/p/ - Photography

IIRC both of those cameras have bad dynamic range and colour separation, so nothing of value was lost.

>>1339

Perhaps a spooky challenge. Shouldn't be too hard in these dire winter months.

>>1342

Yeah, need a new thread.

Deadpan lives again.

>>1228

>I am not THE author though.

>>1287

>>1288

Nice colour, good contrast but tight framing and #3 and #5 are underexposed.

Vroom vroom, engine turning over. Thread back in operation.

>>1099

Use >>677 to look at meta data of image.

Flickr

>>1100

This looks neat! thanks for the suggestion

https://pixelpeeper.com/

Have fun.

>>1078

Got any more of delicious model?

>>1156

No clear focal point

Use

>composition

>leading lines

>organise colour

>think why before you take that shot

If you do all of that properly, then your work would not be shit. Now go my young Jedi, may the force be with you.

>>1156

Please resize to something reasonable before posting

>>1234

You are trying harder than I do.

P.S. I have nothing related to post in this thread.

>>1272

Nice is this a scan of a hand print?

>>1276

Scanned with a Plustek 7200.

Too lazy to find the notes on it but I'm 95% sure it's HP5 in a Mju2.

>>1191

Maybe because it's a good camera.

>falling for the MUH FULL FRAME™ meme

This thread tomorrow will be deleted tommorrow unless some non-trivial dicussion is started.

Why would you care about what exactly people photograph with?

>>1196

>Why would you care about what exactly people photograph with?

I don't know, maybe he wants to know what's the best camera with out going to le gear thread. Or maybe he has past perceptions that m43 is shit and stumbling apon half,full chan his prior conclusion has shattered.

>Why does this board mostly shoot with EM10

I'm 99% sure this board is not filled m34, but Canikon Dominates if not Fuji.

>>994

Exactly how I was thinking. These shots are just masterbatory shots learning how his camera works.

>>994

Although his shots are more interesting, they are over exposed.

>>1060

Overexposure can be used for artistic purposes to lighten the mood and create mystique.

>>679

No, you idiot. It's not CANNON, it's CANON.

Fairly pedestrian pics, but if you want to learn something from them, they are now accessible again.

Board: /p/, active users: 7. lol.

The boards I might personally like advertising on:

/k/

/tv/

/tg/

/mu/

/egy/

/cyber/

/kind/

/his/

/x/

I really have no idea about why should be advertised on this boards but I still feel scepsis about untargeed advertising.

What is the most important property of photography?

Photography gives me the ability to remember the monent of reality observed from a given point of view and then reexpirience it as many times as I like and in the ways which I may alternate.

I mean: if we want to attract quality posters we'd better say something important on our banners.

I just thought that we may make banners with wise photography-related quotes.

>>1120

"Easy ain't worth nothing" (John Free)

>>1138

I recall a BW photo depicturing a man with a medium format waist-level viewfinder camera hanging on two walls in a brace.

Can someone find it? I failed in doing it thus far.

>>1124

No.

You got to work off a Master.

>>1124

You may use any program which supports bicubic or Lanczos resizing. They won't ruin any information which you have on thumbnail.

However, they won't introduce any new information either and your pic will still have resolution of a thumbnail just without square pixels showing.

If you want to upscale an image and make it look like it is it's own resolution you should redraw the textures and details manually...

... or search for a bigger image with Google.

The tool from >>1130 is suitable for solid-painted images (partcularly from cartoons), it won't be much better than upscaling if applied to a photograph.

The only /p/ gf's I've had were fatties with huge tits

I have no regrets but would rather not go down that path again

>>1079

Its not worth it to fuck fat chicks. If you need a puff of flour to find their hole, then youre better off fucking Palmela Handerson.

>>1034

Help me understand this..... why are shadows so bad in BW photos?

...it's only one pic, but what the hell.

Try ebay. Also you could roll your own

>>979

You can get 120 for 5 dollars a roll on amazon if you buy in bulk packs.

>>981

$5, can you link me. It's like $12 AUD a roll down under.

>>982

Heres a package of 5 rolls for 25 dollars. Comes out to one roll per 5 dollars.

http://www.amazon.com/kodak-115-3659-Professional-Propack/dp/B0073HCE3O/

Now we can post about gear autism again.

>>885

Off camera flash? How did you pull that off? You just got in her face with a camera in one hand and a flash in another?

>>887

Besides advertising, what else do you need release form for?

>>891

>Off camera flash? How did you pull that off? You just got in her face with a camera in one hand and a flash in another?

Yes wireless trigger

>>892

>Besides advertising, what else do you need release form for?

Anytime where a person's image maybe endorsing x.

My rule of thumb is. If it's art, no need for form.

Not bad, but you'll need to find uglier people if you really want to be like Bruce Gilden.

Random unsaturated people pictures rezzed.