Go /p/ro.Want:• Expect criticism regarding your uploads.• /p/ is for photos: so feel free to post them as often as possible, even if "image unrelated" to your text. • Use "Recent Photos" threads if you are shy or only want to post a small number of photos. • Raw Files which can be collectively edited for discussion of post-processing techniques are encouraged. • Please check the catalogue for similar topic(s) before creating a new thread. Do Not Want: • Go to /wsr/ or /r/ for specific Photoshop requests. • Gear threads are discouraged but permitted. Keep in mind that many users simply hide these threads. Want to learn more? • The /p/ Wiki
"SOVL vs SOVLLESS" EditionPreviously: >>4536628
>>4537424I'm pretty sure it's cANON /pol/itisperging and schizoing out, if I got it right he's thinking of "benchod" (sisterfucker)
>>4537502Charlie Morningstar obviouslyFreak
>>4537502Reimu hakurei!
>Uma musume>Vivzieslop>2huAre you really the people I've been spending time with? Saddening.
>>4537491No one is forcing you to
>crushed blacks! lost detail in the shadows!>part of the sky is blown out!>why are the subjects in the CENTER?>needs some serious cropping dude
>>4537535>but there's just NOT ENOUGH shadow detail, there COULD BE MORE. some parts of the image have NO TEXTURE. PURE BLACK IS EVIL.
>>4537524Literally just a snapshot. Learn to compose.
>>4537536You're just seething about this specifically over and over again. It's getting cringe.I've never even seen it outside of ken rockwell's blog and that weird jpeg panasonic shill's posts
>>4537538>YOU JUST DON'T GET IT. CLIPPED BLACKS AND WHITES ARE SIGNS OF THE AMATEUR, THEY JUST RUIN THE IMAGE. LEARN TO HDR IN LIGHTROOM AND GET BACK TO ME CHAMP.
>>4537538Kek you come across as a bigger whiner than himYou had to post this twice because no one cared the first time
How can I recreate a photo like this solo? A huge flower field has bloomed near me and I want to recreate similar shots. I was thinking about duct taping my DSLR onto a ladder
>>4536718Why should the opinion of others stop anon from taking a neat photo?
>>4536718>Imagine being this insecure about anything in lifeHow do you even get your groceries?
>>4536726A surprising amount of people have implicit fucks to give about what others think of them. >>4536729Ditto for people being insecure with themselves.Guys, these are not groundbreaking facts, and anon could easily fit into either category.
>>4536717Eh, not the most 'professional' thing to use let alone you can't really adjust the camera at a precise vertical angle>>4536718I think if people see me in a suit and sunglasses when its 25-32C they'd already think I have problems. Ladder is like the least strange thing possible. In fact the bigger issue is if I choose a farm field of lavander, sunflowers, or canola I'd probably get tresspassed
The famous Abbey Road Beatles photo was taken using a ladder. All professionals have a ladder in their camera bags.
Full Spectrum EditionFormer thread: >>4531544
>>4537511>thumbnail is correctly rotated on my pc>image is correctly rotated when opened with photos app>image is correctly rotated when opened with paint>image came to me pre-rotated from the scans>image properties say 1228x1818>film orientation when i post it what the fuck
>>4537512Website from 20 years ago, pls understand. Nice pics though, especially >>4537509.
>>4537513thank you :3love yours too, the window makes almost a picture frame for the shot
Previous Thread: >>4408437My astronomy club is doing an outreach on smart telescopes in a few more months so I decided it pick up an S30. Its been delightful so far; setup is a breeze compared to my primary rig. Think it will be a great little thing for more casual imaging. We're not in the best time of year for my FOV, but I was able to get a little time in on M5.
Reminder
https://github.com/brianm998/starry_timelapse_airplane_removerIf anybody here into astro timelapses, give this software a try. It removes airplanes, satellites meteors cars from your pucs and videosWorks quite wellPosted in other thread but i think is best suited here
>>4535798>other thread?? There are several.
>>4536001Posted in nocturnal photography thread. Some anon posted milky way photo
>>4531547Your best bet is gonna be trawling the used classifieds for a second-hand telescope and an equatorial mount, sometimes both sold together as a package. Note that you don't need a telescope or mount that's billed specifically for astrophotography, that kind of gear is just optimisation for nerds with lods of emone, anything you can use in visual astronomy will be fine in AP as well as long as it's on an EQ mount (and you can technically use an alt-az mount, too, but then you've got field rotation to contend with, unless it's mounted on an equatorial wedge I suppose but the impression I got is that wedges don't actually work that well especially for AP).If you're in the U.S., Cloudy Nights has a pretty good classifieds section but you have to actually use their forums a bit before you can access it. Astromart is also pretty good. If you're patient and watch the ads like a hawk, the whole setup can run you less than 500 bucks.Btw, if buying an achromatic telescope, it pays a lot to do your research on optical quality and exact amount of chromatic aberration as this varies wildly. A good achro is where it's at for value for money, though. I got a 4" f/10 OTA in good enough shape for 50 bucks. It'll beat the snot out of almost any camera lens for AP.
A picture with the Moon making the image interesting - can be just the Moon, or the Moon just being pretty with foreground objects or stars and planets, new or old, but OC.See finder image (next post) for exif.
>>4535790two different anons with the same idea i guess.I am >>4535767 and >>4535768I like the other anons photos too, though.
>>4535791Ye, it happens, your pics are also lovely>>4535790Thanks for the kind words, you two
>>4535791LOL! Well, this is my preferred then..>>4535768>>4535808>Thanks for the kind words, you two
My best moonshot so farwith a viltrox 2x teleconverter on the sigma 60-600mm set to 567.5mm so it was a 1,135mm shot at reno lookout on the 191 with a iso 50 & f11 1/200 & only a single shot no stacking at all
>>4531158A Dobsonian, right? Very common class of telescope, I used to have one. Didn't like the size & weight, the collimation requirements, or the lack of slow-motion controls on the mount, but the big aperture was really nice.>I guess I can get a different eyepiece.Careful with that, at f/6 you'll have to be mindful of how different eyepieces perform differently at shorter focal ratios, some handle fast optics fine while some need over f/10 to perform well, others sit somewhere in the middle. This is known as optical correction, usually shortened to just "correction" in common parlance. Your own tolerance for outer field aberrations will also play a factor in selection. Eyepieces with good correction for fast optics tend to be more expensive, especially if they also have a wide field of view. I think Plossls at least work okay at f/6 though, but you may find the small eye lens and short eye relief of the shorter focal length Plossls uncomfortable (of course you may also find it to be no problem at all, and it's about a 50/50 split so you'll be in good company either way).
I'm quite surprised that we haven't really seen Ai being used in panorama stitching software.I would have thought that, by now, we would be seeing neural feature matching, depth aware alignment, generative seam reconstruction, etc. Ai being used to identify surfaces and textures and blend them properly. To spot perspective and angle changes and account for them in the stitching.Yet here we are, with photoshop and PTGui, still using stitching methods from 2007. I guess theres just no money in stitching. Except maybe for adobe, who are on their asses right now and charging people extra just to generate small image fixes.
>>4537477gpt does it flawlessly so why bother making an app for it
>>4537489ChatGPT is terrible for image stitching. As much as it will tell you it's going to leave your original images looking the same, it never does. Plus it's not exactly going to give you Tiff or DNG files at full resolution.
Street photos that became famous/iconic outside of the photography scene thread
Autumn colors edition
Curious birb
Lots of nuthatches this time of year
Theme: AutumnAll photos must be taken during the current challenge month. No old or archived shots.Get creative and enjoy the process. Unique perspectives are encouraged!Previous thread:>>4526290>Go highlight your choice of best pics!
>>4537437Nice.
>>4537432Literally a case of just get better gear.You need a 400mm or something to actually capture the subject that you want.
>>4537467kek, would have more motion blur. do you even understand the technical faults in this photo?
>>4537476I mean, you need to learn the basics of operating your camera as well, duh.And if you don't understand exposure, you are better off sticking to S-mode for quick animals like squirrels.
>>4537478It's obvious the focus was on his pet rabbit. That's why it's blown out.
Where the hell do you get models these days? It used to be that you would just go on Model Mayhem or find some chick on instagram and shoot TFP but those days are over. I wouldn't even mind paying for a chick's time, but even that seems difficult these days. Not a lot of chicks into "modeling" these days, no websites dedicated to it, etc. I guess they're all doing onlyfans or something. Any way, anyone got some tips?
>>4519752Model Mayhem, Purple Port, and Model Society. None of them are great. When I first started Model Mayhem was amazing. The models on there were stellar, including a lot of now-legendary ones. But my nudes portfolio was mediocre, and only mediocre models would shoot with me. By the time I got my chops up there were far less high quality models on the site. Nonetheless I eventually worked with dozens of world class models and have a portfolio that really impresses. Then in 2020 the site tanked hard. In large part because of the bullshit fake ass pandemic lockdown, and partly because social media and Onlyfans suddenly took all the models away. Now I shoot about once a year because I too cant find quality models to shoot with. I have much more success when I travel to Europe. In the States MM is pretty much useless. The tattoo epidemic really fucked the scene up too. I'm flashing back to when I messaged Leanna Decker way back in the day and she just ignored it because she was way too selective to work with a chump like me. I'm finally in the position that every model I request to work with says yes because my work and references are so solid. But there's barely anybody worth working with. Let me know if you get any new leads. The golden age may be over.
>>4532660The tattoo epidemic? Never heard of this in 2020s. But then again I dislike tattoos
>>4524576The tunblr era was truly wonderful
>>4519752If you're in the US, go to the Mexican border. Seriously.
>>4519752My basement, usually
Remember when everyone would come to this place to post fun photos and critique each other? We can and WILL have fun photo generals here again and not just another gear threadYou do actually take photos with those expensive cameras you're buying, right anon?
>>4537417Neat, it's almost like hunting, they are rare enough to make it worth stopping to take a pic, I do the same.This one was taken with a nearly 100 year old box camera on kentmere pan 200 film.
>>4537458
i scratched this one cos my developing reel is SHIT
Previous:>>4531544
I call this piece: no liberty beyond the WHITE line
>>4537406Yes, once you cross the white line into USA you lose all your liberty. Modern day USA is a corporate surveillance state ruled by demented retard dreaming of becoming a dictator. Sad how the mighty have fallen.
>>4537413Liberty is bad. Dictatorships are based. I’m going to tell trump netanyahu hates sony cameras for their support of pro-palestinian groups like the LGBTQ and get a 50% tarriff on snoys enacted. You can’t be this based in a lame democracy.
>>4537404>building corner photos are fun>flags on your balcony is a mental illnessgo straight to hell you cunt
>>4537373I hope you can now appreciate the spook>>4537405ty
Is photography art? Be honest.
>>4536933>Art is beauty>Doesn't define beautyMust be so peaceful to be you
Art? Definitely. Fine-art? There's a Wikipedia article of fine-art photography, so I suppose
>>4536966cANON inconsistency momenthttps://meadowsmuseumdallas.org/exhibitions/dalis-aliyah/
>>4537085>inconsistency
most professional photography is just utilitarian that's whole separate thingbut does an average hobby photographer really care about producing art that much?I personally just take pictures of cool things I like and find pretty or interesting or just want to preserve a memory. I wouldn't exactly call it art.
