substance, whereas the sony models are great value and jam packed with features, there's also a much better lens selection for sony and the option to go full frame in the future.

>>3016959
in my head there is questions like - but what if i dont do good?

>>3016966
well, it's not like there is monetary motivation behind this. so if it sounds like fun, go for it. but if it sounds scary and unpleasant, don't force yourself to do it.

i'm just saying that you really shouldn't feel like you're going to be judged. when people get a photo of themselves they're going to be worried about their own appearance and shit, not the artistic quality of the photo.

>>3016967
Im scared of people in general :D and they offered schools camera which is fancier than mine. with touchscreen and cooler lenses. i want to and at same time i dont want to. the people factor scares me off kinda :D like hundreds of people.

>>3016972
>:D
Stop.

I remember there were rumors that nikon bought the Samsung mirrorless lineup. Also it said that they would use the mount and use those cameras as their own. Was some development since? I'm really interested in how it turned out.

What kind of camera should I buy for YouTube videos, it just need to be solid.

>>3016985

Basically any dslr or mirrorless will be more than you need. I think Casey Neistat used a d3300 for most of his run-and-gun vids.

>>3016983

also heard this after i want to buy the nx500 and then they stoped the marked in europe.

>>3016986

he switched to sony as everyone.

>>3016985

buy a sony 6300/6500 and a good lense and you will be happy.

>>3016952
you wouldn't be the first
http://nofilmschool.com/2013/01/nikon-d800-hollywood-janusz-kaminski-dexter-wilfred
stabilization is very important obviously, and you might wish you had magic lantern. if you were using the setup for a serious production you'd want to consider what else you could get at that price point, but it can obviously deliver

>>3016996

It literally doesn't matter, fuckwit.

>>3017009
Why are you so triggered mang, someone that gets through 10+ bodies a year has switched to sony, deal with it.

>>3017000
Huh, interesting.

Thanks for the pointers!

>>3017015

Lol, I'm not triggered. You're the sad sonygger who gets so upset when people suggest that another brand will suffice that you can't help but inject your own pathetic brand loyalty.

specifically how do you guys resize your photos in lightroom for posting on 4chan?

>>3017041
Not my brand loyaly, casey neidstadts.
again, why are you hurting so much?

>>3019501
select photos to export
ctrl + shift + e
image sizing
long edge
1000px
jpeg quality 80% (there's 0 perceptible difference between 100 and 80, but about a quarter of the file size)

>>3019503

It's not Casey Neistat's either. He used it for literally one video and then filmed his most recent one on a Canon 5D and even called it his "favorite" in the description. So..

>>3019505
well it makes it look like shit at around 280kb

do you set the resolution? do you enlarge?

>>3019509
never enlarge
set long edge to 1000px
Why do you say it looks shit?

File: ghnbb.jpg (5MB, 5456x3632px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 5456x3632px

>>3019511
okay this is an original picture, resized to 5mb.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-3000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	82 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:10 22:22:00
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/10.0
Brightness	6.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	55.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: DSC01902.jpg (353KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 1000x666px

>>3019514
and this is the same photo with the directions you gave me.

i cant see this being right.

it's not a photo i care about i just used it for help on resizing.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-3000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	82 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:10 22:18:37
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/10.0
Brightness	6.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	55.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3019515
resized one looks absolutely fine mate, the original shows up all the noise and the fact you used a soft kit lens with blurry corners. make it small and it keeps the details nice and sharp.

be aware of what screen you're using, on a 1080p screen your resize will nearly fill the whole screen, on a 4k screen it may look more like a thumbnail.

We use a 1k limit here as it's the best size to display on the most common screen size, it keeps data usage down for those on mobile and it helps eliminate gear bias as you don't get technodweebs saying your photo is shit because you haven't spent $10k+

>>3019517
really? i find the resize really blurry makes it look like shit for me. i'm not really worried about anyone talking shit about my gear, i'm more concerned about my image composition but i guess resolution isn't really important when dealing with that but i still enjoy the full rez clarity even if it shows the noise.

>>3011806
First of all, don't listen to Eric Kim...ever.
To the latter part it depends on what you wan in the photo. If you want blurry background wide aperture and 1/1000 shutter speed is fine. If you want to show motion blur obv you gotta drop it way down. And opposite if you want a deep depth of field or to 'freeze the action'

I don't understand exposure compensation. So if you increase or decrease it, the camera changes settings to make the image brighter or darker. But surely if you're in A or S mode, it's only changing one or the other, and you'd be able to change those yourself anyway. It seems weird to have this +3 and -3 on another setting.

Seems like it would only be useful in an automatic mode. Am I missing something? In what situation would you use it, other than maybe some continuous 3/5 brackets?

>>3019515
There's seriously barely any difference there other than the size. I even compared fullscreen on seperate tabs.

I get sensitive about posting my own (not saying you are) and feel like smaller images don't do it justice, I sometimes make it 1500 on the longest side but it's more than enough

>>3019545

If you're in A mode, exposure compensation will adjust shutter speed up or down according to how you set it. If you're in S, it will adjust aperture. This is assuming manual ISO in both cases.

If you're in manual and have auto-iso turned on, it will adjust ISO sensitivity up or down. If you're in a priority mode, it will adjust one of the variables until it can't go any further (as in min/max aperture, or a shutter speed that is too slow to hold) and then it will adjust ISO. This is theoretical, because I've seen cameras produce some truly bizarre exposure settings under duress.

Exposure compensation is by far the most handy when in a priority mode, since you'll typically be using those when running and gunning and you don't have the time to fiddle with lots of fine adjustments to exposure for every shot.

File: Leave him behind.jpg (1MB, 4000x6016px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4000x6016px

>>3009989
Best type of lens for /toy/ /p/hotography

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3200
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	1002
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	51 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4000
Image Height	6016
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	2017:02:05 17:01:52
Exposure Time	1/10 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	34.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4000
Image Height	6016
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

Upgrading soon choosing between either the d750 with tamron vc 24-70 f/2.8 or d810 body only. 810 has 60k actuations is the 1.5 fps and built in wifi worth the mp drop?

>>3019616

Macro. Longer lenses will produce more cinematic results.

>>3019620
Alright, best Macro lens for Pentax k50?

I\m googling now, just a suggestion would help get the ball rolling faster

>>3019622

Pick up an old manual focus k-mount lens.

Here's one for $65 that will be fun to play around with.

https://www.keh.com/shop/pentax-100mm-f-4-smc-m-macro-k-mount-manual-focus-lens-49.html

>>3019548
okay ill try and not be so anal about my photos but it looks really out of focus on the resize but it looks really sharp on the regular one.

>>3019639
Any suggestions for Nikon?

So, maybe a stupid question, maybe not. I'm new to digital photography. If I want the end photo to be in B&W, is it better to set my camera to shoot in B&W, or is it better to convert color raws to B&W on my computer later? Does it actually matter (ie, am I losing quality) one way or the other?

>>3019828

Color raws will give you much, much,
much more flexibility in post.

I always shoot in black and white mode while still in RAW for previsualization.

I'm looking to buy a new Lumix 4/3 lens and on ebay there are lenses that both are 70-210mm and 140-420mm.
What does this mean? Why are there 2 different lens ranges, has it got something to do with the camera I use with it?

Link to the lens: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/70-210mm-lens-140-420mm-on-LUMIX-G-HD-4K-Micro-4-3-Digital-PEN-GF2-G2-G5-G3-GM1-/252765611612?hash=item3ada01265c:g:DyMAAOSwKtlWpRjx

File: holycrackers.png (293KB, 442x594px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 442x594px

IF a camera uses those mercury button batteries is there some alternative since they might not be made anymore?

>>3019962
70-210mm is the focal length of the lens; 140-420mm is the effective focal length in 35mm equivalence. For example I have the Lumix 42.5mm f1.7, which on a m43 body means shooting at an effective 85mm with f3.5 depth of field equivalence in 35mm standard terms

>>3019986
Hearing aid zink air batteries

>>3020027
any downsides?

>>3020008
Oh so the fact that its a four thirds lens camera will change the effective focal length?

This guy takes a bracket of five images, presumably for an HDR?

https://youtu.be/a-Rmg0Mc7Ds?t=28

He says he uses ISO 100, F/9 and 1/25th of a second. But surely the point of taking a bracket of five is that you're using different settings or exposure compensation for each one. I thought HDR's had to use different settings, most commonly using + and - a set amount of stops?

>>3009991
What a stupid question

>>3020076
Ofc he implyed that he'll shot 5 pics, the base is F9 1/25 ISO100, so 2 pictures with 1 stop lower exposure each, and 2 pictures 1 stop higher exposure each.

But honestly, a foggy day and doing HDR? What DR does his cam have? 2.5 stops? .. what a moron.

>>3019962
the lens is 70-210mm, which equals 140-420mm on a full-frame sensor.
since micro four thirds is a standard with a sensor half the size of full frame, you have to calculate a crop-factor of 2x to the focal length. A 100mm lens on a full-frame sensor shows the same image frame like a 50mm on m4/3.

>>3009989
why am i a picture taker and not a photog ?

>>3020197
Because you're taking pictures and not photographs.

>>3020233
Nailed it !

>>3020028
not >>3020027 but they have inconsistent battery life from what I heard. You might try 675 batteries. My mercury battery powered camera took them and the meter is still very accurate.
there's also an adapter that lowers the 675 battery voltage.

Pretty new to film, been shooting and developing a handful of rolls with color on a 50's 120mm fold camera, just got a 35mm compact. I was wondering what kind of film / processing were used to make these kind of very high contrast grainy as fuck photos? Recommendations for something even remotely similar results?

File: okada.jpg (515KB, 1519x978px) Image search: [Google]

515KB, 1519x978px

>>3020257
Duh pic here

How come some lenses wont do auto focus, can it be because I'm using a 4/3 camera with a normal lens?

File: IMG-20170212-WA0003.jpg (153KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1600x900px

Are €150 worth for this broken Nikon-Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 in picrelated?

First time film user here. So I have an old Praktica LTL that I dug up. Put a roll of ISO 400 colour into it, how would I best light meter?

>>3020257
shoot 400 film at 800 and process as 1600..
its also often done at the printing stage.

do 55mm lens caps fit a 45mm lens?

do lens caps just have a universal fit?

>>3020510
I wouldn't pay 10 dollars for something that's broken, let alone 150.

>>3020784
no. you have maybe 2-4mm tolerance. and even that just sometimes.

if a rangefinder doens't let me change lenses is it pretty much useless?

>>3020786
But if it works? Isn't it a minor issue? Look at where it is

>>3020778
TIL pushing and pulling film, thanks. What do you mean by pushing at printing? I've only developed negatives and scanned them, haven't done printing.

>>3021036
Nevermind, ignore me

>>3021046
nah, not pushed at the printing stage, but some paper is something called multigrad that makes it react stronger/less to yellow/magenta coloured light, giving you ability to control contrast more when printing.

>>3021063
whoops, mixed that up.. magenta filter gives strong contrast and yellow filter gives less.

I want to get a split image focusing screen but Ebay left me confused.
There is this seller selling screens that he claims to be compatible with the D3300 but a similar one is sold on Ali Express which doesn't list the D3300.
So does the D3300 use some kind of common screen or something?

why do people say color noise is the worst noise when it's the best noise

>>3021107
colour noise can be hue-noise or saturation-noise. both is ugly but hue-noise is the worst. in any case it is more troubeling than luma-noise, and in regard to the common view, one could assume that luma-noise is well-known from the film times, so that one will find it more organic than hue-noise, which is a digital flaw anyways.

anybody have a minolta 7sII?

does it need battery to function or just the light meter?

Are any of the free/open-source alternatives to Lightroom any good?

>>3020305
are there metal electronic contacts between the mount if you're using different kinds of lenses? There's gotta be electricity powering the lens.

>>3021245
yes

>>3021250
Which ones?

I have a K-3 and a wireless speedlite. I don't know how to get the two to talk. It works fine when mounted, but I want to have it unmounted.

This is the speedlite

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1101196-REG/yongnuo_yn_560iv_yn560_iv_speedlite.html

Do older cameras only use batteries for small features?
As in, I can take pictures fine without them?

>>3021487

Depends on the camera.

>>3021515
[spoiler]Minolta Hi-Matic 7s[/spoiler]

>>3021522

Needs a battery.

File: orig.jpg (139KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1000x1000px

>>3021527
fuck

>>3021529

$4.50 on b&h or $9 with amazon prime, my man. not too bad. you unfortunately can't just go pick up a wein cell at your local walgreen's, but inconvenience is just part of the charm of old vintage photography.

there are hacks online where you can wrap a paperclip or piece of copper wire around a 1.4v hearing aid battery so that it'll fit into the compartment, if you want to go cheap and not-so-easy.

>>3021536
i think i'm just gonna sell it, it was stupid of me really, i shouldve saved those $28 for an x-700 instead

i'll sell it to you if you like for like $30

>>3021600

thanks but no thanks. list it on craigslist or fleabay. it'll sell for roughly what you paid if you're patient.

If you're using live view, how does spot metering and center weighted average work? Like if you're using center weighted average and your subject is pushed to the side of the frame, and the middle of the frame has something really bright like the motherfucking sun, does that mean the subject is going to be underexposed?

Could you use focus and recompose to meter the subject in the middle of the frame, then just completely ignore exposure meter after you recompose the shot?

any way of getting info about the camera used in these shots? exif is only showing the photoshop data
http://alexblouinmtl.tumblr.com/tagged/tennis

>>3021245
No

>>3021631
Ask him, you fucking sperg.

If I'd take a photo of a well-lit negative with a film camera, will it turn into a positive once developed?

>>3021352
Anyone?

>>3021949
you need some wireless triggers

>>3021954
Fuck, that would have been good to know when I bought the flash. What ones do you suggest?

>>3022031
I'd have recommended getting something like the godox v860ii and commander unit if you're gonna do a lot of flash work.

You can also use your onboard flash as a trigger for your yongnuo, it's not as reliable and you get the added flash from your camera, but is great in a pinch.

File: 1486451460337.jpg (312KB, 1224x1128px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1224x1128px

What are those tiny rubber bands called that I can use to keep a battery in place inside old SLRs and Rangefinders?

Also where can I get those?

>>3022046
>You can also use your onboard flash as a trigger for your yongnuo, it's not as reliable and you get the added flash from your camera, but is great in a pinch.

Can you tell me more about this? I'm totally new to camera accessories. I'm just going to do some self portraits at home, so nothing fancy.

I just got Lightroom and some VSCO presets. So how do these presets work? From what I understand actual film has an ISO, so I'm guessing the Portra 160, 400, 800 are different ISOs of the same type of film? Is there a general guideline on how to pick the best type for each situation? What about the +, ++, -? I'm still messing with stuff trying to figure out what they do, but sometimes I have no idea what I'm actually looking at.

>>3022377
The ISOs listed on the VSCO profiles are mostly just for the level of grain they'll apply, maybe some slight other adjustments but nothing too major. The +'s are just rating the strength of the filter.

My advice to you is not to fuck around too much with a hundred different filters, find the couple that create some colour profiles you like for sun/low light/skin tone or whatever and then make your own adjustments, or your own tuned user preset with the VSCO filter as part of the process.

>>3022381
Thanks, I think I'm getting the hang of it now.

>>3022052
you can use tape and normal rubber bands, also in a not related issue, what a nice pair of legs

>>3022052
Jesus, that bitch is incredible !
Hurry, someone post nudes

What sort of settings would /p/ use for shooting a sunrise?

What does metering mean?

Stupid Question but probably easy to answer:

I have a new Mirrorless which on which I filled a few cards. I bought a Sandisk 32gb tiny usb, Copyed the contents of the various cards onto the usb & after ejecting & rebooting the drive to check the images whhere sound, wiped the cards & transoirted the images via USB for copy onto 2 backups off site.

After bringing one of the back-ups back home to work on, Some of the images from the transfer are corrupted- The image shows but half the frame is black & it has digital bars of colour over several liner spaces.

I haven't been able to check the 2nd back up to see if its the same, but dont want to simply worry until I can finally go & check. Will prob be afew weeks.

Any ideas whats happening?

Thanks in advance

>>3009989
Where can I find a UV filter for my camera? I have a Pentax k50 and am not sure if I can just buy the ones on amazon that say they work for all cameras, my only lens right now is 18-55mm

>>3022620
best advise is to take filter in right hand
place on table
het 3 pound hammer
smash the fuck out of it
throw in trash


dont waste the money anon. filters degradate IQ

>>3022621
Oh I thought it would make my daytime shots look better, do you have a comparison I could see?

is there ever a time when cameras aren't being bought on ebay so I can swoop in and get one for the lowest bidder?

is there a guide to see if lens caps and lens filters fit on different mm lenses?
i have a 45mm lens and i can't find many filters that say 45mm, is it okay to put a 55mm or even a 49mm one on this?

>>3022623
im sure there is an anon here that can answer that better than i can. im a newb also but did a shitload of studying before diving in. from what i have gleaned, uv filters are a waste of money. i guess you could use it as a lens protector but i treat my lenses like gold bricks so im not rough on them. i choose to let the lens work by itself. theres already way to many elements in todays lenses without adding yet another medium for the light to go through. but then again, what the fuck do i know cause im an ignorant newb also.

>>3022642
the mm is the mm. if you have a 45mm lens, you need a 45mm filter.

File: 1482244508998.jpg (35KB, 600x484px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 600x484px

>>3022644
thanks
guess ill have to live with no filter or lens cap for this vintage came

>>3022647
get a 45mm lens cap !!! Fuck the filter unless you have a real use for it.
amazon or wherever

>>3022647
what brand is the lens ?

>>3022669
Rokkor, aka a Minolta camera

>>3022670
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Genuine-Minolta-45mm-50mm-Lens-Caps-X370-X570-X700-XG1-XG7-XG9-XGM-XGA-XD-XE-SRT/320931955559?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D41402%26meid%3D87a2c18c3af146ba9bfa8ba05db5ca7e%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D5%26rkt%3D6%26mehot%3Dag%26sd%3D221182814168

>>3022673
thats ridiculous for a lens cap holy shit

>>3022681
if you want one you better buy it. they are few and far between. clearly the seller knows it

>>3021239
>hue-noise or saturation-noise
Can you post example? Google was unhelpful.

is it possible to take instant photos in dark with DSLR camera? like i want that photo dark, why is it trying to make it lighter and puts on that flash.. (dont argue with me about my englissh im trying my best.)

>>3022694
i just found a 57mm lens cap and it fit, but does that mean all 57mm lens caps will also fit?

>>3022816
what is the focal length of the lens ?
do you have a pic of it ?
is the focal length 45mm and the lens filter ring size 57mm ? focal length and lens filter ring size are 2 different things

File: s-l1600(2).jpg (536KB, 1600x1050px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1600x1050px

>>3022827

>>3022832
what is the focal length printed on the side of the lens ? that looks like a f1.8 45mm lens to me. lets see the writing on the side of the lens

>>3022715
don't shoot in full automatic mode.

File: s-l1600.jpg (350KB, 1600x873px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 1600x873px

>>3022834
like this?

File: 55phuesat.jpg (325KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 800x1200px

>>3022695
saturation noise is worst in bright and low saturated areas. hue noise is worst in bright high saturated areas.

>>3022851
forgot to say: hue noise is more visible. in the example the saturation noise is double the amout to get a comparable impression.

Are crushed blacks a meme? I personally love the aesthetics for portraits, but I'm afraid of being bullied for using a 'easy mode hipster filter' in a majority of my photos.

>>3022860
crushed blacks is a bad habit and unnecessarry. There is no need to kill dark information completely to get a picture with the impression of strong darks. it is sufficient to compress the blacks. no need to crush them. if you see crushed blacks then somebody did not know how to properly post-process and regard the histogram.

it's not a style. it's a redundant flaw.

>>3022625
no

>>3022591
some drive is corrupted. either the sandisk or the backup. so either both or one. that's the situation. with some luck you can recover the files from the wiped original disks.

>>3022591
metering means actually just 'measuring'. In context of photography it means the process of using a device in order to measure the needed exposure values to get a correctly exposured picture under the given circumstances.

>>3022498
You might want a small aperture and more or less short shutter to get a strong silouhette of the foreground.

>>3021913
no

>>3021623
yes to both questions.

>>3021254
ufraw for example

>>3022512
see
>>3022865

got a Canon EOS M recently, someone here commended it

been shooting on auto for the most part, still new to this whole thing. is that necessarily a bad thing? should i learn how to start shooting manually, if so, when/where (noobie friendly, please)

also I remember him recommending custom firmware for the camera, but ive completely forgot. any idea what it might be?

thanks!

>>3022860
>>3022861
I'm kind of an idiot. I don't think crushed blacks means what I think it means. I meant taking the leftmost point on the tone curve and raising it up a few points to get that faded/washed out look.

>>3022894
>been shooting on auto for the most part, still new to this whole thing. is that necessarily a bad thing?
It depends on what you're trying to do. If you want to take quick snapshots without fiddling with the settings, shooting on auto is fine. You won't learn anything, and sometimes the auto-mode will make shitty decisions that will ruin your photo.

If there's something specific you want to do, like shoot with a portrait shallow depth of field or freezing the action of people playing sports, then you'll need to understand how the exposure triangle works and shoot in manual. Even after you master that stuff, you can still shoot in auto if you want if it's more convenient for the exact situation you're in. As long as you know why your photos look the way it does based on the settings the auto-mode chose for you.

>>3022840
Here is everything you will ever need to know about youre 7s from 1966. it takes a 55mm lens cap and the lens is a F/1.8 45mm.
here is the link to more info than i care to read.

https://rangefinder-cameras.com/minolta-hi-matic-7s-1966/

and here is your lens cap for less than $4

http://www.ebay.com/itm/55mm-Front-Lens-Cap-Hood-Cover-Snap-on-for-Sony-Minolta-Leica-Tamron-Canon-Nikon-/371219822848?hash=item566e6cf900:g:ORUAAOSwKtlWsEuT

File: 1449975618873.png (8KB, 142x99px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 142x99px

>>3022904
danke schon

>>3022897
yea, that's something different. with that you don't use the whole tonal-range which would be possible in an 8bit/ch picture. it kind of compresses the whole image, the more when also lowering the whites. from a technical point of view you also lose information. but from an aesthetic point of view it is not a necessarrily a flaw. so it is more a question of fashion. especially when you raise the blackpoint only in one ore two channels.
fashion come and go. I oersonally prefer to use the whole range 8bit offerts. it's small enough, so I wouldn't want to waste it. but it also depends on the content. a real foggy day shouldn't reach total black e.g.

File: 237440624.gif (815KB, 480x384px) Image search: [Google]

815KB, 480x384px

I'm new to photography and want to get into cosplay photography. I usually just take pictures at conventions with my Nikon D3300 that I got at a pawn shop. No matter where I go online I can't find pointers on what Nikon cameras are good for cosplay photography, I keep getting websites that suggest cameras that are under $300.00. Any suggestions? Hell, maybe even suggest a Canon if that works better.

>>3022925
Cosplay photofag here. Camera doesn't really matter that much. I started shooting with a Canon t3i, which is more or less the Canon version of your camera. The shots are very close in quality to the 6D, which is five times the t3i's price. The only reason I upgraded to a 6D was because I wanted a full frame camera with live view which the much cheaper original 5D didn't have. Conventions are crowded as fuck and I wanted to get as much in the frame as possible without using a wide angle lens. If you feel the same way I suggest just buying the cheapest full frame Nikon you can find. Most people here would suggest getting a portrait lens first before upgrading to a new body, either an 85mm or a 70-200, but on a crop sensor body and a fairly crowded convention you're going to have a bad time so I would highly recommend against this unless you put a lot of thought into it first. Or you could do the opposite of what I didn't want to do and just buy a wide angle lens, but unless you're shooting mostly full body shots, you'll end up with slight facial distortion.

Probably my most important advice I can give. If you want to take better quality cosplay photos, completely disregard gear and learn how to post process. You'll get so much more mileage for the price you pay for Lightroom than you would stockpiling a bunch of gear.

>>3022323
??

File: top_3-648cebd0.jpg (385KB, 2048x1020px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 2048x1020px

Alright /pee/, I need answers.
How are photos like this edited to look so crisp and vivid? Because I've actually been to the very place in pic related, I've taken countless pics, even from that same spot, at various points during the day, with multiple settings, with and without a tripod, with different lenses and they all came out looking mediocre. I don't know if my expectations are high but I generally tend to edit my photos as little as I can and they look fine, but nothing stunning. Too much editing and tweaking and they all start to look like the same overblown instagram photos taken by some random DSLR monkey from Romania.
So, what do you generally need to do to achieve this kind of look?