>be me
>always relaxed
>photographs as a hobby
>doesn't follow composition rules or such, just shoots whatever looks good
>av mode or auto ISO for comfort
>tracking af does the job for me
>enjoys looking at the results at home
>high resolution screen
>applies a cinematic preset ctrl+c ctrl+v
>prints the best work
>posts the worst but usable online, so no one steals it

Photography can be easy and fun

>tracking af does the job for me
So you have a $3000+ camera
AF is absolutely shit on cameras made before 2020

>>4451036
Honestly, you should use whatever works for you.
Some people like to limit themselves and use film gear with manual lenses.

>>4451036
Sorry that you can't figure out how to focus on cameras

>>4451033 (OP)
>doesn't follow composition rules or such, just shoots whatever looks good
> yet unconsciously applies rule of thirds in both axis and has a balanced composition that leads one's eye from foreground to the subject and further to the background
Good for you, having universally acceptable sense of aesthetics

>>4451042
Manual focusing is for video, retard
Photography camera should just work

>>4451033 (OP)
>av mode or auto ISO for comfort
ah, so you don't actually know how to use a camera.

>>4451044
Yup, it's too bad no one could ever get any action shots prior to camera being good enough in 2020

>>4451046
Ignorance is bliss.

>>4451046
>retarded nigger take

>>4451046
It's implied, but I do.
I just don't like to do it the hard way.

>>4451047
they shot at f20 and it was grainy as shit

>>4451053
>I am dishonest
>>4451046
They probably know just fine, it works well for most people in most situations
It is lazy mode and there are definitely practical benefits for staying in M and avoiding auto ISO

>>4451050
>retarded nigger

>>4451047
But the a7ii came out in 2014 and had better autofocus than every fuji and panasonic up to today, and better autofocus than expeed6 nikons.

You sound like a butthurt fujislug desu.

>>4451052
you do not.

>>4451054
> there are definitely practical benefits for staying in M and avoiding auto ISO
lmao you know what the exposure comp wheel does right? you are clearly a gearfag

>>4451056
Yes AF has gotten a lot better
People still took plenty of action shots with older cameras, it just wasn't as completely effortless as it is today
Some people even used a focus point they moved around instead of all area + subject detection

>>4451052
Ignore these fags bruh. They’re basically linux fags. They overcomplicate everything and use old junk and base all their self esteem on it.
>you own a nice camera that does auto iso? consoomer that is proof i am smarter than u. i know how to adjust iso manually and i looked at a PDR chart to optimize my ewaste.
Its what nerds do when they cant have real accomplishments like sex and never proved real intelligence by getting a college degree

>>4451057
How do you know it?

>>4451060
Oh sorry seething dlsaar

I used a fujifilm and the moving point didnt even focus on things unless they werent moving so, lol. More like fuji nikon and panasonic just dont make good autofocus! no wonder everyone uses sony and canon. they make the only good cameras.

>>4451059
Exposure comp doesn't fix subtle variations in exposure when shooting many shots in the same lighting
AE locking does that, but that's an extra button to toggle or hold
If I have to constantly adjust EC, I might as well just be in M

>>4451061
Kek

>>4451063
Sorry you couldn't make it work for you

>>4451066
Ok dumb linux fag sorry i didnt ask my cat to pose first or get out a 300 watt lamp to speed up the autofocus

Or maybe fuji makes bad cameras and thats why canon sells more. Basic logic. If you went to school youd know it.

>>4451068
Economics professor here. This is spot on. Fujifilm makes bad cameras and that’s why canon sells more. Fujifilm markets a lifestyle to compensate for their inability to make good cameras.

>>4451068
Fuji does make bad cameras
But people have been able to get action shots with cameras for decades, certainly before 2020
If you can't with a given camera, and someone else can, skill issue

>>4451069
I've tried their X-series and they are...fun.
I don't know about good, but it was plenty for street photos.

>>4451070
>uhm people used the command line for decades. you dont want to use linux? SKILL ISSUE
All of you degree less nerd virgins act the same. You think using garbage makes you skilled to cope because you cant find the clit.

>>4451070
I mean, if you camera have a shutter speed of 1/500 you CAN take an action photo, everything else is cope

>>4451072
Using a focus point + tracking instead of all area + subject detection is not the same a going back to command line
If you really think using a focus point to chose where your focus goes is that difficult, you are literal retard, sorry

>>4451075
>*indignant nerd babble* = durrr me put in more work to use worse technology so me smart!
Just hire a prostitute and you wont care so much about all area cross point dual pickle autofuckus, dickus waddus

If this was real life you’d be in a locker by now

>>4451076
It sounds more like you'd be the one hiring so they can operate a camera for you

>>4451076
Watch who you’re talking to bro he memorized nintendo cheat codes

>>4451077
Nah i just bought a camera that isnt shit

Have fun compiling you focus from source nerd fag. Too bad real jobs for smart people dont ask if you press buttons on a camera to move focus stuff around. They ask if you went to college. Lol!

>>4451061
>measures his self worth based on sticking peepee into a gross diseased hole
Chat, is this real?

>>4451080
Nice, well hopefully someday you learn how to use that camera!

>>4451081
Lol virgin

>>4451083
I have better things to do like my girlfriend cuz

You have fun analyzing the charts and selecting ideal eyesohs lmao im sure people will notice

>>4451033 (OP)
I don’t care what you do, whatever the fuck it is, it’s shit and I’m here to tell you so.

>>4451033 (OP)
trash thread, trash replies. /p/ is the board (You) deserve.

>>4451033 (OP)
Based justwerks chad. I think its funny that you're basically the anti-4chan for doing this instead of being insecure.

>photography on reddit
>4x5 looks better
>it does
>using my leica is more fun
>it is

>photography on 4chan
>4x5 looks better
>NOOO BUT DID YOU SNR 80DB THE EQUIVALENT APERTURE AND SHOOT A FAIR SCIENTIFIC TEST WITH THE SAME NUMBER OF PIXELS ON TARGET AND CROP? IS YOUR SCANNER ON A RIGID STAND? IS IT WORTH IT OR ARE YOU SCANNING WITH FOOL TURDS SO YOU MIGHT AS WELL SHOOT DIGISHIT? LETS CHECK THE DR CHARTS AND MTF OF YOUR LENS BEFORE YOU TALK SHIT YOU FUCKING SOULLESS CONSUMERIST RETARD. NOTHING YOU CAN REASONABLY DO MAKES YOU BETTER THAN ME. HOW ABOUT YOU GET UP TO THE STANDARD OF TIM WALKER BEFORE YOU CONSOOM YOU REDDIT BUGMAN? HYLIC!
>using my leica is more fun
>BULL FUCKING SHIT THATS AN AUTO EXPOSURE LEICA YOU DONT KNOW HOW TO USE A CAMERA YOU IDIOT GO BACK TO PHONES PLEB I AM SMART AND YOU COULDNT FIGURE IT OUT I AM BETTER THAN YOU

>>4451033 (OP)
>likes doing photography for the sake of it
>enjoys the process and results in equal measure
>treats it as a hobby and thus in moderation (no deep dive autistic shit)
For some reason this offends /p/ en masse. You people are depressing.

>>4451090
I’ve had the sex, I’ve touched the grass, and you’re still a faggot, what else can I do to fix that?

>>4451108
Your poor dog!

>>4451108
>>4451090
Sodomy is wrong, faggots.

>>4451090
>like my girlfriend cuz
your girflriend is your cousin?
what the FUCK
ARE YOU A NI-

>>4451033 (OP)
>auto ISO for comfort
my iso only goes up to 1600 and it looks like ass

>>4451199
My ISO goes up to 1,600,000,000

>>4451091
I couldn't care less, my work satisfies me, do I need more?

>>4451092
Then scroll past it, dumbass.

>>4451098
Kek

>>4451101
Some people here should go out and live.

>>4451199
Digital noise is not always a dealbreaker, plus there's denoise software today.

>>4451205
fuck you :o

Why are people, mainly zoomers, weirdly proud they remain ignorant?

>>4451101
For me, photography is like fishing. Gets me out of the house and doing something but it’s not about making money. Hell, I don’t even have to “catch” something for it to be worthwhile.

>>4451259
it is a status symbol to not know how to pull a choke, crank a motor, and work a clutch. and likewise for the digital camera BS of yesteryear.

like a nobleman can ride a horse or drive a modern car but doesnt give a shit about a 1940s farm truck
chads shoot modern mirrorless and enjot vintage rangefinders but not dslr garbage

>>4451199
You only need to apply some conservative noise reduction to get rid of the majority of chromatic noise. What’s left is usually a pleasing grain.

>>4451205
>Some people here should go out and live.
why do leftychuds always project their inadequacies on people who disagree with them?

>>4451261
>it is a status symbol to not know how to pull a choke, crank a motor, and work a clutch
>local man learns some people don't give a shit about certain aspects of the universe
I don't think it's a sin to just want an end-result without understanding all the inner workings of something. If there's a modicum of effort or money put towards it, there's nothing wrong with using the green A+ mode. Same as wanting to pop down to Jersey Mikes and driving an automatic civic.

>>4451280
you see it in every hobby. i also like to 3d print functional bits and bobs for the house and the office and you see it here all the time, there's the "i want to have widget" gang where the printer is just a tool and the hope is that one day it could just be an appliance like a microwave, and there's the "i want a tinker hobby" where the widgets are a byproduct of autistically tweaking configs and readjusting parts and all this other shit. and they generally don't see eye to eye because the camps don't overlap cleanly. so too here in "photography", where you have the people that want images and don't care about how to get them really beyond finding what works easiest and going with it, and the autists that obsess about gear and minute differences that don't actually affect images in any way that normal people would notice or care about. it's just human nature i guess.

>>4451282
>there's the "i want a tinker hobby" where the widgets are a byproduct of autistically tweaking configs and readjusting parts
it’s like min-maxing your build

>>4451282
Even an inferior camera like Fuji, Olympus or Sigma could satisfy someone's needs as a hobbyist.

OP wasn't even trying to point out the emperor's lack of clothing, yet look how easily our local autists were stirred into useless screeching.

No matter what you're trying to do with your camera - what good is it in the end if you're not even enjoying it? Shouldn't that be the first thing accomplished? It used to be that newbie photographer could stumble into this place and still have a chance at coming out of it with new knowledge and even some direction - now it's just another misery trap where your potential goes to die.

I really wish I knew what could be done to start fixing this. If the local culture is poisoned this deeply, then the solution will not be to just "post more photos lol" because the problem is the people (in fact, you should take note of how often those exact words are used to start arguments here).

>>4451272
why do rightoids always project their inadequacies on people who disagree with them?

>>4451411
>I really wish I knew what could be done to start fixing this
Be the change, my man. Effortpost, don't reply to bait, critique more than you are critiqued, don't get angry. Assume good intention and leave when you don't. There's more good than bad on /p/, it's just slow and small enough that a couple of shitflingers poison every thread.

Not worth worrying about. It's also not worth making /p/ your only spot to talk about and show off your work. Finding a local club is really nice.

>>4451411
It makes me sad that I’ve never been asked to «post photos» here, but at the same time I don’t participate in screeching arguments so that might be why.

>>4451411
It's all about effort posting which used to be more common
The problem now is most effort posts get like 1 or 2 comments and then thread dies
People don't really engage with effort posts anymore

>>4451426
It's worse on /mu/. There's still a glimmer of hope here!

>>4451334
>"needs"
Hobbies don't have needs and this is something 4chan in particular seethes when trying to comprehend. It is 100% pure want and objectively an unreasonable waste of money at every level.

And also, using cameras and photography are different hobbies.

>>4451411
>It used to be that newbie photographer could stumble into this place and still have a chance at coming out of it with new knowledge and even some direction
Yes, now the replies are
>just buy a better camera lol
while actual advice gets tested as cope

>>4451428
you don't understand my compulsion to take pictures of my dog in 100 megapixels with zero blur in the dark without ISO noise

>>4451431
There's nothing wrong with that and you could actually meme your way into a gallery if it benefited charity and were well executed (note: doghair's shit is not well executed)

>>4451280
My partner doesn't know anything about exposure, can only use the camera after set up auto modes by me (A + auto ISO), but still takes some great pictures. Doesn't want to learn, probably never will, but that's okay
>end-result without understanding all the inner workings of something
I do think at a certain point it can be a little weird having so little knowledge, like doing math without knowing basic operations and just asking chatGPT for the answer
Or saying you speak another language when you really just use a translator
Like sure, it is the result that ultimately matters, but I do think there's something of value that can get skipped
>there's nothing wrong with using the green A+ mode
and there nothing wrong with acknowledging limitations of using green A+ even if they don't apply to you, no one ever admits they're being anything close lazy

>>4451433
>partner
well what did you expect from a bottom, he's retarded

>>4451411
See an example of the problem >>4451434

>>4451433
>like doing math without knowing basic operations and just asking chatGPT for the answer
Or saying you speak another language when you really just use a translator
Except in this case, the user is still doing 75% of the work. You still need to go places, you still need to bring a camera, you still need to point it at the right place and time the shutter. Sometimes that's all it takes anyway; right place, right time f/8 which I'm pretty sure auto modes will default to if given enough light by other means. Obviously there's a higher rate of garbage induced by a lack of technical knowledge (high DoF requirements, panning, freezing motion, etc.), but that person using green AUTO+ mode is still smashing the faggots sitting at home screeching about fooji and blobmeras.

Now, yeah I concede that tripping and falling into good results over and over again without learning anything is... a bit worrying (after a while *some* shit should start becoming obvious even without the theory), but if they're having fun who cares.

>>4451445
But this is /p/ so when we accuse someone of refusing to learn, it's about refusing to learn the shitty primitive autofocus system of a DSLR or refusing to care about a janky sensor's 12 different gain stages and their specific effects on exposure lattitude, as we seethe at someone for selling their $500 camera and buying an insane $800 camera. THAT GODDAMN GEARFAG! DONT THEY KNOW IT WEIGHS 75G MORE!!! >:(

>>4451445
>Except in this case, the user is still doing 75% of the work
I mean if you include literally travel and bringing supplies as part of the work, going somewhere were you'd have to speak a different language isn't far off
Of taking the image, absolutely
Of operating the camera, no
It's okay to not want to be a camera operator, nothing wrong with that
There's also nothing wrong with wanting to be better at using a camera
>but that person using green AUTO+ mode is still smashing the faggots sitting at home screeching about fooji and blobmeras.
Someone that knows how better to use their camera can often end up with better pictures, and at worse case, about the same. Having more knowledge about how to use a camera won't make your pictures any worse.

You don't need to know how to use a camera to take good pictures.
You can know everything about using a camera and still take awful ones too.

>>4451447
Correct, because no one ever took good pictures with a bad camera before.

>>4451432
Why must you always bring me up? My last 4x5 studio shots were awesome and very well executed(not the 8x10s I posted in fgt, they got fucked up). High effort posts, clearly improving and learning, promoting discussion about real photography, etc.
My contact prints also look pretty sweet and are another form of high effort posting that I do. I mean I don't make the print for you guys, but sometimes I'll scan one to share instead of just taking a phone pic of it.

If you're talking about my scanning then you clearly misunderstand my intent as a photographer. I make prints that I care about not scans. Scanning is to check my work easily so I can learn and that's about it.

>>4451433
>partner
Perhaps the problem is you’re both retarded enough to use this kind of duplicitous language and low iq is the issue.

>>4451457
>no I won't actually address anything you're saying
More dishonesty

the only based large format poster in the forsaken board, is the dollfag.

>>4451455
>Someone that knows how better to use their camera can often end up with better pictures
The entire board is filled with chairbound autists that know the precise SNR of a Olypananikofagatron D50SR at ISO 2000, but almost exclusively spend their time arguing amongst each other. All the technical and theoretical knowledge you could dream of and its spent taking photos of their husky or a random tree near a lake or doing ""tests"" because they never go anywhere or see anything that's worth capturing.

Unironically, a meme influencer that has a loose travel budget and a fuji instax mini is already btfo'ing 50% of the creatures on this board.

>>4451459
The funny part is that he screws up stuff in his shots all the time that I am called a talentless snapshitter for. No one is obsessed with him either, so I don't think he is that based. Dollhair is definitely a good contributer even if his subject is kind of strange.

>>4451461
>more dishonesty

>>4451463
Nta schizo. Here's your YOU-DESU

>>4451455
>a bad camera can take good pictures
In limited scenarios most people arent interested in.

Your hobby is cameras not photography. People want photos. Gearfags want to say they used a manual focus only camera with only 3 shutter speeds to "make art" (a blurry photo of a pedestrian).

>>4451464
Still dishonest

>>4451465
My hobby and profession has been both with camera and photography
Sorry for trying to encourage people to learn how to use a camera better

>>4451467
He has a point, you huskyfag retard. People are interested in photos, not playing with technology. If a better camera is within their budget and doesn't require as much dancing around problems created by japanese "technology" that's showing its nature as a refined copy of a western invention devoid of further creativity or innovation, why wouldn't they just buy a camera that isn't as shit so they can take pictures and continue living their life?

Cameras and photography are different hobbies.
Gearfags can not understand this no matter where on the hipster spectrum they fall
>End "shit": You can still take great photos. If you need more than a D700 you need skill. Learn. i am smarter than you and everyone.
>End "too good": Your photos will always be better with this. If you aren't ace with a hasselblad 907x, you need skill. I am smarter than you and everyone.

>Off-the-spectrum: It needs to look much better than a phone and not require nerd necking and preparation to use.

>>4451467
anyone who is not autistic can clearly see that better cameras reduce the amount of spec nerding required to accomplish things and that this has immense value

maybe some friendless autist out on his own taking photos of bridges and street signs sees things differently

>>4451462
Holy fucking fart sniffing cope, dollfag is an order of magnitude better at the large format meme than you are.

>>4451470
Good thing no one disagrees with that
>anyone who is not autistic
Can also see that learning can also improve your images
Yes, someone that takes photos of people for a living, and have used hundreds of different cameras from years working in camera shops too, is seeing things differently
>>4451468
True! I have no problem with that, they just don't seem to be honest about it

CHAD TIER:
Manual everything vintage SLR, preferably medium format
High end FF mirrorless in auto mode
Pocketable PNS
>I know how to use a camera, but it's not always about using a camera.

VIRGIN TIER:
>I know all the settings on my dee esh ell arr and have practiced rapid fire pressing the dpad joystick to do my own af tracking just like in halo
>Micro fer tirds has the best reach to gram to price ratio fool frames and if you will look at these charts and my equivalence theories...
>Fuji autofocus works for me because i select the right focus area and try to take every photo at least 5 times. $1699 isn't a lot of money for me. Kids? No i don't have kids lol

>>4451468
Huskyfag was actually more tolerable than corgifag and doghair. Mostly because his pics were not actually bad, and he actually posted pics instead of tests and collages of tests, until he started shilling nikon DSLRs, and image quality and composition quality both cratered like nigga stopped tryin. Then he became exactly as shit as doghair. I think his nikon DSLR shilling was actually him quitting photography.

>>4451472
Absolute and extreme projection by the dollfag sucker. His last pictures had a chopped off foot, and a giant fucking blurry thing in the top corner. I get absolutely shit on for missing something inconsequential in the very corner of my frames. His main subject wasn't even entirely in focus because he failed to use any swing. He is taking decent pictures of an incredibly easy subject to photograph. All that said I think he is doing a great job, I like his pics for what they are, and I think he's a good contributor.

Get the doll out of your mouth, kid.

>>4451477
>more dishonesty
No one's making tier lists about what what's better or worse
It's just dishonest when people to even acknowledge limitations of decisions they make

Corgi has posted more non-test chart and even more non-animal shots than the others
More dishonesty

>>4451476
There is not a lot to learn regarding cameras.

When people complain about shit autofocus, negligible autofocus coverage, and shit sensors it's like complaining about driving a 50hp 4 speed car in city traffic. No matter how much can be learned it's not applicable, or a replacement for the upgrade, and it quickly becomes obvious the person saying "uhm, learn first puleeze" either races on a track or likes to imagine they do so their needs or imagined needs are entirely different.

And by races on a track I mean gokarts, the racing equivalent of running a photo booth at a furry con.

>>4451479
They must lie to cope with their inferiority.

>>4451477
gigachad tier
>yeah idk i just use full auto all that matters is faming and composition, I just look through the EVF to make sure the exposure is right, then I slide the aperature or exposure that's it, not really sure what "ISO" is buddy haha

>>4451480
>There is not a lot to learn regarding cameras.
Yes, everyone on this board uses their gear absolutely optimally and could not possibly benefit from and more knowledge regarding exposure or processing or composition, etc
We are all shooting 10/10 bangers here

>>4451467
All for people becoming more intelligent and learned beings, but this ain't the place. You'll get the odd newfag who wants to get better but the gearfags and anti-gearfags sink their hooks in fast.

I think the spirit of the thread highlights that; highest engagement thread in days and it's a group of anons reee-ing that OP isn't autistically sperging about specs or using the gear they approve, when the entire point is that the "gear doesn't matter" kek. Not in that nihlist bullshit you need to use old turds sense, but like, it's a tool to acomplish a job. I for one am happy more people are just doing the thing.

>>4451482
>to make sure the exposure is right
You're already asking too much for some people here

>>4451478
You sound jealous that there's an anon here that is more tolerated than you are

>>4451484
>but this ain't the place
Used to be
Now people say
>just buy a better camera lol

>>4451483
composition has nothing to do with the technical operation of a camera, it's a universal artistic technique used in pretty much every form of art (taking pictures of your dog is not art)
Most people can't be taught how to take a good picture because they're incapable of the psychological feat of looking the world in front of them and knowing where they should put a camera and what angle and distance it should be from the subject. That's 90% of taking good pictures. 5% is technical skills and lighting the final 5% is your camera

>>4451479
There is nothing dishonest about what I said.

You're a gear nerd even if you shot boudoir for an OF slut once upon a time and had the balls to post it on 4chan, the mass shooter manifesto website that just had to ban kik threads because a US representative was sharing CP using them. You really risked your career when you do things like that and I do not blame or fault anyone for not posting their professional people pics on /p/ so I don't use non-animal/non-tree photo as a metric. Alas huskyfag is now as bad if not worse than you and hasn't posted in months. I seriously think he bought a D750 to quit photography with. I feel vindicated thinking that, because the d750 is a shit camera.

>>4451488
many sads. I wish /p/ lived up to the glory days I missed. I miss Fe2fucker strangely.
>c. 2022 newfag

>>4451489
>no cameras ever have any kind of compositional aids
More dishonesty

>>4451492
slapping some grids or patterns on top of your viewfinder only helps if you're already not retarded bro

>>4451490
I have posted plenty of other work, some of it linking back to my actual website, nothing ever happens
Even posted at least 4 selfies here lol
Thank you for the ad hom / threat

>>4451492
Did you recently buy a word-of-the-day calender or something? Buy a thesaurus kek.

>>4451493
>I was wrong so I'll just say retard
Nice

>>4451488
People also said buy a better camera in 2016

This isn't like other hobbies. The tech supplier is japan, and japan milks actual garbage for 10 years before making an incremental upgrade because they think their only market is professionals who will put up with the bulk, ugliness, and overall bad design. Which is how they lost the entire non-pro market to phones.

Apple could completely destroy whats left of the camera industry if they wanted to.
>the Apple iLC
>Sony autofocus, olympus size, nikon build and features, hasselblad interface, internal storage and battery, multiple USB-C ports, full frame, great color science, assembled with the finest chinese slave labor, computational modes included, jpegs that make your capture one processing look mediocre, $1699

>>4451495
I'd gladly stop using it people stopped being dishonest

>>4451497
True, and people still took great pictures in 2016

>>4451494
A US rep was sharing CP on /b/ for half a decade and only just got caught. What you do here, might bite you 10 years later, depending on what you end up involved in adjacent to. I wouldn't even post my cat here if I were running for city council.

most people who take photos have nothing to say. for some reason its more grating when its a dentist with 10k of equipment.

>>4451499
In 2025, more people take better pictures of more interesting things and action and macro photography are no longer status-signaling.

That last part is part of what I think makes long time gearfags seethe. The fact that certain things are no longer hard to shoot and they can no longer impress people, so they want people to go back and use worse technology and appreciate the work they had to do.

>>4451486
>insta change subject
Lmao youre a massive fag, cunt. A little, but I get it. I wish weird obsessed chartnerd freaks didn't constantly bring me up for no reason(theyll do it more because I said that). I know why they are obsessed, but I'm not going to say why.
Most people just ignore his dolls or he gets a nice doll reply. Kinda boring.

The past 2 or 3 months I've put a lot of effort into my photography and it has paid off with some great pics. The disgusting chartnerd freaks will never admit or recognize this, but it is a fact.

>>4451501
>its more grating when its a dentist
honestly that is universal, just look at /o/ and all those fucking dentist on harleys

>>4451500
I've been on /p/ for like 15 years now lol
Know plenty of oldfags that got out just fine, even Burke posted just a few years ago
If it makes you feel any better am winding down the business by years end, but that also means I'm free to share more
I have enough money I'm not too worried about future earnings

>>4451502
What interesting things do you take pictures of?

>>4451503
Your pics aren't good

It's very sad. You and huskyfag did the same thing and degraded your output by getting into shittier and shittier outdated gear. Huskyfag cratered while shilling DSLRs and medium format film, you cratered when you went from a leica and 5d, to 4x5 film (the beginning of the hair complaints), to 8x10 film (and now you can't take a decent picture at all).

You actually used to be good and when you shoot digitally some of that comes back. The skill floor for 8x10 is not just very high, it's an entirely different discipline, just for easy to focus on landscapes. You're way out of your depth and your ego can't see it.

>>4451501
I take photos because I like doing it, and I spent my 20s "living in the moment" and now have nothing but my failing memory to remind me of the good times I've had in my life.
I still carry over this discontent of people (incl. myself now) who need to shove a camera everywhere for all the snapshits, but when you can look back and think of happy times, or print out something for a mate, it's a warm fuzzy feeling.
Sometimes I post these photos here because I think they're neat, or somewhat impressive (they're not). But according to the elitist /p/ fuckwads, I'm better off necking myself and using my phone because I didn't golden-ratio my travel snapshits.

>>4451505
>What interesting things do you take pictures of?
Other peoples weddings and I don't touch the camera unless its a family picture
I have achieved peak boomer

>>4451503
>The past 2 or 3 months I've put a lot of effort into my photography and it has paid off with some great pics
Well done, I'm proud of you even if you called me a cunt. Cunt.

>>4451506
Absolutely and incredibly retarded dishonesty. I was right about the seething chartnerd freaks. Thanks for that.

>>4451506
Even on 4x5 he was showing more creativity and uh, life, than he is now, even without leaving the farm

Fast forward and bro is doing this with his dog in front of a tie dyed bedsheet

>>4451513
I posted that 8x10 because I had questions to ask about flaws in the negative you lying cunt. What an absolute JOKE you are. Is this a meltdown you're having? Over me again? LOL.

Hand painted background I got specifically for taking a nice pic of my dog with and to learn studio work.

>>4451510
>chartnerd
I don't care about charts I care about composition, content, and better image rendering than a micro four turd laying on the AI copes

Anything beyond that is just a matter of someone choosing to waste their money or not. There's nothing wrong with a shitty camera, there's something funny about a $2000 shitty camera, and there's nothing wrong with selling a canon 7d for an R6II to have an easier time with spur of the moment action and HDR, but there's something funny and sad about people who get irritated by that.

Now let me tell you, your composition and content have cratered and your image rendering didn't even get better. You post a lot about film's theoretical resolution but you blew past the point of diminishing returns and now you post such bad photos of your dog in front of a bedsheet, such, bad, BAD photos. That you took BETTER on your 5d and MFDB.

>>4451513
in this image we see a malnourished dog with slobber coming down its mouth. The eyes of the dog are cross-eyed, indicated PTSD from anal rapes. I call this, Wooferschnitzl
>a work of art

voy a ir a Afganistán para recoger la mercancía y los 0rgan0s para después venderlo al gobierno

>>4451514
That's not just a test, every 8x10 sheet requires careful focusing, composition, and checking with a loupe and then manual labor to develop. You put effort into that. Do you even try anymore? One year you're taking kino street, then your dog is looking at eagles on a riverbank, and now, this.

>>4451515
LMAO. We got the armchair critic master photographer over here. Go lie and cope about someone else.

Ever since you have started obsessing over people your photography has gone to absolute and complete shit. It has been so sad to witness. Just go back to not caring about what other people do and maybe you could regain some of that old charm you lost. I doubt it because your ego is so inflated you can't even admit you're wrong.

>>4451519
Path of least resistance when the novelty wears off, happens in every hobby.

>>4451519
What are you even talking about? You are completely clueless to my 8x10 usage. I'm using foma100 to make sure I can ace some shots using slide film. Are you the 8x10 king that sets the rules for what an 8x10 shot can and cant be?

I was taking those pics to see what sort of DoF I was working with, slightly altered lighting setup, and how much my dog would move while I was loading film. I shot these 4x5 previously as my first film shots

>>4450111
>>4450110
>>4450107

If you go into fgt you can see that I considered those 8x10 shots a complete failure. The lighting got fucked somehow and I missed focus because the dog moved.

>>4451521
>Your photography
You don't know what my photography is. I post mediocre farmlandian and shitholeville 'scapes and car photos anonymously when I'm at uni and post hot takes on /p/ when I'm putting off homework. I make a point of keeping my photography and my hot takes so separate even the jannies can't link them together.

But i'm graduating soon so i'll have to post shitholeville cars and 'scapes from home lol

I know what your photography is though
It's bad, not because you're bad at this, but because you got too busy with gear and doings things you told 4chan you'd do (to be based!) and stopped actually being based.

Pic related, doghair before film megapixel tonality autism

>>4451526
Buddy ol pal I don't care how hard your camera was to use even though you mention it every time, but it's interfering with rule #1 of taking a good photo
The decisive moment

Even your 4x5 is noticeably better
And with 35mm, the MFDB and 5D you produce noticeably better shots than with 4x5

It's been consistent. You could not just get better, but instantly be ok and maybe even pretty good, if you stopped gearfagging about the tonality.

>>4451527
Here's the thing uni child. My interests in photography have changed. My home has changed. I'm not trying to be a street fag anymore. I hate the degenerate city. I love the country and my new home. I feel drawn to photographing it. I want to produce high quality and meaningful pictures for myself of the things I love. People freak out about this and fail to understand it.

It isn't about the cameras. It is about a complete change in subject matter, and what I like shooting with. Streetshitting was sort of easy for me. Farmshitting is hard for me. I've just started studio work and I've already improved a lot. This is a process of learning and improvement. I posted my dog studio shots because I wanted feedback so I could improve faster and I did, while mostly avoiding drama.

Im not ready to stop taking pictures of my home. When I am I'll stop and move on to bigger things.

>>4451528
>cope and a non reply
You are a giant faggot.

>>4451532
>Politically informed artistic death
Many such cases. Even in the studio you produce higher quality, more consistent work with digital cameras and smaller formats.

Everyone sees you uploading max size, 9000px scans and max size 6000px captures hoping someone pixel peeps btw. This is a bad look.
>well at least look at how good my camera is!

>>4451535
>cope and a non reply
when your response to every 8x10 pic you've ever taken being a bit shit or just fucked is showing how your 4x5 shots were better overall without a hint of irony, it's time to reconsider the gearfagging brousef hair-canini.

its like if a half decent photographer working with a nikon zf switched to hasselblad upon hitting a snag and instantly got worse at everything and didn't even hit focus most of the time

>>4451527
Something slightly ironic about that picture you posted, which is possibly my best picture ever, was taken on a rolleiflex 2.8. Lol

>>4451536
Freakishly insecure anon.

>>4451540
>Something slightly ironic
it's not ironic at all
your soul left your body and you became a zoophile once you started gearfagging

>>4451540
>My best picture ever was taken on a simple, easy to use film camera
>So then I decided to take increasingly bad pictures on larger and larger formats because of schizophrenic "tonality" hallucinations and the unique experience of looking at 8x10 contact prints very closely while wiggling them around (cuz im really bad at using an enlarger and can't get the grain in focus and then my dog bumps it mid-exposure)
La vida y los tiempoooos
del hombre con
fotos suciaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaas
*mariachi band plays*

>>4451541
he was always a furry/zoophile, most people who are currently furries are, that's the very nature of their, uh, thing. thats why he's so neurotic.

>>4451536
I do not care and neither should you. You aren't helping me. I enjoy shooting all the cameras I own, and have urges and desires to use them at different times.

It's laughable that you're complaining about how my 8x10 shots look on 4chan. NO SHIT retard. I don't have a good way to digitize them. Basically no one does. I use them to make contact prints. Go read my posts in the fgt where I posted those dog 8x10s. I specifically sfayed how shit they are. They were practice shots and used to help me understand better what limitations I am working with.

Well there you have it! Slanderous dog abuse lies come out as always. I consider that a concession btw, so thanks!

>>4451544
It is not merely the quality. Actually, the pixel peeping quality is pretty good. Your dogs eyebrows are very well rendered. Not the amazing breakthrough of magic tonality you keep talking about. A decent inkjet and a fuji gfx would equal them with competent editing.

It's the content, composition, and ever-present fuckups that make the photos bad at any size. You're missing the decisive moment where the camera and reality align, consistently, and calling literally everything a practice shot. Don't even git gud you're out of your depth and trying to use the wrong tool for the job because of some gearfag schizophrenia.

For as much as we talk about quality, you'd think the RPT would be much better

>>4451546
I'm not judging you for being a furfag. It's legal in finland after all.

I'm judging you for being such a gearfag your gear is interfering with the most basic aspects of photography and you clearly produce more and more consistent and high quality (moderately above average) work with smaller formats.
>its for the 8x10 prints and ~LE TONALITY~
That's a really, really old mythical bit of schizophrenia, from back when precise film enlargement didn't really happen. With today's digital tech, inkjets can reproduce very fine textures and tonal variations with a HR file better than an enlarger could with a theoretically HR negative. Optics simply aren't perfect.

>>4451547
You are legitimately stupid and fail to understand the plain english that I have written. Your extreme ignorance is proven further by your stupid replies and it is hilarious! Keep it up.

>>4451551
Holy cope from the ignorant retard. Thank you!

>>4451552
The content and composition of your photos get worse with every increase in sensor size above 120 film, and your handling errors get exponentially worse and detract from each photo to an extreme degree. The tests you shot with the 5d and MFDB were, aside from your really terrible moire-ridden raw processing, significantly better looking than the subsequent large film "tests" (everything's a test with you) and caught better expressions, better poses, at better angles, and were more likely to just be in focus.

You become better at photography when you become worse at owning nice gear and I mean (you) not the theoretical "imagine you're doing this in the future" you of modern english

>>4451554
Why should I listen to your "advice" when you fail to see or even recognize what my photographic goals are? You are like a concern troll, but 10 times more gay.

>>4451555
>uhm my photos might be shit but my goal is, le contact prints
contact prints of shit photos?

no one cares about grain peeping. fucking 120 film is miles past the diminishing returns line for a lot of the world. i guess 4x5 has some advantages for firsties with wall space and nice computers. just use a camera you're competent with.

>>4451556
Lol. You have no clue what you're talking about.

>>4451557
You threw away what little talent you had to grain peep 8x10 contact prints. Of the 3 dogfags your story is by far the saddest.

>>4451556
Im more competent with a view camera than most people are with their phones. My subject matter doesn't align with your ideal of a good photo. I do not care. I take pictures of what I want to take pictures of with the cameras I want to use. No amount of you crying and whining to me is going to stop that.

All of my photographic effort is directly connected to making prints. Prints that bring me joy to look at. I will be making 4x5 contact prints of my dog today and I will be framing them and hanging them on my wall. Stay tuned.

>>4451558
I was a miserable and severely depressed sack of shit living in the city. I have purpose now and found peace living and working in the country.

>>4451560
>I'm... competent with a view camera
Even with easier 4x5, doubtful. 8x10 is a good studio format for human subjects just because dogs move.
>It's my subject matter
I enjoyed huskyfags dog pics more than corgifags, although corgifag shot way better fap material. I enjoyed even some of your dog photos. But they're getting worse.
>All of my photographic effort is directly connected to making prints.
Too bad they aren't good prints anymore.

>>4451558
I am almost entirely apolitical btw. I care more about my chickens then what the president said/did.

>>4451561
Too bad you replaced your misery with gearfagging. I guess everyone needs at least one thing in their life to be hopelessly bad huh?

>>4451562
My prints are good enough that I have sold a few of them to complete strangers and get lots of compliments when I show them at the farmers market.

>>4451565
My country bumpkin grandma would buy an inkjet print of a stock photo of a bird and calls everything everyone does nice, even when it's a lopsided failure

>>4451564
If thats the lie you want to tell yourself go right ahead! I use 8x10 to make contact prints. Why haven't I gotten anything better to scan them if it's all about gearfagging? I could buy a gfx100 and macro lens right now to start taking good scans of my pics if I really wanted to.

>>4451566
More cope. Cool.

>>4451567
>Why haven't I gotten anything better to scan them
Because even for you, a 9000px scan of hair, dust, fingerprints, chips, and scratches on a poorly composed and even more poorly timed photo of a dog has got to be enough.

You are putting out stuff way, way below the standard of other people who use the format. I like dogs, I don't care if you like dogs a little too much, but your photos keep getting worse.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/zboumeester/5823541268
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBOt9DsvUxw

>>4451569
and showing off every slightest mistake by overscanning
>guys look at the dog eyebrow hairs!

>>4451551
don't be so harsh on him, he's in his 60's, he's caught up in his boomerisms

>>4451571
Probably 30s

no way would someone who has been alive 60 fucking years post here

>>4451569
>dog on couch
KEK

Bro come on. You keep making yourself look so stupid. It's funny, but still...

>>4451572
>no way would someone who has been alive 60 fucking years post here

We have had people on their 60s on the board.

>>4451573
>dog on couch
story of your portfolio

>>4451569
You don't get it. Are these photos better in both a technical sense and in composition and framing? Yes.

But the purpose is different. These pictures are meant to be "photography" but dogfuckers pictures are an ode to the love of his dog. It's like when a guy sends pictures he took of his gf at a flat angle zero framing or composition. He is married to his dog, the love of his life, and wants everyone to become a furry like him.

>>4451570
I posted those two 8x10s because I was asking for help on a weird issue I was curious about and couldnt find searching for it elsewhere. Now you use the lowest of low hanging fruit to say I suck in general. I even said they were a failure in the posts...

Here is an 8x10 contact print that is more up to my standard in all regards. I know you will say it sucks because you will never say anything I do is good, but I think this is a really nice image and a great use for 8x10. This picture looks incredible framed up nicely.

>>4451579
ugly hands
ruined it, RUINED IT

>>4451578
I just want a really nice portrait of my dog to keep forever. You are such a nasty little creep.

>>4451581
The ugly hand is part of what makes the picture good!

>>4451582
It's a fucking dog, nobody has this kind of psychosexual fixation on having a perfect picture of a living creature unless deep down they want to fuck it.

>>4451584
You are a really nasty person that is probably too scared to open your heart to anyone or anything truly. Sad and gross. My dog has been there for me through some extremely difficult times and has helped me become a better person in so many ways. You're just showing me how fucking sad and ugly you are.

>>4451572
You'd be very surprised

>>4451585
It's a dog. I can't open my heart to my dogs. They're fucking retarded little goobers... they're dogs! Your dog hasn't done any of that shit you have psychosis, you are insane!

>>4451584
>>4451578
This is projection. I'm not discounting the possibility of zoophilia, but probably for one of the other dogs. The way he photographs the german shepherd has more furbaby overtones and no way is anyone attracted to that.

Now, if you were talking about huskyfag, his style was definitely more suggestive. Or maybe his dog just gives off constant bedroom eyes and has large and visible junk for no reason.

>>4451579
damaged, underexposed, hazy, overscanned (stop overscanning, 9500px is too much for this shit), awkward wrist angle, unevenly lit, hard to see. Try using a smaller camera, or a second person.

>>4451588
getting closet homo homophobe vibes off ur posts mate
t. notdoghair

>>4451589
Idiotic critique, but I appreciate it for the laughs.

you people really never get tired of arguing about nothing

>>4451592
anything to not post photos or practice or learn

>>4451589
>furbaby overtones
but that's zoophilia in the same sense that people who constantly take pictures of babies but never actually fuck babies are still pedophiles
>look I have millions of pictures of this baby on my computer for normal reasons okay

>>4451594
Oh no no no Anne Geddes sisters how do we respond?

>>4451589
Even if your critique is really stupid I do appreciate that you can see the dog pictures I take for what they are. It's a ziatype, so it will innately be slightly hazy, the "damage" is because you brush the emulsion and I think it adds to the image, the awkward and dark hand also adds the image imo.

I like the idea that it almost looks like my hand is dead and weighed down by the egg. The ugly and awkward hand adds to the image.

It was printed on matte paper, and when you put light on it the whole image almost glows. Not hard to see at all.

Uneven lighting is so subtle it does not matter and is just nitpicking, but I guess it is sort of fair.

>>4451590
Yep and maybe porn addiction.

>>4451592
The never get tired of talking about me also!

>>4451572
I’ve been intermittently here for 20 years already. What’s another 25.

>>4451591
It's a dark, hazy, and indistinct photo of a broken looking wrist next to some eggs.

Try an easier camera or having another person with a less stiff hand appear in the photo. And please stop uploading 9500px when there is not 9500px of detail there. The only details that are 1px wide are the hairs, dusts, and scratches. The smallest details on the film itself are dozens of pixels wide. The jpeg artifacts are smaller than the details.

>>4451594
You're either a closet zoophile or one of those autistic incel /pol/ freaks that thinks pet ownership is "emotional zoophilia" because people would rather be friends with cats than with you lol. Maybe both. Chandler's law: Every incel is some closeted combination of gay, trans, pedo, and zoo.

>>4451597
>it adds to the image
Ex post facto artistic meaning is a cope. Large format photography is best done with a second person.

>>4451599
>ou're either a closet zoophile or one of those autistic incel /pol/ freaks that thinks pet ownership is "emotional zoophilia" because people would rather be friends with cats than with you lol
Brother I have two dogs. You can't be friends with a cat or a dog. They like you because their brains are wired to associate positive experiences with affection, so they like anybody who pets them and gives them food and treats. They have no complex thoughts, they are not your friend. Why do you medium and large format fuckers always have zero actual human friends. Seek psychiatric help.

>>4451599
You are simply proving me correct, which I really appreciate. Thanks for that. You probably have no frame of reference for what an illuminated print looks like lol.

>>4451600
Yeah a second person would have definitely made my life easier, but I did not have that luxury. I actually took the image with the idea that the egg was weighing my hand down. It just turned out better than I had hoped.

>>4451602
>people can't be friends with cats or dogs!
>seek mental help!

>>4451602
Soulless autist confirmed. You think your angst and overanlysis means you have a soul and probably think of yourself as "aryan" but it actually means you're using the LLM glued onto your ape cortex to compensate for not having a divine spark. Fuckin' cats contain more of the pleuroma than "its-just-chemicals" tards who are one depressive episode away from thinking humans are also "just wired to do that".

Even in strict neurological terms, you're wrong about animals being strictly pavlovian. There are reports of complex learning and planning behaviors from crocs, and dogs and even yes, mice, were confirmed to actually have complex thoughts years ago. In a purely material world an animal can still be a more genuine friend than a pseud who has cut their own soul out and felt good about it because they wrote "logic" on the knife. Humans can be even more a friend, but also, i'd save my cat from floodwaters before i'd save the local BLM protestors.

>>4451603
>it needs to be illuminated!
You suck at scanning.

>>4451607
I know I do and I do not give a shit! You suck at critique, have poor taste, and zero frame of reference for actual prints.

>>4451607
but he has to use the highest resolution scanner he has. he can't backlight the print and put two softboxes overhead and use his DSLR, it wouldn't be pixel peepy enough!

>>4451609
the dust and dog hairs give character to his scans, you fool

>>4451609
Dont care enough about it, really, and I don't even own two softboxes.

>>4451607
You should tell me what I did well with that picture/print. You know a balanced critique adds a lot of honesty to it, and makes it seem like you arent just another obsessed troll with an overinflated ego.
I know there's good aspects to that image and print.

>>4451612
>and I don't even own two softboxes.
why do you even own cameras then

>>4451612
>spends $8k on lf and mf gear
>aspires to studio shit
>does not own $300 of basic bitch lighting
annie leibovitz taped table cloths to beach umbrellas to save a shekel and invented the photek softlighter
and then there’s this goy

>>4451614
Lighting makes pictures inauthentic. True Aryans do not use the Jewish invention of the light bulb.

>>4451614
Dumbass I have umbrellas, a giant octobox, a mola rayo beauty, novatron 1000 with 3 strobes, a speedotron 4803 with 4 strobes, and reflectors for all of them.

I used continuous light for that egg shot because it was easier to hit my f45 target with the setup I had going on at the time.

The setup I used to take that egg shot only cost me around 2500-3k. 2000 for the 8x10 camera + accessories, 800 for the macro lens, and 150 for the 200W LED light, and the eggs? Priceless.

For the egg hand shot I taped a piece of translucent blotter paper from the light to the front standard to create the very soft light.

>>4451614
And yes that is an electronic shutter for my view camera. It is an incredibly cool piece of kit. It has film plane light metering, vibrationless shutter, automatic aperature, it closes the shutter automatically when you put your film in, and can go up to 1/500!

>>4451617
>>4451618
All of this to take mediocre pictures of eggs. The germanic brain is diseased, this is hitlerian levels of artistic incompetence. The pure artistic merit of the judean and anglo in their OCD style obsessive attention to detail and making interesting art which makes people question their assumptions is nowhere reflected in this autistic germanic monstrosity's pictures of eggs. The true German ideal, the pursuit of technical perfection completely lacking soul. Art without an artist, the creation of a golem. Shalom goy, at least you're contributing to the economy.

>>4451619
You just don't get it

>>4451619
Lol that's a hella funny post, bro. I'm suprised you couldn't see the purposeful meaning behind that egg hand photo. I think it has a lovely aesthetic to it as well.

Look another picture that I created with intentional meaning to it. Also has a very nice aesthetic to it, and because I made albumen prints of it there is even deeper symbolism present in the final print. Can you see it?

Please ignore the dark blotches. It is from a wet negative going on a lightbox to take a phone picture really quickly.

>>4451619
A jew has never made anything beautiful and neither has doghair

To bring race into this is absurd but now that you have, a jew has never made anything beautiful. Doghairs stuff is what jews make when they try not to be subversive, hypersexual, and obscene. Jews have never had any culture at all. They just purchase it from others to resell it for a profit. Their sacred temple wall is a roman basement they bought as part of a tourism scam ffs.

>>4451622
Someone said that my 4x5 dog portraits are beautiful and I fully agree with him. You have been proven incorrect with great ease. Ha! Ha!

>>4451622
>subversive, hypersexual, and obscene
aka beautiful

>>4451624
>different hominid confirmed

>>4451617
The irony is that you don’t even seem to realize that’s obsessively documenting your gear and your shoots like this is proving the other anons right that you’re increasingly gear obsessed. Who does BTS of their snapshit “just a test” shoots?

>>4451627
The irony is that you do not have any context as to why I posted my dope ass setup.
I use 8x10 to make contact prints. This is not gearfagging. It is using the tools necessary to produce the prints I want. Sorry if that hurts you. Being an anti gearfag fag is equally as retarded, but at least the gearfafs are having fun using the cameras they want instead of crying about how other photographers should stop using the cameras they enjoy using.

What does bts even mean?

>>4451627
Behind the scenes? I think it is a cool setup and I wanted to share it with the film fags. Ive taken a handful of shots using that exact setup. You just sound like some weirdly obsessed photography hater. Why are you even here?

>>4451612
>I don't care but I show everyone and then get mad when its pointed out its a 9500px blur covered in hair
Lol.

>You should tell me what I did well with that picture/print
The sad thing is there isn't much. As here, and there >>4451621 the aesthetics feel more slapped together. There is always something unbalanced and off with object placement, perspective, and shadow direction. There's no visual flow. It's like "i have the concept and a cool camera, just put something in front of it, close enough"

>>4451629
It is gearfagging. Contact prints are not anything special. It's a miniscule resolution increase if you're competent with a nice enlarger. Miniscule. Not worth throwing away every other aspect of the image if 8x10 saps so much effort you can't get anything else right. it's pixelpeeper autism.
>Being an anti gearfag fag is equally as retarded, but at least the gearfafs are having fun
You get mad so easily it says you didn't want to be just a gearfag.

>>4451619
>durr i hate white people! i hate white people!
Are you actually this stupid or is this a nazi agitprop falseflag

>>4451631
>My opinions mean you're TERRIBLE! I have never seen a contact print in my life, but I know you are WRONG for doing them!
You are actually so stupid it is hilarious. I enjoy alternative processes that require contact printing, DUH. They also produce better looking prints, and I enjoy the workflow more. Worth it for me, doesn't mean you have to do it. Insane you have to ego to tell someone else they shouldn't be using the camera they want to use. Disgusting, honestly.

The still life has clear and obvious flow to the image. It goes from the bottom upwards in a triangular way towards the right upper third. This was intentional and the blocks of wood also add to this. The chicken elements are supposed to feel somewhat confined within the wooden blocks. It was my intent to do that, and it further adds to the meaning I created in the image.
The more stupid shit you post the more I know you are the one that legitimately sucks at photography. I only think Im average, but I know you SUCK. No photo needed! Thanks!

The egg hand picture also has a clear flow to it from the... uneven lighting! The bottom of the picture is darker and moves up towards the light and the hay at the bottom also gives it flow! The eye is immediately drawn to the brightest egg in the picture, the one in my hand, and then my crushed hand afterwards and the other eggs and hay that create a context for the whole scene. Try to be a little smarter with your critiques. Yeah?

Both the egg hand picture and the still life are well exposed, they have the lighting I wanted, they're in focus, framed well. Nothing wrong with the execution of them at all. I was able to make excellent albumen prints with the still life, which requires very specific exposure and contrast.

Why are you so obsessed and so so determined to just sound as stupid as possible?

>itt geartranny just can’t stop taking the bait
This board is fucking grim.

>>4451638
I will defend my work and make the retards look retarded. It is good fun.

Using 8x10 to contact print is not gearfagging either.

>>4451636
I have seen contact prints in real life. They're not that impressive or that much better than a well made enlargement or a digital print.

>I fucked over any chance I had at producing a well timed, well composed photo by putting all my effort into an ULF camera I can barely use, because I can't use an enlarger
Good thing too because your ego seems to preclude any aesthetic sense. You lack self critique. You think everything you do is great.

>>4451640
You are just dead set on showing me how impressively stupid you are, huh?

>>4451639
you're making yourself look retarded
>its just for contract prints
>*spends 30 min with a flatbed to post 7515x9500 blurry dust and scratches*

>>4451579
Hello, retard. I am very sorry I forgot to take egg pictures. I will attempt to take some.

>>4451641
Indeed you are. You have a lot of ego to struggle to surpass photography students.

>>4451642
It takes like 5 minutes on the flatbed. I see nothing wrong with scanning at a resolution that helps me learn what I'm doing right and wrong. You are just so desperate to nitpick and make yourself look as stupid as possible.

You said my print was hazy, you said I just want to count hairs on my scan, and now you're saying I'm gearfagging because I scan at a high resolution. I dont give a fuck about my scans I scan everything at 2000dpi and convert to 4mb in lightroom. There is nothing wrong with that at all.

>>4451646
You can't critique yourself at all can you

>>4451644
I constantly say I am average, I constantly say there are better photographers on p. I post photos asking for help all the time. That does not mean I cannot defend my work from some obsessed freak that doesn't even own a camera.

>>4451644
Explain to me in detail why that is betrer than my still life. It's a cool shot, but it doesn't really have anything deeper than egg and feather.

>>4451643
You are forgiven and very well. I look forward to seeing your work.

>>4451647
Go look at my 8x10 posts in fgt, king retard.

>>4451647
Go look in the pet photography thread.

>>4451648
I'm starting to feel like hitlerian incompetence describes you well because for all hitler's pursuit of formalism and for all the talent of the artists he looked up to, the perspective in his paintings was always slightly off.

That's what it really is. Light, shadow, and perspective in your egg photos is just slightly off. It's like when amateurs shoot flambient and there are weird shadows that don't belong there.

https://www.worldfoodphotographyawards.com/what-makes-an-egg-cellent-photograph/

Yeah these are all awesome, and most of them are way better than my egg pics in certain ways. Very different vibe, and no black and white egg photos. The selection is quite playful and light hearted, while my still life and egg hand are darker and more serious.

>>4451661
Your description/opinion is remarkably vague, nearly meaningless and just astonishingly stupid, but you are entitled to it

>>4451662
It's really, really like you're a newbie with a 50mm lens who just doesn't notice the subtle perspective distortion. The perspective is always, always just a little off.

Perhaps all the view camera movements are confusing you. Shoot with a camera that does not have moving standards and you might un-degenerate.

The hand egg photo is just lifeless

>>4451664
>Uh I'm gonna need "fucked up perspective" in milimeters chief
How about you go submit these to a real life photographer for critique

>>4451262
This really depends on the raw editor you use. Capture One has that pleasing grain like noise. Darktable and Photolab have that ugly early dslr noise rendering IMO. That's the biggest reason I use capture one honestly. Haven't tried lightroom in over a decade so not sure if it has pretty noise rendering.

>>4451665
Again more laughably stupid criticism. My camera is perfectly parallel to the stage in the hand shot, and I always level my standards. The phone pic adds some distortion to the negatives when I take them, so maybe that's what you're seeing.

>STOP PRACTICING!
Shut up ultra retard.

>real photographer
I would love to and I think it's hilarious you admit you are just an obsessed guy who doesnt own a camera. Major major blunder.

>>4451670
Your narcissism is grating.

>>4451671
Your stupidity is entertaining.

>>4451670
you have been "practicing" large format photography for over a year and you have been consistently getting worse at it while consistently buying more gear, and amplifying this by putting no care whatsoever into your scans (which are all that most people see).

you are now at a level where your off the cuff 5dIII snaps look and feel better than anything you do on film and yet you are convinced you are a superior artist with perfect technique who fills everything with incomprehensible meaning and that everyone who disagrees is "laughably stupid" and "extremely cringe".

if you don't like getting shit talked, stop producing shit.

>>4451674
>cope
>lies
>stupidity

Nice job. You made me laugh.

>>4451674
Forgot to mention that you cannot read either.

Kek

>>4451648
>Explain to me in detail why that is betrer than my still life
The contrast of the egg's texture and color compliment the texture and color of the egg. The feather bends naturally towards the top right third of the picture, drawing the eye along its curve. The egg gently touches the feather, bending its edge.

Your "photography" is just modern art. There's no attempt to achieve artistic merit or visual appeal. Rather it's about "meaning" that NOBODY gives a FUCK about
WRITE A BOOK YOU PRETENTIOUS HACK, PHOTOGRAPHY IS NOT ABOUT ESOTERIC MEANING IN A SHITTY PICTURE

Meet the dogfags!
>doghair: i am a really good photographer and not a gearfag *really bad photos, really good gear*
>huskyfag: this camera has shitty autofocus, absolutely substandard *perfectly focused pics*
>corgifag: people should just learn instead of buying fancy new cameras *gets ZF out of purse*

eggfucker
>literally hitler incarnate, waiting to do the second holocaust while he shoves eggs up his ass

>>4451681
>seethes uncontrollably
Looool. You almost had it there, dummy.

The meaning is so obvious in my still life it's actually crazy you can't see it. Very telling.

Try putting your little cope spiral on my egg hand pic lmao.

Why do the obsessed freaks constantly make up lies?

>>4451682
>people should just learn instead of buying fancy new cameras
How awful

>some people like doing things I don't!
How awful

>>4451690
Funny how it comes from the guy who bought the fanciest, newest cameras tho

>>4451688
nobody cares about your "i'm 14 and this is so cool" message about death

>>4451692
You mean the guy that still uses and advocates for using older camera all the time?

>>4451497
>Apple could completely destroy whats left of the camera industry if they wanted to.
lol
>zero whatsoever third party lenses or flashes
>camera won't even power on unless it's connected to apple (tm) product via WiFi in has mobile reception
>64gb internal storage (expandable to 1tb for an extra $1100)
>CF, SD cards? no, our cloud storage is only 39.99 per month (we can't have those because waterproofing okay?)
>isn't even waterproof
>user removable batteries? lol no
Got a giggle out of me, good day to you saar!

>>4451701
Pajeets can’t afford Apple, I’ll never understand the meme of them being Applefags lol.

>>4451693
LOL. Another beautifully stupid thing to say. Im honored you provide me with such great comedy!

You can ask me for a hint if you want, big dummy.

>>4451714
take your bipolar medication
the litihum hungers for your stomach juices

>>4451695
I mean the guy who's dangerous generic
>How could you feel limited by this
>just learn to use the tech
>who cares if its not the best, you can still take some good photos eventually
>*picks up hasselblad, leica, zf, and sony a9 and walks away to go shooting*
Talk about being dishonest

We all know, there's a misery point between two forms of nirvana. In cameras, that is the "shit tech" zone between an all manual film camera, and cameras of a high calibre like the sony a7iii and nikon d500 that simply get the fuck out of your way as much as film cameras were.

>>4451717
>projection

Ill accept that as your concession. ;) Thanks for the fun today bb.

>>4451719
everyone learns it eventually

your first camera is never your last nor should it be. realizing why a shit camera is shit it's absolutely fun zapping because you KNOW exactly which shots you are passing up, why, and the smallness of the dollar amount of the upgrade minus selling your old shit on facebook

>>4451719
>Talk about being dishonest
Yes, that is a very dishonest summary of me

>>4451737
Part of learning, is learning what gear you like, not learning how to deal with gear you hate. If it were any other way, we wouldn't see "expert gearfags" telling everyone to stick with micro four thirds despite using high end cameras.

>>4451738
>even more dishonesty

>>4451738
Trvth nvke.

>>4451261
I kind of get it, but zoomers have this weird pride about not knowing anything