"Don't Feed The Tripfags" EditionPreviously: >>4533681
Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Fujifilm are industry standard.Almost no one uses lumixes because lumix removed the AA filter from cameras that need them. No one else did.Capture one for raws and photoshop for tiffs are industry standard.Almost no one uses adobe for raws because adobe lightroom has always been a slow, laggy piece of spyware that added AI noise reduction and generative AI while still having worse demosaicing than literally darktable.OLPFs on low density sensors are important. Thats why every canon, nikon, and sony FF with less than 36mp has an OLPF and fujifilm uses xtrans with unique processing that makes it easier to automate moire removal in the cameras jpeg converter.>inb4 i photographed a grid with a g master at f5.6Skill issue. Use the right tool for the job.
>>4534229Holy newfag. 11 gearfaggot threads on the catalog now. Thank you for doing your part ruining /p/. The gear thread spam is way worse than any namefag posting btw.
>>4534233New threads would bump those off the board, but whenever somebody posts something there is always one of these autistic faggots complaining that it should be in a general and I suspect said faggot is also the type to "report" stuff that makes power tripping mods remove said thread and thus we are stuck with a bazillion gear generals that all have the same arguing between some faggots who whine about about overly technical details nobody really cares about which eventually turns into an online penis measuring competition where unfortunately scientists have not been able to produce equipment to measure such minuscule penises yet. It would not surprise me in the slightest if the guy who complain about said threads is also the one arguing here about that nonsense because either way these people have little to no life outside of this board.
>>4534234They could just pin the thread and wait until it reaches page 7 or 8. The board is extremely slow so it doesnt matter at all. With one gear thread there would probably be over 1k posts/gear thread if OP newfaggot wasn't just an autistic loser purposefully ruining /p/.
>>4534237>pin the thread and wait until it reaches page 7 or 8Holy newfag, pinned threads don't go down
>>4534229>Don't Feed The Tripfags
what does everybody think about the new PEN?
>>4534246I think it insists upon itself too much, the Pen-F was subtler.
>>4534242LOL. I knew you gearfags were retarded, but not THAT retarded. Thank you.
>>4534258This is a pinned thread, you can even see the pin icon in the header >>4422499
>>4534246Olympus is not an industry standard brand and for a good reason. Their sensors are too small to be quality but too big to have reach.
>>4534260No you retarded idiot. You pin it locally so it stays at the top of YOUR catalog. The mods would never in 1 million years do us all a favor and keep a perpetual gear thread pinned at the top and delete any extraneous gear threads.
>>4534266Sounds like a cope for losers who don't browse 4chan in incognito mode
>>4534268>copes and projectsFirstly, It's a blue board so who cares? And secondly who are you hiding your browsing history from when you're a shut in that argues about a hobby you dont even participate in all day???
>>4534246The response to a market that wants a Pen-F in the same way how the L10 was a response to a market that wanted an LX100. Both are massive failures and bloated in comparison to the OGs, but that is where we are now.
>>4534278The L10 also suffers from sharing its name with the L10 Four Thirds DSLR, which became the design inspiration for the GH1 and GH2
>>4534285A failure in the naming scheme as well, yes. The only thing they'd have to do to be successful is to not make it bigger that the predecessor. Micro four thirds as a platform will probably die if this keeps up when they can't even make their non-interchangeable lens cameras small.
>>4534246> Name a product after a half-frame DSLR> Make it quarter frame
>>4534234we are stuck with a bazillion gear generals that all have the same arguing between some faggots who whine about about overly technical details nobody really cares about which eventually turns into an online penis measuring competition where unfortunately scientists have not been able to produce equipment to measure such minuscule penises yetyour mistake is thinking a gear thread could be anything else than that
>>4534245Embarrassing.
>>4534286Ricoh has old patents for an MFT mirrorless camera, but they're not smart enough corporately to see the appeal in a digital version of the Pentax Auto 110 with new Limited lenses
>>4534290I cannot think of anything more embarrassing than being a frog poster.
>>4534292Being a knowyourmeme poster.
>>4534245>Trips can take responsibility for their post Yet they don't, it is universally recognized /p/ would be better without your posts and you are still here being a general nuisance.>vibrant personalityOn a photo board a personality means having a distinctive photography style. You don't have that. You don't even have a photo thread up.>continue conversation on other boards? Good point, can you go continue your conversation about camera brands on /g and your conversation about jews on /pol? No? Damn.>if name field bad why do they exist?The name fields are not the issue, you are the issue. There is many users using the name field and nobody cares. Its just pathetic that you are addicted to farming attention using the tripcode.>make friends everyone hates you
>>4534245You are a dog fuckerhttps://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/4527555/#4527791
Cinefag’s poor abused pup, wore out his back legs from humping too much
>>4534231Starting the retard thread off strong with this specimen
>>4534289Don't forget that there two rpt threads because a tripfag was assblasted that he didn't get to create one.It's the same pattern as in other dying boards or generals. A bunch of parasocial tripfags/avatarfags and a janny spend all day in the same trannycord and fill the board/general with shitposts to the point no normal people want to post.
>>4534277>he lets hiro harvest his dataI started browsing 4chan incognito like 10 years ago after getting really strange ads on Facebook that related to tax threads I had discussedMoop was still running the place I think
>>4534345>feeds the tripfagSasuga /p/
>>4534278>Both are massive failuresthey aren't able to keep up with the order volume. OM saying now some customer deliveries will be delayed to spring 2027.
cANON should learn from me, 1 post and 4 seethes including one (You) denial with my snapshit attached to it (that's when you know you really got them)>>4534345I'm being held responsible for my posts here >>4534380I'm not responsible for his retarded interpretation of them thougheverbeit
>>4534246I like it a lot! Might pick one up once the market settles down. It's like a A7c but with nice colour rendition.
>>4534246I hate it. $1000 for 8x worse image quality and worse colors than an a7c. Every photo every olympus takes has a green tint by default so they need magenta added that warms up the actual greens too much. It would have to be 1.5x shorter and thinner and have a hybrid OVF to justify itself. The worst thing to happen to crop sensors was used FF cameras.
>>4534420Go away nazi zoophile
>>4534423Even if it was the size of Ricoh GR, it would still suffer from the small sensor and bad Olympus image processing (which lowers the IQ even more if you use SOOC or OM Workspace). Our daily reminder that Ricoh with its meme-tier products (a DSLR, a tiny digital PnS, and a film PnS) now sells more bodies than OM.
>>4534424I'm not a zoophile, you're probably one yourself accusing me as a way to cope
>>4534421>It's like a A7c but with nice colour rendition.+ IP tested weather sealing.
>>4534423>The worst thing to happen to crop sensors was used FF cameras.Yes everybody wants full frame. People only choose crop sensor because they are poor.
>"Don't Feed The Tripfags"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lZDgGr1PO0WHOS THIS COMING DOWN THE RAMP
>>4534434These m43 zooms are f5.6 equivalent
>>4534441and much softer in practice than ff lenses, with more flat and sterile rendering, as if the worse tonal range of tiny pixels werent bad enoughand then add on panasonics low quality/absent quality consistency and its just a bad idea all aroundget an aps-c camera from a good brand like canon or fujipanasonic = junk, with video codecs
>>4534433>IPX1They sprayed a mist bottle over it once and it didn’t explodeNikon has no IP ratings and went to space and survives harsher weather than any olympusIP ratings mean nothing under IP65, which no ILC can meet
>>4534441>These m43 zooms are f5.6 equivalentIf you crop a quarter out of a full frame f2.8 photo, is that crop f5.6 equivalent?
>>4534444That is not how it works at all, lil bro. Lmfao
>>4534444Yes. The measured noise will also be equivalent to using 4 times the ISO and the framing equivalent to using 2 times the focal length.This is image processing 101
>>4534444If you take a quarter crop of a full frame image taken with a 25mm lens at f/2.8 it's gonna look roughly like a noisier and softer version of a full frame image taken with a 50mm lens at f/5.6, yeah.
>>4534455Back in the good old days it was known you put your FX camera in DX mode and it behaved just like a DX one, but if you wanted more reach you needed an actual DX camera. Boomers understood this, zoomers are somehow more clueless than them when it comes to tech literacy.
>>4534453>equivalent>>4534458>reach
>>4534458So are you really a self-hating Canon user like cinefag said or are you actually a Nikon shill using Canon as a cover?
>>4534444Learn what f numbers mean please50/2.8=25/1.470/5.6=35/2.8Same aperture sizeSame light gatheringPeriod
>>4534444https://clarkvision.com/articles/exposure-f-ratio-aperture-and-light-collection/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number
>>4534429>bad Olympus image processing (which lowers the IQ even more if you use SOOC or OM Workspace)got any examples of this?
>>4534431>I’m not a zoophile i just wax poetic about dog dicksWhy is it always the nazis?
>>4534464He's just the capture one shill, he got one-shot by how flawless its AI makes photos look so he thinks the other software is stealing quality from you. Basically Ken Rockwell if he thought Perfectly Clear is the default instead of an enhancement.
>>4534467>capture one has had the same secret AI as darktable since before AI was a thingOrAdobe does not make good software They literally never haveDo you know why there is no other photoshop? Adobe patented every last part of the program and sues anyone who tries. Adobe is legally opposed to having to compete and make good software. The only reason capture one exists is because adobe is ran by non-photographers so it was possible to make a photography program better than lightroom without running into too many adobe patents.
>>4534467>Capture one has had AI since before AI existedWow, they're that good? ONLY AI can demosaic fuji xtrans properly, right? NO way can fuji ever be good. It could only be AI.There's an open source demosaicing algorithm (markesteijn) that's existed since 2014 that demosaics fuji better than fucking lightroom. Face the fucking facts. Lightroom is not and never has been the industry standard for a reason. They went subscription only because otherwise no one would pay $300+ for a permanent copy of such shitty software. Capture one is and always has been the industry standard raw editor. Lightroom has always been for gearfags that couldn't afford a C1 subscription along with their new-sony buying addiction let alone a perpetual license after wasting their entire savings on the newest sony.Adobe is THE company responsible for some of the least stable, least secure software ever released (adobe flash's security issues alone have caused hundreds of millions in economic damage before inflation adjustments) and their primary revenue source is monetizing user data because their bloated software maintained by 5000 H1Bs probably isn't even paying for itself with susbcription fees only.
>>4534246Price wise it seems good and shows that they're self aware that it's not that great of a camera. But it's ugly as fuck compared to the olympus pen-f which is a critical flaw of a fashion camera
>>4534468>>4534470>SOOC or OM workspace>Adobepick one retarded sperg, the jig is upwe're onto your bullshit
>adobe
>adobe good>dont use capture one>its secretly AI
>>4534473>>4534474Why are you bringing up adobe, shill?Is OM Workspace secretly Adobe?
>>4534470DeepPRIME had AI for ages too, Luminar had AI for ages too, so did Perfectly Clear. AI was around way before LLMs.Have a look, 2012.https://web.archive.org/web/20121216030542/http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/athentech/perfectly-clear.htmAI is older than X-trans cameras.
>>4534477>ages2020>perfectly clear marketingNonsource
>>4534479>Luminar>2016
Based review of Z5iiChttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1nu2-ZYqp8
>>4534483>bean soup theory
>>4534464Just look how noise reduction deletes contrast and details from shadow areas
>>4534477You know very well there's a difference between actual AI and software that just isn't dumb procedural shit. It's just not one marketing departments were eager to acknowledge.>Hey guys, our software is barely any more advanced than the photoshop magic wand tool>becomes>WE HAVE AI
>>4534471If this camera was good, you might buy it instead of OM-3, which has same IQ for twice the money. Hypothetically of course, because no one buys OM cameras anyway.
>>4534484>cost cutting is bean soup nownikon is a rich companyprofit margins on electronics are hugeit could have had an offset EVF, but nikon is greedy.companies are not your friendsthey do not tell the truththey are not here to help you and provide you with things you likethey are here to restrict your choices and make you give them money. all of them. no companies are good.
>>4534477>Actually, capture one has secret AI. Just look at the marketing blurb for this literally who software only ken rockwell ever used. They claimed edge detection was AI.Orrrrrr adobe is just shady and shittyThese two cameras use the same sensor. Both use an OLPF. There is zero reason for this to happen except for adobe and sony having a mutually hostile relationship. Meanwhile, nikon officially partners with adobe.Why is it easier for you to believe capture one secretly has machine learning applied to every image than it is for you to believe one of the most immoral software companies to ever exist is immoral, and the wildly popular brand is not in fact defective because of a test chart processed in software made by a company that has a bad relationship with that brand?
>>4534492>adobe adobe adobeWhy is it so hard for you to have a conversation without making it about Adobe?This was where you started sperging: >>4534464I still see no such examples of OM Workspace being bad, only you reeing at Adobe as a substitute for an argument. I'm not going to pay a Capture One subscription because you tried to gaslight me into not using OM workspace.
>>4534492adobe demosaicing is genuinely awful and this has been common knowledge since capture one version four. capture one has always had better fine detail and less false color. the guy claiming otherwise is just desperate for sony to be bad.also, this isn't even a real camera problem its usually caused by camera A having a vertically blurring OLPF and camera B having a horizontally blurring OLPF. most fine repeating details in real life run vertically and need blurred horizontally. if you look at the lineart section, the z6ii has sharper vertical lines and more false color in the wall texture. the a7iii has softer vertical lines and less false color in the wall texture.basically all OLPFs are asymmetrical.>>4534493no one uses olympus anon we're talking about important things that affect real cameras
>>4534492They showed the D800E in the previous thread and it too had false color, it's not a Nikon gets exempt from some shady thing deal.>>4534494I think you're miserable because you bought a Sony so you want to make everyone who has a better camera miserable too, especially people with Olympus and OM System cameras with their art filters. You wish you could have that in a Sony but brainwashed yourself into thinking MFT is bad.
>>4534490craziest part is downgrading the rear screen while it's the sole display. 720x480(1.04M dots) in 2026 is mind boggling.
>>4534497Let me guess, you "need" more...At that screen size and the distance it's used any more resolution is wasted.
>>4534495i didnt buy a sony. i bought a canon. olympus is garbage. go away.im sorry learning about asymmetrical olpfs hurts your feelings. there's a reason pros use high mp cameras without olpfs. getting antialiasing from the lens is superior and a soft lens with more mp is higher resolution than less mp with the same lens olpf or no olpf.>but dpreview...the d800e...dpreview test charts are shot at a sharp lenses sharpest aperturespros do not attempt to provoke moire like this.and pros would be pissed if you told them it should be impossible to provoke moire. that's like the kind of design decision APPLE would make.>it shouldn't be possible to fuck up. make everything worse.>>4534498coping defending a greedy third rate corpshoulda bought a canon or a sony
>>4534492>These two cameras use the same sensor. Both use an OLPF. There is zero reason for this to happen except for adobe and sony having a mutually hostile relationship. Meanwhile, nikon officially partners with adobe.That theory might be believable if Sony's own firmware didn't do the green/purple striping.https://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_a6700/sample_images/sony_a6700_45.jpg
>>4534500A test that doesn't push the tested object to the limit is worthless
>>4534501>exif>shot with 50mm f1.4 gm at f8that's a portrait lens, not an architecture lens. a sensor doesnt need blur forced on it because you want making a $1500 mistake like this to be impossible.just don't buy ultra sharp portrait lenses to pixel peep buildings.
>>4534509He just wants permanent training wheels.On his $2000 camera body.>everything needs to have foam bumpers to keep me from taking fucked up photos in auto mode after buying the lens the guy at best buy told me to -moirespammer
>>4534500>tfw ywn be a miserable faggot with a canon RPfeels good to be an olympuschad, senpai
>>4534509>>4534510samefagging like this is cringe I hope you realize it
>>4534511Both of those look extremely bad! Nice.
>>4534510>spammerYou started this bullshit with your asinine allegations, captureonespammer. I bet you're the same guy posting the moire samples and then the opposite position as a way to ruin /p/.
>>4534501>That theory might be believable if Sony's own firmware didn't do the green/purple striping.I'm leaning towards the theory that Nikon has better CFA spectrum. Sony using weak CFA may be causing it to exaggerate false color as the Phase One engineers explain in this video.https://youtube.com/watch?v=HHM-vp9lWkk
>>4534517Actually I looked at other parts of the test scene and its true, its just the AA filters blur in different directions. The sony AA filter blurs side to side more than up and down so horizontal lines alias more. The nikon AA filter blurs up and down more than side to side so the vertical lines in the drawings alias more.Pros famously dont want AA filters on their cameras. Pros use high resolution cameras and use their lens selection, settings, and filters to decide how and when to trade contrast+aliasing for softness. This makes it pretty obvious why.You have never seen a sony's CFA specs btw
>>4534517They chose low light performance over image quality.
>>4534418Manufactured scarcity. Nobody asked for these cameras.
>>4534521>Actually I looked at other parts of the test scene and its true>Pros famously dont want>Pros use high>CFA specsI want this sperg killed, who else?I think he's the guy who bought a Hasselblad X2D a while ago and got mogged by a Canon so now he bought a Canon but is still the same sperg
>>4534523Sony cameras have the most accurate colors and are preferred in blind tests. Most news agencies use sony cameras, and sony cameras are used for the majority of broadcast and cinema applications. Sony cameras are simply the best.
>>4534526Pros just don't use shitty cameras. Pros use good cameras like the sony a7RVI. Deal with it.
>>4534483> "Analog Photography"> Bought a digital camera> Complains
>>4534527But then why do the pics always look so shitty? Plastic digital garbage.
>>4534527Based and industry standard pilled>>4534532Sony photos look the best. Lumix photos look the worst.
>>4534527Who the fuck cares what some blind tests say about cameras? If I wanted some blind guy's opinion it'd be on Braille not colors, that's like asking a deaf man which guitar sounds best. Besides it's incredibly cruel, what a shitty prank to play on disabled people. I applied once, they said I wasn't qualified. "Neither are the subjects". They didn't like that. Anyway, the results were inconclusive. The blind people preferred the camera they couldn't see. And the sighted people preferred the camera they couldn't afford.
>>4534509kek this>sony engineers: with 3.79um pixels, the a6700 does not need an AA filter. every lens people would reasonably use with this beginners camera outresolves the sensor. radial lens blur is much better looking than the directional asymmetrical blur of an OLPF.>sony reviewers: IM GONNA PUT A G MASTER ON AND PHOTOGRAPH A LITERAL GRIDdont put a g master lens on your camera unless you want the compromises that come with ultimate sharpness
>>4534539>every lens people would reasonably use with this beginners camera outresolves the sensorthat causes moire
>>4534540Sorry I got mixed up. It's pretty early in the morning.The sensor outresolves most lenses someone using a beginners camera would use. G master primes are for professional use only and they come with compromises just like a CBR1000RR is easier to crash than a honda grom.
Is it officially meltdown time? I think he's having a meltdown now lol
>>4534546Bold of you to assume I'm having a meltdown.
>>4534546He was struggling with cANON but then cinefag showed up and it was the straw that broke the camel's back
>>4534550I prefer "the camel that broke the straw's back".
I agree. Sony makes the best cameras with the best colors. They have been used for blockbuster movies like The Creator(tm). You can't argue with that.
>>4534431>cinefagMinor correction to my previous statement.I am a proud zoophile, and I'm tired of pretending that I'm not.
>>4534550I wouldn't be suprised if it's the same person that spams all the gear threads. His extreme obsession and hatred for two trips "ruining" /p/ has turned him into someone that actively drives new and old people away more than any trip ever has.
>>4534552I concur. Sony has the best sensors on the market and my shares have been doing great this past month.
>>4534553People like you give us furries a bad name
>>4534554I wouldn't be surprised if you were cinefag with his trip off. Maybe the whole board would be better if we all used trips, don't you think?
Upgraded to schizo meltdown. KEK
You either die an anon or live long enough to become cinefag/cANON
>>4534561come on baby, do the loco-motion
Mirrorless is a pure upgrade from DSLR. The raws even edit better on the lightroom.
>>4534559The final result of inviting faggots from /v/ with the banners. I think what pushed him over the edge was my statement on photography being reserved to art, whereas simply pressing a button is just imaging. Some faggot fancies himself an artist because of the camera he owns and the software he uses so he felt so deeply injured he had to try to shit up the board, as if there were anything good left to shit up.
>>4534517I think you're mixing up two different issues>>4534523Everything is a tradeoff>>4534525They make money selling them, no reason to manufacture scarcity to a point they miss out on profits>>4534526>I think he's the guy who bought a Hasselblad X2D a while ago and got mogged by a Canon so now he bought a Canon but is still the same spergI think hasselblyat fucked off for good, this is probably huskyfag>>4534554well huskyfag made that filter list that no one cared aboutreminder that 4chanX has a preload feature that auto-downloads the images under the thumbnails, if someone posts something illegal in a thread you're browsing and you have that enabled it's as if you clicked it. He also posted a picture with a fluke TV signal generator, not only SIGINT glowies use that kind of equipment but it's a hint. And he demands full size pictures all the time so I wouldn't be surprised if he's a JBER faggot. Must be very bored now with the rare earth scarcity depriving him of radars to provide the info the ones in the CENTCOM are can no longer provide because they intercepted some missiles with their domes.These intel types get idle and start getting ideas to get busy again, I know them too well. Not so much the Americans but a spy is a spy, doesn't matter if NSA or KGB.
>>4534460More like a bit of a Canon-hating and Nikon-loving Canon user. Nikon has the best cameras, Canon the best ecosystem. Best camera I ever had was a Nikon F80.>>4534483He's painfully close to getting it but fails completely. He even said he wanted an OVF in the end and even admits the gripless bodies are shit ergonomically. But gets caught in the aesthetics bullshit and demands they make a FF DSLR in a FM body.
>>4534594Yes huskyfag is obviously a spy. He works for ISIS, the israeli secret intelligence service. And he’s benjamin netanyahu’s cousin.And he’s…. YOU!
>>4534594>the filter that tried to get /p/ to ignore me was associated with a dog picture so (ludicrously unlikely schizophrenic delusion)Genuinely see a shrink. This is the prodromal phase of paranoid schizophrenia.
Ignoring photo quality, which phone processed pic related better?Pic related or
>>4534607Pic related B?
>>4534608Missed focus>>4534607Looks like micro four thirds so you’re fine. Just tell /p/ you’re enjoying the new olympus pen. No one will know.
>>4534245You really expecting me to read all of that shit?
>>4534605>gaslightingHave a primer everyonehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
>>4534614Disregard this I need to take my meds
>>4534594>He also posted a picture with a fluke TV signal generator, not only SIGINT glowies use that kind of equipment but it's a hint.I got an HP signal analyzer too, you like that?
>>4534632Say hi to your colonel I guess, nice trinitron to calibrate your Van Eck attacks. Are they treating you well at least, soldier? Is the radiator working properly?
Is gangstalking a real thing?
>>4534634Of course it is, but some people have gangstalking delusions. If you want a real example of someone who was a victim just look at Reviewbrah.
>>4534633>Is the radiator working properly?Sure does>>4534634>Is gangstalking a real thing?SurecANON, can you post some of your pictures?I haven't seen any in the other threads.Thanks
>>4534633You have a 5D and drive a white Z4 don't you?
>>4534498why yes, I do monitor UHD video on a 480p screen. How can you tell?
>>4534640BasedSharpness is a bourgeois concept
>>4534638'ere agent >>4530018
>>4534639You read too much into tripcodes don't you? 5D just goes well with Canon and well you can make a little sentence from the other, like OK super whites 4 HH Vivat Evropa.
>>4534494>most fine repeating details in real life run vertically and need blurred horizontally???>basically all OLPFs are asymmetrical.If that were true it would show up in this test pattern.
>>4534653You have deeply repetitive thoughts about pixel peeping test charts on dpreview nophotoConsider suicide
>>4534677I'm sure everyone ITT is considering yours, kike
>>4534594Hey dude, I know the mossad meme was funny, but your (lack of) mental health is starting to concern people. I'm not an intelligence agent. I am not stationed at any air force base anywhere in the northwestern reaches of the US. I have not been to israel in over a year. I have never bugged a modem. I have never monitored a dissident. I work in small batch specialty electronics manufacturing.You really need to get a bottle of antipsychotics and leave 4chan for a real world activity ASAP. You are showing actual early signs of schizophrenia.
>>4534576The main benefit of mirrorless over DSLR is that now you can do the things you did in your RAW editor directly in the camera while you have eyes on the scene.Most commonly boosting shadows using tone curves. With a good mirrorless camera either result in pic related can be produced at the moment of capture, for both photo and video.
>>4534707Why would you ever want to edit on a tiny ass screen? Sounds like it would really take you out of the moment. "Oh wait a second guys! My tone curve was off and we need to retake the picture or I'll have to edit it on my computer."
>>4534709Literally no one does that lolCamera screens aren't even accurate enough to do it. Anyone who's tried to set up THE look in jpeg on their camera knows the struggle>configure>shoot>transfer>WHY DOES LITERALLY EVERY COLOR LOOK DIFFERENT? EVEN THE CONTRAST IS WRONG>repeat>Oh well. Fine detail is worse. Color noise is worse. Sharpening is an on/off switch. Processing raws just looks better. I'd rather choose the edit for the photo. <- Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Olympus>My colors are scientifically accurate, not "dull". If you would look at this chart... metamerism.... spectral transmission... cd/sqm.... fwc/snr log2ev^3.... now if we consult the mtf chart and consider per-pixel-pair demosaicing efficiency we find.... <- Sony>Uhhh actually wrong colors are surprising like sending film to a lab also stop noticing things just because the body alone was $2000 doesnt meant you can have quality standards you pixel peeping gearfag how dare you buy a 40mp camera and zoom in on things <-fujifilm
>>4534710Why do they all sound like absolute dog shit lol.
>>4534711Obsessed with dog shit, huh?Let me guess, you're a german born indian living in canada?
>>4534712>esl doesn't understand extremely common slangNice projection, kid.
>>4534714painu vittuun nekru
>>4534707Please do not edit like this unless you just want quick and limited changes. Good enough if I'm out somewhere with mates and want to share a photo with them via WiFi or something, but figurative turds at getting ideal results out of a photo.>not apparent due to the 0.35MP pic rel: Shit noise everywhere from the boosted shadows and fucked sharpening because a 5 pixel radius looks great on a 2.7" TFT>>4534709>>4534710I do not understand the aversion to editing on an actual computer unless you're legitimately poor and cannot afford one.
>>4534716Well thanks for confirming you were projecting.. I guess? >>4534718Yeah that's why I asked the question and the guy got incredibly upset about it.
>>4534721>oh no a humorous greentext>they must be incredibly upset>please give straightforward businesslike answers please i dont understand jokesyou must be a sony guy
>>4534718Getting it right in camera is a talent in itself
>>4534725It's just a more primitive form of gearfaggotry
>>4534725>talentOh no. You actually are retarded.
>>4534727>>4534729Ever heard of Kino Dogme 2007? Enjoy your dishonest crap I guess
>>4534723>no uProject a little harder, sport?
>>4534729>>4534727You guys are right. Camera operation is irrelevant. Especially with digital cameras. Post production is what makes photography art.
>>4534707No one does this. Cameras have worse software and worse screens than computers and no decent brand even wastes code on “tone curves” because everyone who knows what they’re doing shoots raw.
>>4534718Normies don't know how to use a computer.
>>4534693>I'm not an intelligence agent.That's a title, not all glowies are agents>I am not stationed at any air force base anywhere in the northwestern reaches of the US.Well JBER is technically a joint base not an AFB so there you go. >I have not been to israel in over a year.But you've been there before>I have never bugged a modem.Who even has modems nowadays outside of the built in ones in phones? Why would you bug the modem when everything else is easier?>I have never monitored a dissident.It would be very inefficient if analysts had to do the monitoring themselves. >I work in small batch specialty electronics manufacturing.Such as? Pagers?
Quick, it's been an hour since someone tried to talk about Micro Four Turds
>>4534638Why would anyone willingly offer you data? Go and mine your data like the others lazy fuck
>>4534755Despite being a somewhat open standard it will enter the graveyeard of dead mounts if they fail to deliver smaller cameras.
>my entire shtick is selling digital cameras that are supposed to emulate film photography in both operation and output but I would NEVER EVER make a camera with a sensor size of an actual 35mm film frame>I love film photography so much but I would NEVER EVER manufacture my legendary positive film stocks again even though there clearly is a market for it, here is your kodak gold repackaged as fuji 200 but now also more expensive!why are they like this?
>>4534709>tiny ass screen>>4534710>Camera screens aren't even accurate enough>>4534718>looks great on a 2.7" TFT>>4534747>worse screensDSLR boomers can not comprehend that the OLED viewfinder in a modern mirrorless camera is better than the crappy LCD they edit their photos on.
>>4534765Is it true that they've stopped making Fujichrome though? I recently buughted Provia with 2028.04 expiration date. Availability has been very limited lately althoughbeit.
>>4534765APS-C is better at emulating the mediocre resolution of consumer 35mm film now that FF outperforms even pro emulsions.
>>4534766Everyone shoots raw get over itCalibrated screen with ICC profile >>>> field grade evf with gross adjustmentsReal software > camera firmwareShooting jpeg is for parents taking photos of their kids
>>4534769That would be your lens choice.
>>4534767>althoughbeitsharteen detected, canon or cinefag?
>>4534775Neither.
>>4534718>I do not understand the aversion to editing on an actual computerBecause if you don't accurately capture the scene while you are there, editing when you get home is just making things up.Not adjusting tone curves while you are there means not accurately capturing the scene. The essence of the scene is the relation between light and dark. Camera sensors respond very differently than human eyes to that relation, so it's the photographer's job to adjust tone curve parameters until it's close to what he sees. A memory is a poor substitute to an observational recording.
>>4534778>if you're telling the truth there's at least 4 'teens on /p/ now
>>4534780>t. glorified scannerHylic, in isian terms
>>4534780Sounds like it would seriously take me out of the moment and make photography more about menu pecking than actually taking pictures. The screen is extremely small and shitty looking compared to my monitor. I would hate to edit on a tiny camera screen. Editing on my phone is absolute shit and I avoid it at all costs.
>>4534780Everyone shoots raw get over it spammer
imagine being an indian and spending half a year begging /p/ to stop using DSLRs, stop shooting raw, buy a lumix, and shoot jpegAnd all anyone does is insult you and post about how shitty lumix cameras areImagine spending months of your life being that guy. Lol.
>>4534754This is really sadHe’s obviously a regular guy who probably builds server racks or PLC cabinets. Stop being a schizo.
>>4534783>menu peckinghighlight/shadow control must be assigned to a function button. It is as important as shutter speed and aperture and ISO.>The screen is extremely small a modern EVF is the same size as a 24" monitor at arms length and the OLED is better than every LCD.>>4534784>Everyone shoots raw get over it spammerthis isn't about RAW vs JPEG, it's about capture accuracy which can't be done without adjusting tone curves on site.
>>4534789Looks worse than a phone screen and less convenient than phone editing and much slower and less convenient than computer editing.Do you have an example picture you have taken so we can be wowed by this "real" and "true" reality scanning you spam the gear thread with?
>>4534789What good is "accuracy" if you don't have authenticity?>>4534786You just blinded me, I'm going to need welding goggles
>>4534789Is the giant curve thing always in the middle of the screen when you're editing it?
>>4534792https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xti6t0zgemoyes, but once you set up the custom curves you don't really need to spend any time editing. Just select the appropriate one to suit the scene.
>>4534793there is also i.dynamic which can be used alone or combined with highlight/shadow curve adjustment.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yFUMzPDp7g
>>4534793But doesn't a preset curve completely screw up the accuracy you obsess about? I have preset curves on my computer that take 5 seconds to apply.
>>4534785This lmao>>4534789Camera screens aren’t color or contrast accurate and cant be calibrated to be so it doesn’t matter and its a waste of time, and even if it weren’t its soulless reality scanningYou clearly think you’re smarter than everyone else with your months long tirades/spam fits but please consider, you aren’t, and you’re at least 1/2 of the reason this board is shit now. You have literally never posted a photo you took with this lame method or even proved you own a camera and take photos with it ffs. If this board had mods you would be banned (and cinefag/canon would be name and trip banned)
>>4534794>>4534793I see youtube videos of other peoples cameras but not YOUR camera. Do you do photography at all?
Is there an "Anna's archive" analogue for photobooks?I know that lots of photographers post pictures of their collections on their personal pages or insta, but usually it contains just a portion from their published photobook.
>>4534795>But doesn't a preset curve completely screw up the accuracy you obsess about?Zero accuracy is what happens when not recording the observed tonal relation. The tone curve being off by a point or two while recording it is negligible.To make an analogy with white balance, it's like using AWB vs setting the K value/tint manually by eye. Yeah, setting the WB manually isn't perfect but it's way better than AWB.>I have preset curves on my computer that take 5 seconds to apply.you don't see the scene with your eyes while sitting at the computer.yes, you can guess the tonal relation just like you can guess the white balance while sitting at the computer but if you care about accuracy you should record it at the scene.
>>4534805So being off by a little is no big deal? Cool. Sticking with computer instead of a tiny ass screen with half of it blocked by some BS.Are you really so new to photography that you don't know standard tonal relationships or do you just suck at editing?
>>4534802>soulless reality scanningI'll take that over "soulful" editing any day.
>>4534808>good stylized photos BAD!Where are your photos? Do you do photography at all?
>>4534807He has been on this rant for seven months and has never posted his own examplesHuskychad did post his own examples and now the tripfags blame him for everything… meaning this spammer could be trip-off cANON (notorious neverphoto)
>>4534807Editing on the tiny screens is impossible anyways. They cant be calibrated and arent, the professing software is inadequate in countless ways and the meme “tone curve” (real curves are R+G+B+L+RGB - there is no “tone curve” in photography) is limited to cameras that are themselves inadequate and more often than not, simply garbage. Truly you can tell they were not designed by photographers - probably by toaster engineers.
My guitarist friend calls the sliders on his gibson mesa booger guitar loudifer the tone curve but i have literally never heard of tone curves otherwise besides this spammy jeet. In photo editing its just the curves tool. This guy is so clueless he says “edit on lightroom” remember? Literally 0 experience with photography, computers, and spoken english. And he has been spamming for seven monthsWhen he gets what he wants (no one disagreeing with him) /p/ will be so dead and have so few and shitty photos no one who mistakenly comes here will ever believe the rambling retard on the dead board full of shitty photos
>>4534246Queen of /p/ shares her take:"I'm a fan of 4x3 now"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhWdH188prs
>>4534818>Le sponsored youtube video>pls buy the 5th em-5 mk3 re-releaseNot even clicking
>>4534754That's right! We're are glowies here. This whole board is a charade designed to keep you from starting the revolution. Now that you've spent so many years here, moscow's fall is inevitable. We've already won. Our agents are ensuring pentax discontinues the last DSLRs and soon there will be a K mount mirrorless camera. We will have total control over the flow of information from our new country in liberated Khazaria.
>>4534820>and soon there will be a K mount mirrorless camera.>2012 soonThe world is ending soon damn
>>4534822Pentax is so irrelevant I forgot it existed
>>4534824Pentax is testament that mirrorless is a failed concept. The world will return to the mighty SLR sooner or later, even mirrorlessfags are starting to turn their backs on the mirrorless false idol. Just look at the Italian reviewer posted ITT, longing for an optical viewfinder. The optical viewfinder quenches a thirst few other things can.
>>4534824Also Sigma SA is basically Pentax K with Canon EF contacts and a shorter flange. And their batteries are interchangeable with Panasonic's.
>>4534826Pentax is literally going out of business because DSLRs are garbage
>>4534828More like because the wound the K-01 inflicted is still bleeding to this dayAlso because the average camera buyer is an autistic poorfag with shit taste, they'd rather buy canned greens than a real camera.
>>4534830>it's not their current product lineup its the discontinued failureThis is sadder than cANON's delusions about some PLC cabinet builder from spudsville being a glowie
>>4534831Such a failure they're sold out everywhere. Anyone who wanted one but was hesitating rushed to buy one, their future selves can worry about paying the credit cards.
>>4534831Also quit being so tsundere, Heather-kun. We both have one in our lives.
what is the use case for 70-200?
>>4534834Aiming aid, recon, surveillance, self defense. The potential uses are limitless.What sort of question is that?
>>4534811Heather-kun hasn't been posting about moire for a mere 7 months, he's been doing it since 2023.
>some jokers stole cinefags name>they didnt even crack his trip, they wrote random shit after the #>this still caused a psychotic break
>>4534836>need a portrait lenstake an 85>need a telephoto lenstake a 100-400
>>4534839Some 70-200s are better than prime 85s for portraits.>>4534839>psychotic breakI have archives to back me up, "spot the moire" ca. 2023https://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/4195319/#4199272
>>4534840Archive thing meant for >>4534838
>>4534840You’ve always been a creepy gay obsessed with this guy? Wew lad. Leave the house more often.
>>4534842
>>4534842>>4534840>cinefag is obsessed with huskyfag>huskyfag notes he has a stalker from /an/ who wants to fuck his dog>cinefag is on record defending his belief in consensual bestiality>cinefag constantly talks about havinga tulpa with the same name as huskyfags dog>fast forward to cinefag having a psychotic breakdown today>cinefag links the thread where huskyfag talks about his zoophillic stalker Is this your confession?wtf
>>4534834A 100-400 with worse max aperture, roughly similar IQ and performance is 2x the price, size, and weight. 70-200 is good for most normal tele needs. 100-400 is better for small and far away.
>>4534838No one actually checks the trip of wannabe board celebs. Putting on a trip when you're an irrelevant fag with nothing to post but worthless opinions is like buying a checkmark on X, The Everything App.
>>453484570-200 2.8 and a teleconverter is the way.
>>4534812Calibration is a meme. It doesn't make or break a photo unless you're working on some project that requires Pantone matching or something of the sort. A gearfag is someone who thinks the right gear will turn his snapshits into photographs.
>>4534846If that were true you wouldn't be attempting this whole targeted operation. Even if the trips were right people would be able to tell the real cANON and cinefag from the imposters posting retarded takes which contradict our stances. Nobody bothers doing that to mirror because nobody knows what she thinks.
>>4534818She's saved by the moire and screen calibration retards from having the most retarded take posted ITT. 4:3 is a cope ratio. >>4534820Ridicule is one of the system's most potent weapons. >>4534826Based>>4534811>>4534831Sure, you are a glowie
>>4534868>calibration is a meme>my masterpieces look great on my thinkpad i dont know why everyone calls them underexposed and dull with weird tintsIf you don't care if your reds shift orange and your contrast and exposure are totally different on any screen that comes within 90% of being calibrated out of the box (ie: the vast majority of modern smartphones and laptops) then why the fuck are you even a photographer>>4534844Yes, he definitely linked that thread for its surrounding discussion. Cinefag just had a breakdown and tacitly admitted he's not just a dog fucker, he's THE dog fucker that's been haranguing that guy all the fucking time since before the two of them were even on /p/>>4534840>cinefag: my bestiality obsession goes back to 2023. i mean, its about moire! spot the false color in the fur!It looks less like complaining to me and more like he was seeing if anyone could notice how he edited it out
>>4534871You don't even print, because you take snapshits instead of making photos. Snapshits aren't worth printing.
>>4534870most screens in use today are close enough to being calibrated that it doesn't matter, but cheaper mobile devices and most cameras are still off by enough that the back screen on any lumix nikon canon sony fuji olympus etc is going to be brighter, more contrasty, and shift certain colors compared to normal screensnikon cameras at least do it on purpose so people are impressed when they demo them>>4534874if you printed you'd know there's no way to know how a photo will look digitally printed without a test run (frontlit medium), and proofing is done in an icc profile specific to the printer and paper if you want to get it right with minimal triesbut you don't even take photos
>>4534875You have to do test runs just like me, what's the advantage of your calibrated screen?
>>4534876Fewer test runsPhotos looking like they should on most modern screensYou're missing a huge pointMost phones, tablets, and laptops screens are calibrated enough, out of the box.It's literally just shitty computers (the kind owned by people who say editing raws takes hours), low end android shit, and the EVFs/back screens on cameras that are significantly off.
>>4534877this>buy decent thinkpad p series>calibrate screen>almost nothing changes except some blues get marginally paler and some medium dark greens look a little less warm>it was already close enough to not give a shit>return colorimeter and never do that again>camera screen still looks totally different in dozens of ways, pre-editing jpeg is an exercise in stupidity
>>4534877>>4534878If you know how to previsualize you don't even need the camera screen to be accurate, just close enough to give you an idea of where things will shift towards. This is one of the many reasons why you should use a reflex camera, you see the scene instead of some bullshit the camera wants to show you so you can act accodingly. Same as with film really, if you can't adjust to the scene without some hand holding you'll never get the colors you want from film. Eyeballing illuminants and using filters accordingly if needed is half of it. Get caught up in "accuracy" and you'll never get authenticity and artistic value in whatever you do. When I pop a roll of 500T and shoot it in cold lighting I know exactly what the final result will be like. I know it's the "wrong" and "innacurate" white balance. But I'm going for authenticity, not accuracy. I'm being faithful to my artist's vision. I don't do art reproduction, run a 1 hour photo to be concerned with such pedestrian concepts as accuracy.
>>4534877>Most phones, tablets, and laptops screens are calibrated enough, out of the box.NUKE OF TRVTHPhotos viewed digitally are 95% consistent on any device made in the last decade. Prints are another story, but then, printing is another story. Oh, and like four anons otb actually print photos. Going >>4534878 tier with a colourimeter is not necessary unless you do this as a job (you don't).
>>4534847the way for what?
>>4534884>cANON now got a new tripcode to sockpuppet as one of his imposters supporting his own points>he even pretends to have some slight differences in opinions but the core is the sameJarring state of things
>>4534877>Most phones, tablets, and laptops screens are calibrated enough, out of the box.even if they are, they change as they age.clear plastic turns yellow, LED shifts temperature as phosphor decays.regular calibration is important.
>>4534887You need calibration like a hole in your head>>4534886Not my post>>4534884The real use case for a colorimeter is matching different screens between each other especially when working with a mismatched multi screen setup. Or if you're making something to be shown at some venue and you know they'll use some specific projector. Nobody cares about your calibrated results posted to some digital image sharing platform. Who cares, the clarkvision guy perhaps? The guy who spergs about people not showing the "true color" of the milky way or light painting?
>>4534888>Not my postIf you were the real cANON that statement might matter, but you're not
>>4534890cANON is the most popular name on /p/ nowadays, I won. No one achieved this, I even beat anonymous if you look at this past week. They should make it the default name on /p/ at this point, just to give recognition to the iconic status. cANON is the "I am Spartacus" of /p/ now.
>>4534884Samsung phones coming by default on vidid mode display that boost saturation and colours most of people having the auto brightness turned onMost of ppl having eye comfort shield or night mode on that makes everything yelowishdon t sound very calibrated to me or consistent.>oled lcd led monitors will display the same image or anybody will calibrate their monitors so they can see your artistic colouring
>>4534892Yeah okay schizo. We all know the real cANON's tripcode ends in HUE not HVE
>>4534896>if you are retarded enough to keep factory settings but also enable the most stupid display settings the photos will not look rightNor will anyone elses'. Everything is a level playing field with you're catering to retards.
>>4534898>I take photos only to show them to monitorphiles on 4chanThats why you are not posting photos?Because ppl don t have their phones adjusted you match you editing monitor calibration?
>>4534896/p/ is rife with people obsessed with bullshit "pro" features they have no real use for, and if you don't share their obsession they just pretend it's because you can't afford it. That's why they shill stuff like pro bodies from 20 years ago that get outclassed in every relevant way by newer consumer grade stuff they deem as ewaste. They shoot themselves in the foot all the time because they think it's "the way of the pros". They buy a shitty Sony because "it's what the AP uses" then they're paranoid about water ingress. They later struggle with getting an usable result so they endure C1. They calibrate their monitor. And in the end, the skin tones are still awful. Meanwhile Stacy takes a jpeg picture in girlfriend mode on her $600 Kiss X8i and it mogs their photo they spent two and a half months worth of wages on. So they come to /p/ to alleviate their buyer's remorse telling themselves their way is the pro way. Maybe they should have looked into WHY pros use xyz instead of cargo culting.
>>4534899>Can't readIt's a gear thread, chud. You're also moving the goalposts every single time you hit post.Idgaf. You don't need super dooper calibrated anything to view a photo well enough.
>>4534897You're only makkng my name even more popular, dumb shitposter
>>4534901>Is a gear thread so i must post retarded takes and shit irrelevant for 99% of peopleIs a gear thread but nobody posts gear
>>4534844>>4534871Classic /p/, show them evidence and they try to turn it against you instead. In case you haven't noticed it's Heather-kun that flocks to my posts like bees to honey. And yes, he's been posting about moire since 2023.Tulpa Heather is not a dog.
>>4534793>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xti6t0zgemothis one simple trick makes armchair photographers SEETHE
>>4534905Congratulations, it looks like an iPhone photo now.
>>4534246Enjoying this deep dive presentationhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oaND1E8nr4
>>4534842>>4534844>>4534871How I found the post:https://archive.palanq.win/p/search/filename/moireSo you can take that cookieand stick it up your
>>4534710>shoot>import to LR>apply preset vaguely imitating the idea of portra 400>Yep, now THAT looks good! <- Leica, Pentax, SigmaCope and seethe as much as you want, but these guys are the happiest.
>>4534911>>4534904Cope dogfucker.
>>4534904Why cant you shut up about all the drama you start with this literally who? Is it because you’re a dogfucker and you’re into their husky? You made a fucking tulpa based on their dog? ffs you need a break from life outside the mental ward
>>4534901You do need a reasonably calibrated screen for editing so non-retards with reasonably in spec screens will see what your photos will actually look like. Yet there’s a months long argument insisting people need to shoot jpeg and pre edit on inaccurate camera screens for "honest and realistic photos". Peak kek. Literally no one does that but fujislugs who pursue wrong colors, and fujislug wannabes. Months! KEKEven when its soulless lumix reality scanners, fujislug style behavior is the cancer killing /p/. Even cinefag is fujisluggish with all his feminine drama and street obsession
>>4534921>Literally no one does thatNot DSLR boomers.Most mirrorless cameras have some ability to adjust tone curves in real time, but most people use their mirrorless cameras exactly like they used DSLRs so they did not upgrade at all by switching to mirrorless.
>>4534920>convinced no one awardNo, it's because you fuckers insist on making false allegations to avoid admitting you're the ones behind the actual shitposting.
>>4534923Different anon here. Live tone curve adjustments are pretty cool to have for cutting down global edits on the fly (which is awesome if your employer wants quick JPEGs), though the more extensive editing I do for my hobbyist photography couldn't be replicated with digital camera UI's. Dodging/burning/other masking work and finer tonal adjustments will always need to be done on a computer. I bought a mirrorless anyway because it was easier to adapt vintage lenses, and I'm indifferent to which viewfinders I use.
>>4534924Go away dogfucker>>4534923Most cameras do not have curves tools on body. Its ultimately a waste of time to even use it on the few shitty cameras (mostly lumix/olympus walmart grade garbage) that have it because the screens aren’t contrast accurate. Lets just say pros arent clamoring to waste time mid-shoot to pre-edit on a 3" screen and gimmicks like this live on unreliable fifth rate budget brands for a reasonAnd you have been repeating yourself for months for a reason>i have to! im right! no one has agreed with me yet! You have to reference the real scene to reality scan or its bad photography! NO ONE AGREES WITH ME REEEEE-Yeah thats because the world is right and you are wrong
>>4534927You wish I fucked dogs, you sick fuck
>>4534927>screens>>4534927>3" screenlmao this senile boomer still can not comprehend the concept of evf
>>4534929>editing on a tiny cheapo OLEDcamera displays are mere composition aids. even exposure preview is pretty useless. photos always have more DR on a real screen.and even the best EVFs are just shit compared to a leica's rangefinder window. if EVFs were better leica wouldn't be able to sell an optical rangefinder for $11k. that's supply and demand baby. THAT many people are desperate to get away from japanese mirrorlessslop.
>>4534928You don't fuck dogs. You're just disturbingly obsessed with the idea of other people fucking dogs to the point that you follow them around commenting on their "dogwife" and fantasize about using dog fucking for "eugenics". So you're probably going to a fuck a dog in the future and generally shouldn't fucking be here.
>>4534930>if Snoys were better leica wouldn't be able to sell a Panasonic for $11k
>>4534929Name every EVF icon.
>>4534921Fuji's selling point with jpegs is not in-camera editing. It's that you can have a range of jpeg presets that look good in most cases and switch between them at whim. Slightly boosting shadows ia part of that, because a lot of photos benefit from boosting shadows. Not becauae you are supposed to change the settings every time you take a photo.
>>4534933Yes unironicallyLeica's flagship is a sony a7rv with an ORF and all the features removedThe mediocrity of jap cameras has been the sole thing keeping leica afloat as all the genuine fanboys die. Nobody would want one if there was a canikony with a zooming OVF and electronically coupled rangefinder patch except for peak camera snobs. Fuji won't ever release an xpro 4 because leica would probably sue them to try to avoid going out of business.
>>4534921True actuallyShooting jpeg is a cope, a feminine aversion to delayed gratification and skilled work (and experience+previsualization, which shooting raw requires)And cinefag is VERY feminine (spiritually a white woman)
>>4534936Why do so many fujibros snaps look like pee filter or orange + teal? It's like boomer hdr but for zoomers that only post on instagram.
>>4534936>Not becauae you are supposed to change the settings every time you take a photo.That's right, you also don't change white balance with every photo, you change it when conditions change.When you change from a front lit subject to a back lit one, you adjust the tone curve to capture the new relation between light and dark because the same tone curve does not work for both.
>>4534939I guess the "classic neg" film sim?
>>4534937I assume rather because optics is expensive while Chinese semiconductor e-waste is relatively cheap.
>>4534921Look at this snobNon retards with calibrated screensFuck of niggerBefore i will share my pics on the family or friends group i m gonna lecture them how they should adjust their screen so they can experiment my editing skills and my artistic viewCalibrated screens are for people who print. That s itEnjoy your carefully edited raws on a perfectly calibrated screen with the most accurate software that nobody will ever see Actually im 100% thay you have terabites of unprocessed raws that will sit forever on some hdd unedited because you don t have time or are too bored
>>4534941You don't change anything except ISO shutter speed and aperture. Learn to use a camera.>>4534945Every non-retarded person in the first world has a screen that's factory calibrated well enough. If you have a screen that's way off, sorry you bought an old business laptop/shitty android device or are using your lumix's chink e-waste display to edit photos.
>spend hours tweaking your lumix's tone curve>transfer photos>they look wrongdont buy a lumix brospanasonic is a toaster company not a camera companybuy a canon/nikon/sony/fuji/olympus, shoot raw, and use capture one
>>4534948Calibrated for what you fucking retard? Everybody adjust brightness contrast to their preferenceEvery os has some colour adjustment fuckeryAome use eye protection bs setting Night mode settingsEvery fucking monitor in 1st world country has some preset modes like movie office game etc that most people useAnd 90% of media including photos are viewed on phones. Where every fucking company has their own presets and bs to make the screen colours seem nicer by default, plua user custom settingsThe photo you are sending/posting looks like on you monitor only on your fucking monitorAnd >90% of people don t give a fuck about screen settings and colour accuracy. They adjust to their liking and eye comfort, which, braking news, is not according to your standard and fucking calibrated monitor.Even by reducing brightness the picture colours will look different
>>4534950>Every fucking monitor in 1st world country has some preset modes like movie office game etc that most people useNo raj, we just turn them on and leave them as is. By default most screens are 90% color accurate.>people don't carePeople do that's why we all use apple devices that are typically better calibrated and automatically shift the display to keep the colors consistent under different lighting conditions>braking newsRaj...Why are you so angry because most screens in the US are color accurate lmao
white american (blonde hair blue eyes) here i have never used a "mode" on my monitor besides on mode and off mode because it looks realistic and accurate by default
>>4534951Who is "we"?Is "we" all the women, technically impaired zoomers and boomers and all the other 99% of us population? because is a well know fact that americans are high iq homo sapiens that care about how colour accurate their devices are>unironically voted for a nigger president 2 times>For a literal demented one> for a turbo narcisit child fucker 2 timesJust because you like to thinker and autistically adjust setting on your devices doesn't mean the rest of the world does I bet you mom starts fucking with her iphone settings the first second she takes it out of the box.But you don t show your mom or normies your artThey just can t understand your genius and artYou share it it with conoseurs with calibrated monitors>>4534952I bet those are there because nobody use themHow about sdr screens, hdr, 10 bit hdr, oled, qled, lcd, do they display the same colours because they are factory calibrated and 90% accurate?
>>4534953>seething thirdie babblei hope your entire village's H1Bs got denied tbqh
>>4534954I hope also. American educationOnly usa and india exist
>>4534955Can we get that in English patel
>>4534949Imagine sacrificing reliability, build quality, an OLPF, an EVF, a hot shoe, a shutter, and usable AF-C for a live tone curve adjustment that isn't even accurate>lumix qualityhttps://www.openfilmmaker.com/the-lumix-s9-has-a-control-problem-no-one-talks-about/https://www.reddit.com/r/Lumix/comments/1wvz7b0/lumix_s9_sensor_broken_out_of_nowhere/
>>4534956No
>>4534949>I chose sRGBthat's the reason, sRGB tends to look desaturatedliterally skill issue
>>4534959literally wrong
>>4534959You should try kRGB. I hear it's tuned for high saturation and rich colors.
>>4534957Leica system and cine features is why you get a Lumix not meme curves. Literally one of the best designed mirrorless mounts in the market.
>>4534931>more wishcasting
>>4534929>>4534934This is how an EVF looks like on a good camera.
>>4534969>babby needs his gridlines
>>4534939>Why do so many fujibros snaps look like pee filter or orange + teal?Lack of taste + "recipes". Oh how I hate "recipes" and all of those dumb apes commenting "recipe?" under any half decent Fujifilm photo that gets posted on Reddit. 99% of those "recipes" look like shit and use terrible settings like Dynamic Range Priority - Strong or set White Balance temp to some insane values making every shot look like it was pissed on during development. Fuji cams are probably the most accessible out of all Japanese camera brands because of their great in camera JPEG processing and it reflects in the community. Fuji cams = great, Fuji online communities = retarded.>>4534970Needs? No. Finds them useful? Absolutely.
>>4534948>You don't change anything except ISO shutter speed and aperture.this isn't feelm.technology has progressed, along with it potential capture quality, but not in your case because you set an random tone curve and random white balance on lightroom to suit your gay taste.
>>4534951>By default most screens are 90% color accurate.but not camera evf or screen those are always bad.the dslr booomer cope is unreal.
>>4534964L mount is a bad design. No pancake lenses. Now go away zoophile. >>4534978Everyone shoots raw sorry your computer cant run capture one>>4534979>cheap composition aids arent as good as real monitorsYes. The raw editor on a camera isn’t as good either. Everyone shoots raw.
>>4534949>>4534957Lmao the only brand with a live tone curve has a screen too inaccurate for it to be reliable and sucks all around. Imagine if lumix stopped wasting employee effort on useless gimmicks because everyone shoots raw. Their cameras might be good.
Why are lumix and olympus cameras so bad? Even sony is better>but lumix enabled all the video modesSmells like desperation>IP RATINGAnything under ip67 means less than a youtube video of a sony getting rained on
>>4534983it turns out making cameras is kind of hard and not everyone is as good at it as canon and nikon
>>4534983>Even sony is better
>>4534983Basically this >>4534984Cameras still involve a lot of hand assembly so no shit a toaster company, a medical device company, and a stereo company don't make cameras as well as actual camera companies>>4534985The a7iv is without shutter issues, but it allows the front curtain to be used as a dust cover. In the hands of low IQ people such as the very low IQ man in your youtube thumbnail, this feature can prove disastrous. Of course, you're low IQ yourself so you can only understand simple and dramatic claims.The a7iv's actual problems are far more insidious and only perceptible to high IQ people with reasonably calibrated screens.>voigtlander and zeiss loxia lenses change their own settings>only shoots 5fps with lossless or no compression (a nikon z7 is faster)>autofocus randomly glitches out in macro>slightly noisy sensor for full frame>bad ergonomics>weak IBIS performs at half its rating>forces jpeg like processing on raw files
>>4534965https://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/4527555/#4527791>>4534553No one is wishing you were a zoophile. You even linked an archived thread here showing you haranguing random dog owners and you calling their pets "dogwives".You are a zoophile. And people wish you were either not one or were not here.>>>/trash/
>>4534985sir you needent worry this is easy fixedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGScAliiOzo
>>4534988>a7IV>a7IIIdo V and II mean the same thing in hindi?Why are all your youtube links of indians?>inb4 i'm bangladeshi sir
>>4534989
>>4534992Reread >>4534986A true history of sony failuresa7/a7r = light leaksa7ii = badly pre-processed rawsa7iii = defective shutter, dodgy weather sealinga7iv = standard sony shittiness that has never been fixed and never will bea7v = still every bit as shitty as the a7iv but now it overheats using the menuIf you're not willing to accept what's really wrong with sony and instead post lies, I can only assume you are a sony shill. It's like when politicians pay fake opposition to make ludicrous claims so it looks like only retards dislike them.
>>4534987I wish you had a functioning brain that allowed you some reading comprehension.>>4534981Nobody cares about how small the lens you're mounting to a full frame camera is. The only reason to give a shit about lens size is if you're using it as a prop. Is that your use case for lenses?>>4534986Sony makes some good cameras, they're called Venice and Burano. Still hampered by the vignetting issues but other than that they're pretty good.
I find it hilarious that the one forcing the zoophilia meme is none other than the pancake autist, Clive.
>>4534981>No pancake lenses.
>>4534802>soulless reality scanningAndrea discusses his giga reality scanning project in this CineD interview.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTXo4_AnZGQ
>go FF trading compactness for quality>get a pancake lens that trades quality for compactnessExplain this retardation
>>4535002>giga reality scanningDishonest portrayal
>>4534791Spoken like a true rockist, reconsider your life
>>4535005how so?
New >>4535009
>>4535008The thin DOF makes it aethereal
>>4535010Not FUCKING NECESSARYNot even FUCKING close to the THREAD LIMITThis dead fucking board DOES NOT NEED 15 ACTIVE GEAR GENERALSIt DOES NOT MATTER if (YOU) and (YOU)'RE ego cannot handle NOT having control over the NEW THREAD.NIGGER.
>>4535013310 posts is very much the limit
>>4535013Also the catalog is so empty it didn't even kill any threads probably because of that thread made promoting the use of tripcodes that jannies swiftly deleted (that one killed a photo thread btw). Learn to imageboard, loser.
>>4535014>PIC REL>OH NO THE GEAR GENERAL WONT BE DEAD TOP CENTER OF THE BOARD, WHAT A TRAVESTY THAT WOULD BE>BETTER ENSURE IT STAYS DEAD FUCKING TOP OF THE BOARD AT ALL TIMES
>>4535013This. Only newfags will disagree.
>>4535016You're the op, the basedjak gave it away
>>4535011That's a function of the lens/projection, not an intentional deviation.A better argument that this is not reality scanning is pointing out that the paper has an arbitrary tone curve set by the manufacturer and limited by chemistry. To counter, I would say there isn't exactly a huge selection of photosensitive sheet available. They are using what's available, and if there were more realistic options they would choose it.The point you are ignoring is that there is zero editing.The projection hits the paper. The paper goes into a chemical bath which develops it. The paper is the photograph. No negative. No manipulation.If you listen to the interview Andrea makes it very clear that the concept is about connecting to reality, in opposition to modern fakery.Everything he says is in line with the philosophy of capturing the moment as it is.When the tools are digital that means using in-camera tone curves and white balance adjustments to match what is seen by eye at the moment of capture, not arbitrary manipulations afterwards while sitting at computer.
>>4535001>$2000 apsc pancakeLmao you furries are retarded
>>4535034> When the tools are digital that means using in-camera tone curves and white balance adjustments to match what is seen by eye at the moment of capture, not arbitrary manipulations afterwards while sitting at computer.Uh no>>4534982>>4534957>>4534949
Both in camera tone curve purists and PC post processing enthusiasts are equally retarded. Like with most things the truth lies in the middle. It's nice to be able to judge your exposure, set your tones and color/white balance in camera to get good results right away but it's not critical to always get everything absolutely right at the moment of capture. Shooting with little regard for your in camera settings and trying to fix everything in post is equally as retarded and comes from decades of DSLR use. Smart people don't pay for a good, modern cameras to not use most of their capabilities.As an intelligent person with a good camera system that can produce great results straight out of the camera most of the times I try to give my in camera settings a little bit of extra attention but if there is no time for tinkering I just make sure my exposure is right and my highlights protected and I just fix the rest later in post. World is not all black and white. Right or wrong. Good or bad. There is some nuance to everything.
>>4535059Most DSLR homos shot jpeg. Their computers couldnt even use raws. Thats why DSLRs had shit like dedicated white balance buttons. Mirrorless MFDBs and tech cameras always defaulted to raws
>>4535059modern cameras jpegs are journalist/girlfriend mode. fine detail is always worse in jpeg.
>>4535061>fine detailOnly autists care about that shit. Nobody views their photos at 100%. Composition, subject and light >>>>>> color >>>>>>>> fine detail.Also what is jpg + raw.
>>4535059>comes from decades of DSLR useThat's retarded, if anything DSLR demands you know your shit better. Especially old Canons, there's no recovering many stops of shadows with their FPN.
>>4535062Autist seems to just mean smart a lot of the timehttps://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10581472/High IQ people (ie: jews) = 61mp leica, 180mp phaseoneLow IQ people (ie: tripfags) = 20mp micro four thirds (5mp equivalent), 40mp fuji (8mp equivalent)
>>4535077Equivalence includes aperture, ISO, OLPF and crop factor50mm FF = 25mm MFTf2 FF = f4 MFT100 ISO FF = 400 ISO MFT20mp mft = 5mp20mp aps-c 10mpolpf = -10% resolution
>>4535086This is quality bait.
>>4535086true20mp mft photos look a bit blurry and shit, but when resized to 5mp they are super sharp and virtually noise free
