wtf i hate photography now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d16 LNHIEJzs

This lazy bait thread again?

fuck off.

film is racist. i knew it.

>>3025230
>film companies going out of their way to make sure black people come out right, even marketing its superior performance with black skin tones
>FILM IS RACIST

>light doesn't reflect well on dark objects
>light is racist

I mean what else can you really do. It's the overall weighted average of people.

so is vox owned by buzzfeed?

Science is racist.

>>3025278
Nope. Not as far as I know.

They have one or two really good "journalists" who do a good job but some of their content is SJW bait.

This makes me want to bash my head against a fucking wall.

>>3025294

Yeah, it's pretty shocking how blind Kodak was back then.

File: russia030.sJPG_950_2000_0_75_0_50_50.jpg (257KB, 950x841px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 950x841px

>>3025303
Not only Kodak.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS3 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2009:10:14 14:00:09
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	885

I don't see what is wrong with this video besides the naive conclusion. Film technology was developed/improved with the purpose of targeting the existing market, aka middle-class/white people; as a consequence, it reproduced the skin tone of white people better.

>>3025352

That's racist though.

>>3025320
Rightmost girl looks like she has arms that could smash in the face of a bear.

>>3025352
True story brah:
>be me talking about PP, and llightroom 5 with fellow coworker enthusiast.
> the phrase "crushed the blacks" was uttered
> some random cowerker filled a complaint.

Everything turned out ok in the end since "crushing the blacks" resolved in google to a lightroom page.

Next is "you blew your whites"

File: BW.jpg (37KB, 800x529px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 800x529px

>>3025378
forgot pic. sorry.

>>3025368
and mercedes should market their cars to low income familys in detroit right?

>>3025368
It's objectively racist, not subjectively racists, since the reasoning behind it was economic, not ethnic. Kodak targeted white people because they were its potential buyers, not because it believed in the superiority of the white race.

>>3025381
That's not racist.

Sun tan lotion is aimed at white people, with the sole intention of keeping them as white as possible, yet that's not deemed racist.

>>3025377
Dem bitches generally worked harder than anyone in this fucking board ever did in their life, you better believe they had some muscle on them.

>>3025383
- film was aimed at white people, because they were thought to be its only buyers (turns out also black people wanted to take pictures).
- sun tan lotion is aimed at white people because they are its only buyers.

>>3025388
>implying black people want cancer

>>3025392
black people need sun tan lotion too? i honestly don't know

>>3025388

Black people don't know how to use film cameras, its the same thing like how they can't swim

File: 1484412693956.png (34KB, 340x300px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 340x300px

>>3025230
Wtf I love Film now

>>3025230
I guess vox did their job good, if you fell so hard for their shit that you had to create a whole thread about it.

>>3025419
vox can surely have a political agenda, but it's hard to argue with this video's content

>>3025393
Black people have a harder time getting sunburnt but can still develop skin cancer, which sunscreen protects against.

>>3025378
If this happened, it crushes my soul a bit

wtf I haet photography now

>>3025380

It's almost like you don't understand the situation at all.

It's more like if Mercedes made their cars turn on only if you were white, since that was their target market.

And yes, that would be racist as well. Why are white people so fragile?

>>3025377

That is really hot.

>>3025617
Lol, no.

Film still takes photos of darkies, the issue was the low dynamic range of film at the time that meant if you expose for a white skinned person, blacks came out as eyes and teeth.

Blacks just looked dumb on film, so yes your analogy is kinda right as only white skinned people look right in a merc.

Film was developed in western europe and they designed it for people with light skin?

The crazy bastards !

>>3025629

Wow I am so triggered by this edgy post!

>>3025631

Kodak is American my man.

Umm... does nobody bothered by the fact that film captures in negative so it preserves detail in the highlights whereas digital is positive and preserves detail in the shadows?
There is a perfectly sensible explanation here, nothing to do with racism but how physics works.

>>3025749

Except that they came out with a better formulation that captured dark tones much more accurately, so it really doesn't have anything to do with physics and everything to do with racism by omission.

Why didn't niggers develope their own film that worked for them huh? Because niggers never made anything, they only took the white man's technology then complained when it didn't work how they wanted it to.

File: water-fountain.jpg (82KB, 1608x905px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1608x905px

>>3026166
I guess they were busy being slaves for white people

>>3025230
Read
>>3025247

Why would anyone waste perfectly good emulsion on negros?
It's not like their skin has tones besides just straight dark.

This is just regular Jewish bait.

>>3026177
So have they done anything since then. ..?

I mean South African whites have risen out of nothing into greatness until they were crushed. Even penniless Jew and Asian immigrants have risen out of nothing to become great within a generation or two. Blacks?

>>3026236
>South African whites have risen out of nothing into greatness until they were crushed
>Asian immigrants have risen out of nothing to become great within a generation or two
dude open a book sometimes lol

File: rassist.jpg (32KB, 229x331px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 229x331px

>>3026278
>dude open a book sometimes lol
even the textbooks are racist
this is the icon for "subject" in my school book that assumes you're taking pictures of a white person. Below that is a picture of neighborhood watch. Assumes the criminal is black. You rassists are out of control.

File: 32403356290_8a380659ac_o.jpg (335KB, 1678x1678px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 1678x1678px

>>3025396
say that 2 my face fucker not on dry land and see what happens

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 6 Plus
Camera Software	VSCO
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	2016:10:17 18:05:28
Exposure Time	1/15 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	32
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	3.0 EV
Exposure Bias	-1/256 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Comment	Processed with VSCO with g3 preset
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1678
Image Height	1678
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: bull-jumping.jpg (245KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1000x665px

>>3026177
>meanwhile, in africa...
they're still rubbing mud in their hair 3000 years later.

>>3026849
That silhouette implies a shady character, like a dude in a trench coat and fedora hiding in a back alley who's either going to sell you a watch or put his dick up your ass. White middle class businessmen also wore the trench and fedora as attire of choice while commuting to work in bad weather, and you'll still see some older men doing it.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ConspicuousTrenchcoat#

File: Colonialism-1914.jpg (256KB, 572x595px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 572x595px

>>3026867
ignorance is bliss

>>3026883
oh.. so before the colonial invasion african civilization was on par with europe?
>entire continent of people incapable of defending themselves from overseas invaders because they were still rubbing mud in their hair

>>3026867
>they're still rubbing mud in their hair 3000 years later.
At least its not as fucked up and backward as actually choosing someone like Donald Trump as your leader.

>>3026956
so butthurt

>>3026958
Not at all, you are the poor fuckers that have to live with it

>>3025230
In short:

Early color film had shit dynamic range, so the darkies got crushed (literally).
But they quickly developed new techniques to widen the dynamic range and render everything just fine.

OMG WHY DIDN'T WHITE PEOPLE NOT INVENT HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE FILM INSTANTLY???
WHY DID IT TAKES SOME YEARS? - DAS RACIST!!!!!

>>3026883
There were no white slave owners in Africa except in the Congo and in South Africa.

(there were plenty black slave owners all over Africa though, and still are today)

>>3026969

The video never called it racist. That's your own white fragility my man.

Also,

>"early" color film
>all film for 90 years

Pick one.

>>3026965
Pretty great so far man. Looking forward to another 7 years of it

>>3026965
>we have to live with a president who doesnt speak political bullshit out of both sides of his mouth and does what he said he'd do

quelle horreur!

>>3028825

>this is what fucktards actually believe

>>3028825
self-delusion is comfy

>>3026971
>There were no white slave owners in Africa except in the Congo and in South Africa.

Pretty sure the Congo and South Africa count as Africa.

Are there any capable black photographers?
Also, I heard that black people aren't able to use film cameras.

>>3028951

Yes.
You heard wrong.

Do you think you're trolling us by looking like a retard?

>>3028956

So there's no capable black photographers, and they can't use film cameras, alright, good to hear.

>>3025230
What if i'm hispanic, should I care?
my skin isn't dark, but not pale either

>>3025231
this

stop posting this shit