Thread 4452693

Here are my bad photos of a theme park. I only took a 20 year old digishit with me. Enjoy

A photo of the hotel is mandatory

>>4452694
soi out here

pixel peeping has been approved by the autism council
better than mft/10

content holds up
equal to or greater than winogrand and shore/10

vibe checks out
beats most film/10

>>4452730
>>4452731
thanks anon

>>4452732
These low light shots were crazy. Just tried to brace up against the railings

>>4452737
really beautiful sunset that day

>>4452739
alright that's enough of that shit. If anyone wants to the the SOOC version of anything I'll post it for you

>>4452720
Can you post the SOOC of this one?

Is this a Lumix DMC-FZ8?

So you're telling us the pictures you posted aren't SOOC? I thought you had a digishyt with you.

>>4452812
You can still edit sooc jpegs. Not as much potential but who cares.

>>4452803
yes
>>4452804
No it's an Olympus Camedia C7070
>>4452812
Yeah even 20 year old point and shoots can do RAW. I Shoot in RAW+jpeg cause the colors are just a little more alive when processed on the computer. I only do a simple light edit with them

it looks like theres a dark void entering your room

>>4452737
nice

>>4454407
thanks homie

there's a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 to sell for just 30€
Seller states that there's a slight gray marks if you photograph vertically
he uploaded a test image.
should i grab this ?

>>4457708
>Lumix DMC-LF1
Nah that's a boring generic point and shoot. Get something with a ccd like a coolpix s4 or a canon powershot G1-6. They're a little more money but they're more fun.

>>4452714
nice
>>4452703
soul

>>4452906
Very similar to mine, I've got the C-8080. Awesome work anon. Olympus made some great cameras. And I know the pain of trying to do any kind of even remotely low-light work with these things.
>>4452703
I have to know, was the diorama motorised? Do the trains actually ride around on the rollercoaster tracks?

>bad
>they're all pretty decent street photographs
anon please be kinder to yourself
man i looked through again
some of these are genuinely top tier work
great job dude

2007/10

Fun fact, I had four 190 octanes at that Fat Tuesday in my 20s and did the whole park absolutely schnockered, still have my FT cup

>>4457708
>>4457760
Update on the LF1
turns out the hair on the picture is way more visible at f5,6 f8
just opened it and removed that shit. Works perfectly now !!
>ccd / g1-6
nah, the only ccd i'd probably go for would be the canon s95 maybe...decent camera
just sold a g11 recently bc it's kinda slow...it's good if you're a slow photographer
Now to the LF1
>12mp, shoots raw/jpg 3:4
>remembers last focal length so when turned on it's automatically at 35mm f8 ready to bust a nut
>has a little digi VF with a button that turns off the lcd
will use it as my new glorious streetshitter pocky camera, wish me luck

These honestly just look like they're from a smartphone, there's not much of that typical digishit flaws in them that you'd see 20 years ago. Funnily enough you've bought a camera that is too good.

>>4471014
The lf1 is in that weird territory of pre 1” “large sensor” cameras that were made to compete with the canon S series, but were too late in time because the rx100, gx7, and cell phones were taking over. They’re fun because they provide manual controls and such but image quality wise the 1.7” ones were always cellphone at best in good light.

>>4471014
>>4471017
lf1 anon here...i didn't post any images here yet...
i bought it..saw that fat hair on sensor and dropped it
until today when i fixed it...
will take it out soon.

>>4452698
>Devag
I'd like to D her vag, if you know what I mean.

>>4464047
now I want some halbes hendl

>>4452734
sick