what's /p/ like? I just got into this for like a month now, a friend led me his film camera and I found out that I enjoy film photography a lot, largely probably has to do with the fact that I love movies and Adam Curtis's documentaries.

Anyway I just wanna know what is it like on this board. what's up homies. any tips on film photography? here is one of my shot of my first ever roll! (it's a shot of cowe near my place)

>>4446697 (OP)
I'm glad you're enjoying photography. /p/ is unfortunately a bit of a cesspool full of gearfagging and brand dickriding, but there are some legitimately good photos here, it's the only place you'll get the harsh criticism you need to improve, and there are some genuinely helpful anons. If you steer clear of the clearly deranged, it can actually be a good time. It's a slow board though, I'd wager comparable to /ck/ or /out/.

>>4446697 (OP)
I'm on my 4rd roll now, and I'm still using my mate's camera at the moment and it's Canon EOS Kiss Panorama. I'm going to get my own camera once I get paid though, been thinking about Minolta SRT 102/303/Super because of its price and the fact that it doesn't really require battery to shoot (beside for light meters ofc) and its light meter sound fun to shoot with.

>>4446697 (OP)
>any tips on film photography?
yeah buy a light meter because your shot is over exposed

>>4446701
It looks more like they need an ND filter
you can't shoot fast enough shutter speed on film to properly expose without one in sunlight

>>4446701
Overexposing is good for film.
Sure, you may get white skies, but you can rarely save an underexposed one.

>>4446704
OPs image is way more blown out than that

>>4446701
there is a light meter but i didn't know that it's overexposed cus it looks fine, can't say the same thing about this picture though, it looks nice but i hate how white the sky it :( cus in the reality, it was so blue and there was contrast between the white and the blue :(((

>>4446697 (OP)
See /p/ sticky. Go to great photographers section. Checkout all of them. Then do this "Look at them. Why do you like some, why do you not like others. What makes them good, what makes them bad." Try to imitate them, like ditto imitate them in the start. Then mix and merge the your influences to create a your own style. You may develop your visual style with this method but you'll never develop a worldview by just looking at photographs. The way that you look at the world, your own observations, study, memories, your life, the country that you live, your religion/philosophy etc. will all influence you to choose your subject and impact your work.

Three essential books on photography:
>Photography: The Whole Story by Juliet Hacking(History)
>The Photographer's Eye by John Szarkowski(for general understanding of photography)
>On Being a Photographer by David Hurn(especially for the chapter On Subject)

If you're big on philosophy and theory then
>Camera Lucida by Roland Barthes
>Towards a Philosophy of Photography by Vilem Flusser

If you like Adam Curtis then checkout these photographers:
>All photographers in New Topographics exhibition
>All photographers related to Dusseldrof School of Photography

>>4446719
holy shit thank u

>>4446703
If you're shooting a camera that tops out at 1/500 with 800 speed film maybe, but for most daylight shooting you'll have plenty of shutter speed. Now, can you shoot wide open without an ND or some super slow film? No, of course not, but that's a bad digislug habit unbecoming of a filmchad

>>4446716
It's risky, but underexposing can give you amazing results.
Or get a cpl filter.