Thread 4453308

But I hate the photography community.
Everyone judges anything they can think of, even if it`s irrelevant:
-Gear used
-Settings
-Edits
-Etc

Good photos posted in a group or forum either get ignored or heavily criticized, specially if good gear is used (jealously maybe?)

Bad photos get praised instead of being criticized.

Why everyone has to be such an specialist in such a relatively easy craft. Yes, photography is easy. Anyone can learn semi-pro level in 6 months or even less.

>>4453308 (OP)
Cute bird

>>4453308 (OP)
why do you even do photography if you are this insecure about it?
just ignore the fags and any remotely homosexual opinion
there is genuine critique to be had, but alas everyone is morally superior online
>Bad photos get praised instead of being criticized.
opinion discarded. eye of the beholder, or something

>>4453315
Thanks, he stole my Doritos bag. If you zoom in he`s eating it.

>>4453317
I`m not insecure. I`m doing this because I personally enjoy the aspects of it, and I don`t mind doing it alone.
But honestly, it`s interesting to discuss about our interests with someone who also likes it, sometimes. But photography is different, everyone wants to show everyone how superior their gear is or how they can make good stuff with outdated gear on purpose.
It appears to be competition, like wth.

>>4453323
alright, here are my two cents
people tend into gearfagging because they are insecure and because of incessant consumerism
basically the same thing that happened self esteem after years of social media poisoning
its been shown time and time again that gear only matters to the extent that you enjoy using it and it suits your "style" of photography
any camera is capable of good photos
the gearfag cannot accept that someone can take a better picture with a €10 thrift store fixed-lens camera from the 1960s than they can with the latest €5k mirrorless system

In any male dominated hobby, there is a subset of people who consider them "the REAL fans" and they are anti-consumerist and minimalist. These are by and large the most hostile, stuck up, snobbish, narcissistic, insecure and shitty people in any hobby and they basically always start this fight when the "normies" (men who do not have aspergers) want to upgrade their gear to just have an easier time instead of hyperfocusing on working around technological limitations. This is because they have aspergers, and they need to be "the realest" to compensate for how they are still virgins. This doesn't happen in female hobbies because the female autism rate is basically zero and women can always get laid.

With electric guitar, there are people who insist anything beyond a squier and an orange crush 20 is CONSOOMER WASTE! and you don't need more to "still play good music".
On the other hand, more sensible people really don't see the problem with buying a mexican fender or a half decent tube amp or at least a boss katana. It does sound and feel a bit different - possibly even better if you learn to milk it.

With cars, there are people who insist anything faster and fancier than a miata is for SHIT DRIVERS! POSERS! because they are REAL car enthusiasts who "focus on cornering on the toe-gay" (read: break speed limits and kill pedestrians going around blind corners). Total tryhards that mostly hurt themselves and others.
On the other hand, more sensible people really don't see the problem with just cruising in a nice V8 coupe with some passing power or having fun with a harley instead of pretending to be valentino rossi on a scooter.

And here we are with cameras, and well, here's one now >>4453337
"You can still take great photos" but they totally ignore the wants and needs of people who are not autistic tryhards. In fact, they consider not being an autistic tryhard a sin. God forbid someone just want to do something, instead of being the best with dated tech.

>>4453343
you dont need autofocus and dr to shoot handheld and take photos of your kids and dogs running you fucking normie i am a real photographer and a real artist who deserves nice gear more than you. i actually focus on the craft and learned how to use a camera instead of just going from point A to point B. my knowledge of exposure is perfect. i always carry a tripod. my technique is flawless. i am a real photographer. if your camera has a PASM dial you are just a gearfag.

*underexposed rando shot from behind on a film camera/fujifilm camera/leica.jpg*

>>4453308 (OP)
Go to photography school OP. It's way better.
Gear fags drop out in their first year as soon as they realize they can't buy their way into good photography.
There's still gearfagging - photographers are always going to like talking about gear - but the context changes a lot, and shifts towards lenses and aesthetic results (a lot of love for vintage lenses, for example, kind of annoying when people discover the Helios 44-2 for the first time desu) and in the context of how it works with someone's own photography, rather than shitting on you because your camera has 0.3 stops less dynamic range and 3ms slower shutter readout.
But the gearfags drop out. People that remain are people who are into photography for the photography, not the gear.
None of this applies to the video side which remains gearfaggoty as fuck.

>>4453343
skill issue learn to use a camera

you just arent a real photographer. you're a snapshitter. real photographers dont need whatever feature you consoomed.

>>4453345
In art school if you dare want a camera with better autofocus, you still get some prick with a fujifilm saying "YOU CAN STILL TAKE GREAT PHOTOS..." even though the instructor themselves has an A1 for dynamic portraiture, sports, wildlife, and lifestyle shooting

>>4453343
>>4453344
you are free to disregard my blogpost on the premise that it was underexposed and shot on camera system X and scanned with scanner system Y, or film Z
if you enjoy a hobby, why should you even care about the faggot opinion on people online?

>>4453343
gearfag cope
You're blatantly inverting what actually happens in order to play out as the valiant defender of "better gear" in your head.
Admit it. More expensive gear hasn't made you a better photographer.

>>4453348
>even though the instructor themselves has an A1
They do it because of gearfags like you who wouldn't take them seriously if they didn't use a flagship.

>>4453343
That's an in-depth explanation right here

>>4453344
Gear matters, but in your case it seems to compensate for your lack of creativity.

>>4453345
Yeah, studying by myself reading books has been great lately. Also trial and error.

>>4453349
Makes sense. But I engage to share knowledge, or ask something legit about techniques but in return I get some general ass advice and perfectionist critique from someone who takes actual bad photos.

>>4453348
As far as I saw, instructors/professors themselves seldom had Sony cameras except on the Video side, where Sony dominated.
Typically they fell into two categories:
1) Active professionals usually in some sort of commercial photography and were making big bucks. They had Z8's and R5's. Some of them blatantly said they chose these cameras because their clients expected it, and told us not to buy these cameras unless we are either loaded or can write it off on taxes.
2) Coming from the Fine Art side (some of whom were very successful, others were starving artist stereotype) or retired commercial. They almost all had DSLRs with peeling rubber they've glued back on multiple times. A lot of D810s, D850s, and 5D iii's and iv's.

>>4453352
It's because they're loaded and want to take a photo of a bird instead of impressing their fellow aspies with their button pressing skills.

>>4453351
>I'm a REAL photographer and...
It's not about being "a better photographer" and setting out to "make le art". It's about normal people who are not autists just wanting to get from point A to point B with a small amount of luxury, and autistics like you acting like its the greatest sin.

Read it again. You are literally THE annoying car guy.
>V6 camry? i guess you aren't a good driver. buying a nice car like that never made anyone a better driver. i can out-corner you.

>>4453355
>but in your case it seems to compensate for your lack of creativity.
Not all photography has to be creative. In fact, most of it shouldn't be. Photography is a luxury hobby. Taking better photos than a phone or 110 pocket camera.

You just use the vague idea of "gearfags" to try and boost your ego since "being an artist" wasn't enough to fully replace losing your V card. You also have to "be a real ____" and use more opaque, obscure, and primitive equipment to showcase what you believe is an impressive and desirable skill and feel like you are better than and set apart from others.

It's something autistic men, and only men, do. You will never see women act like you. If a woman sees another woman buy a nicer camera because she just wants to take a better photo than her phone without the bullshit, she doesn't really care.

>>4453359
if you are doing photography for anything other than coping with being a virgin or being a loser why even do photography? just use your phone

>>4453351
>pff, you just want your tourist snaps to look nicer. better gear didn't make you a better photographer. now i, i am a real photographer who makes art.
who the fuck cares
photography isn't art

>>4453358
normies aren't buying $3,000+ cameras unless they're loaded. Autistic gearfags are.
Normies are buying R6ii/Z7ii's at most, and usually they're buying something cheaper, unless they can write it off on their taxes.
And then when you blow up your photo on your 7lb gaming laptop to 400% and talk about the pixels they'll shrug and say "hey anon thats cool, your camera's really nice," and then take their print from their Z50 home to give to their girlfriend and not think about you or your gear until they see you again next week.
I've seen this happen time and time again at photog school lol.

>>4453361
>photography isn't art
lol you're trying to justify buying top end camera in order to document in the greatest detail possible, with soulless pictures, photos of your autistic obsession aren't you?
Either that or you misread Ansel Adams and his "Straight Photography." It's a common misconception. His opposition to the pictorialists and other contemporaries in photography wasn't against the idea of photography as an art and only see it as a form of documentation or what not, nah, he totally saw photography as an art. His philosophy of photography was rather that photography shouldn't try to emulate other mediums of art, but should be explored to exploit its own characteristics as an artistic medium.

>>4453362
I don't advocate for buying $3000 cameras either. There really is a point where gear is objectively stupid. GFX100, Hasselblad, Z8/Z9 and R5/1/3/6II slinging hobbyists, for example. What the fuck are you doing then? Yeah I consider the R6II an overkill camera. It's basically a canon A9II. Perhaps in the future, it will be a <$1500 bargain.

If cameras were motorcycles, "you can still go fast on a 125cc, a faster bike wont make you a better rider" is about as dumb and ignorant of real world, normal person use as "you're not really riding until you can handle a GSXR1000". Just for narcissistic autist reasons instead of narcissistic consumerist reasons

>and when you blow up your photo
The nicest thing about having detail to blow up with digital cameras at least is that details that would be literally absent on a 20mp/24mp camera are there on a 42-50mp camera (like an affordable sony a7rii or canon 5ds), and remain present even at smaller print sizes like 8x10 and even 4x6. And if that detail isn't a big deal, they can crop and get free zoom range out of primes and compact kit zooms. This is nice advice for hobbyists.

But some people are autistic and think you only need 8mp and to always get it right in camera like "a real photographer".

>>4453357
>artists use DSLRs
>working photographers use whatever impresses clients
Color me surprised, lol. Some spergs will be shocked at this.

>>4453364
>lol you're trying to justify buying top end camera in order to document in the greatest detail possible, with soulless pictures, photos of your autistic obsession aren't you?
you are the autist here. no one even brought up top end cameras. just better cameras than micro four thirds and used up fujishit.

nicer cameras are nicer. maybe a shitty micro four thirds is still better than a phone when you go out all on your own with a tripod but what about just living life? you don't understand just living life. you are literally the annoying car guy/motorcycle guy who only cares about racing and has never casually cruised and only gone fast to pass a slow driver. you lack soul and personal enjoyment. it's all about signaling to you.

the "you dont need more" and "you need the best" guy are two sides of the same coin. and they are always autistic or insecure men. always.

>>4453365
>you can still go fast on a 125cc, a faster bike wont make you a better rider
if you enjoy riding a 125cc and it suits the rides you take, why would you need something else?

>>4453368
But also why would you get salty if someone said, plainly, that a 125cc isn't good enough for them?
>Just learn to ride better
>Carry more speed through corners
>You can still go fast on a slow bike
>Post chicken strips before you consoom fag
That's 4chan, the autistic male perspective, just the impoverished version of the hayabusa squid. It's still about insecurity and status.

>>4453351
I can confidently say that faster cameras with stabilization make me a better photographer

>>4453359
Kek, I use an average gear to get from point A to B getting results.
If you don't wanna think while taking a photo, why bother buying a camera? Just raise your hand and press the phone button pal.

>>4453360
This

>>4453361
Also true, but it doesn't have to be noring either. Think of a mom making a video, vs something more cinematic. Both create memories, not art.

>>4453362
Gear makes a difference for people who likes to compare the minimal details. Honestly, any aps-c photo will look decent, even if compared to fool frame ones with professional grade lenses.
In real life no one gives a damn about what you use or if your photo has 10% more or less quality, even professionally.

I could totally work with unreliable gear as it doesn't limit the purpose of taking a picture in the first place, which is freezing memories. I wouldn't because of other factors like comfort and ease of use, and it has nothing to do with minor details like DR and color depth difference.
Even lenses are a meme desu, depth of field became overused long ago and you can do portraits with f/4 zooms and get competitive results.
Even for sports indoors, just get an average camera and raise your ISO.
If you can't work with an f/4 zoom, it's skill issue.

>>4453308 (OP)
Personally I don't care about any critique, if it's valid, it's valid, if it isn't, it isn't. The bigger problem is that the photography community is mostly main-character syndrome redditors or boomers who have been doing it for 45 years and never learned anything during that time. Unlike the fat redditors who call ad-hominem a fallacy, it is actually true and good to ignore the opinions of people who are obviously retarded.

>>4453373
nooo u have to practice manual focus and get a perfect feel for your cameras shutter delay and use a tripod. heccin consoomer. skill issue. how dare you use your time that has already been converted into money to take those photos instead of using up even more time to practice using old junk.

>>4453374
>"This"d a parody post intended to look stupid
That says it all

And of course you're a back of heads street snapper. Why are they all the exact same? These people are basically NPCs.

>>4453377
because autistic people lack theory of mind and think everything they do is right

someone who only takes photos of buildings and backs of heads for instagram cant comprehend caring if trees are blurry wormy shit when they make a photo their imac's wallpaper because they don't do that. autistic people can not imagine being other people or imagine that what other people do is a valid preference.

>>4453367
>>4453371
Except your argument isn't equivalent to 125 vs 1000. What you do is act like you can't go fast in a mint 2007 ZX10R and that if you give the slow 2007 ZX10R guy a 2022 model he'll suddenly be fast because the new one replaced the according to you obsolete needle rev counter with a screen. It's pure consoomer retardation.

>>4453365
>>4453367
And no one's saying don't get a mid-range camera if you can afford it and want it.
What we did is complain about people who will shit on you if your EXIF data does have a mid-range camera or other camera that doesn't appease autists, about people who shit on you because you didn't want to afford a mid-range camera and wanted to stick with a 20-24MP DSLR you bought used for $200, despite the merits of your photography.
You're the autist that came in here acting like better camera = better photography, absolutely.

>>4453381
It's more like
>I want traction control
>SKILL ISSUE SKILL ISSUE SKILL ISSUE LEARN TO RIDE
>I don't care I want traction control. I'm getting the 500cc twin.
>3 months later
>normie with 500cc twin: hasn't crashed
>autist with 125cc babysport: i broke my collarbone but i'm really developing my racing skills. just 1cm of chicken strip to go. :')
but instead of going to the hospital you have blurry photos or just no photos. but hey, you're a loner. you dont have friends or family to photograph, so most of the things that gear matters for are just totally absent from your life, and you're autistic, so you literally can't imagine it being any other way.

>>4453384
Did I ever say better camera = better photography?

No, I said photography is infested with autistic men.
Autistic men fit into two types of cringe virgin
The minimalist anti-consumer purist, "skill issue" guy who loathes every upgrade even if it's clearly just for luxury and sanity (micro four turds, fujislugs, dslr shills)
And the maximalist hyper-consumerist nerd, who knows all the specs and buys the absolute best ones (cannot pos r flagship fans, niggon z8 consoomers, snoy 61mp snapshitters, people who own a newer medium format digital but not studio space)

>>4453386
Except the features the newer camera added are more comparable to Bluetooth connectivity than to traction control. You don't ride, you don't drive and you likely don't photograph either. Your arguments are all outsider tier.

The fact is spending money on nicer equipment no matter what the hobby is just makes what you're doing easier while also feeling nicer. As you get older and hopefully make more money fiddling with shitty shit just get less appealing. A lot of you guys probably haven't experienced something that just works extremely well out of the box and makes the process easier.

>>4453387
DSLRs aren't inferior, and some MFT cameras aren't either. You like to pretend mirrorless is some technological breakthrough when all they are is a DSLR stuck in live view.

>>4453389
I'd compare something like 100% autofocus point coverage and live exposure preview to traction control. A guarantee at what was once difficult.

And it really pisses off autistic men when normies, especially women, get guarantees at what the autistic males used to practice and feel set apart/above others over practicing. It basically robs you of your self esteem when a teenage girl with a z50ii can pick up a camera and instantly take the kind of photos it took you hours of practicing pre-focusing, timing, etc and learning the tendencies of your camera's metering mode (or just using the spot setting) and memorizing base ISOs.

>>4453371
if you NEED more than 125cc to drive the same 50km/h road then you are retarded consumercattle
the same goes for photography
if your largest prints are A4, then you don't NEED 100 megapixels
to the extent it matters i can say that buying a camera i enjoy using made me enjoy photography more and i imagine i got better because of it
i don't really care if you use the x2d or an 8mp digishit, or even a kodak brownie
sure it would be more impressive if you achieve good pictures with the brownie, but in the end it doesn't matter
>>4453391
for some of us the fiddling and the process is what makes photography fun rather than a chore

>>4453387
And yet you came into this thread and spent most of your time here shitting on people for saying nothing more than you can take good photos on less-good gear.
>>4453366
The most telling thing for me was that accomplished artists tended to have more in common, the fact that their cameras were falling apart from use, more-so than the cost bracket of their camera.
Sorry, you poor D810 on your third shutter. We're not done with you yet.

>>4453391
A flagship Sony is both spending a good amount and a miserable experience, especially out of the box. The only way anyone could fool themselves into thinking it's some godmachine is by having never tried anything actually good before.

>>4453396
>"cattle"
Incel language. You're just proving me right. Autistic men are cancer. If you have balls and autism there should be camps for people like you.

A normal, sane person who is not an insecure autistic male will want more than 125cc
But also think 1000cc is stupid

Can you logic and reason your way into having enough empathy to understand why normal people are like this, aspie man? Why they don't want to use the shittiest thing and status signal with the "skill" they develop to cope with it? You can't lol you're an autistic male.

>mentions sony out of nowhere just to seethe
this is why I will never respond to trip fags

>>4453395
DSLRs are great at following moving targets, especially Canons. The EF mount is why they became the de facto standard in sports. You've never used a DSLR or used one with poor AF, and it shows.

>>4453398
This is a post only an autistic male could make
>Dont you plebs know how miserable using an apple product is... the nirvana of a self compiled linux install is far superior.

>>4453396
yeah and to some of us fiddling is a waste of time that stops us from actually doing the main activity. There just no reason to fight over this. Go buy a dirty D40x id you want to do a bunch of extra work

>>4453396
>if you NEED more than 125cc to drive the same 50km/h road then you are retarded consumercattle
Nailed it.

>>4453401
DSLRs are ok at following moving targets, within this tiny area of the frame here.

Why buy a big ugly 5d iv with a hard to trust meter and "learn it" like a machine fetishizing autistic male? Why? Just buy a fujifilm xm5 it does it better with less bullshit.

>>4453404
>right wing incel agrees with the other incel and their incelspeak
Pottery.

>A girl on her newer 500cc twin blows past you in traffic
>"b-but i can carry more speed though corners and dont SNEED traction control ;_; fucking roasties being consoomer goy cattle sois"

>>4453402
Sony cameras are closer to building Arch, lol. If you don't change most of the default settings they are even worse than usual, my dear green skin connoisseur.

>>4453373
For video, of course.
Photo is much easier and can be done with vintage cameras for a reason.

>>4453375
True.

>>4453376
There's a difference between decent gear and overkill. Who in the world would need a Sony αII?

>>4453377
Generic response from a lazy person without opinion

Why is everyone here talking about autists?
Blame the softwares that enable a 400% zoom so you can count the pixels one by one. Focusing a photo is also autism according to /p.
Knowing the basics of gear is also autist, don't you dare watching youtube reviews.
Using trial and error to improve yourself is also autism. You shouldn't focus too much in a craft, just be shit at it forever.

>>4453403
to an autistic male, the fiddling and learning the finer points of a specific machine is the main activity. if cameras were simple tools anyone could pick up and already know how to use, they would no longer be able to substitute photography for having sex and friends.

you never see autistic men getting all aspie over pencils because they literally can't, there's nothing techie to learn and feel smug over when non-autistic people have better things to do.

>>4453410
>Just be shit at it forever
Something users of shitty old DSLRs, micro four thirds, etc don't realize is that a 14 year old girl can pick up a sony a7iii in p mode and instantly take better photos than most people here.

>>4453412
Pointing and shooting a souless picture has nothing to do with gear.
Mentioning semi-auto mode to measure skill doesn't make sense, since M mode is so easy to figure out and I still use Av for comfort.

More yapping about autists kek.

>>4453415
You're an aspie lol

Girls can just point an a7iii at their friends standing in front of something and take a more important photo more worth looking at than every random snapshit of some building corner/back of head you have ever taken with your supremely autistic metering skills
>b-but that would just be a soulless snapshit... no one cares about my art...
It's always a man that's like this.

Women are just better photographers because they don't care about gear, and not caring about gear in the real world works like this
>Buy a shitty $100 camera
>realize it sucks but you like taking pictures
>buy a nice camera like a fuji xt4 or sony a7iii

>>4453406
>big ugly 5d iv
The real reason for your vitriolic hatred of DSLRs, you're a fashionista not a photographer.
>with a hard to trust meter
lol, you just suck
>and "learn it" like a machine fetishizing autistic male? Why?
What you learn by seeing the light and metering applies to all photography and makes you better at it and able to expand your horizons without needing the WYSIWYG EVF crutch (which even limits the DR you can capture if you trust it without knowing how to meter)
>Just buy a fujifilm xm5 it does it better with less bullshit.
It's one of the worst new cameras that money can buy, lol. You're deluding yourself if you think it'll produce better results than the 5D4.

>>4453410
>For video, of course.
>Photo is much easier and can be done with vintage cameras for a reason.
completely disagree. There's just a tier of photos you can't take if your camera is really slow. Film Leica street photography that's blurry, crooked, and barely in focus looks like shit

>>4453417
Your argument doesn't make sense because you used the word "better" and the type you people you're refering to don't want to be better. In fact gear is irrelevant if you're taking a worse picture. Man, your argument doesn't make any sense, try harder.

Gearfag detected.

>>4453412
>to an autistic male, the fiddling and learning the finer points of a specific machine is the main activity.
you have my pity

>>4453418
>You're a fashionista not a photographer
What's with aspies and hating fashion? Is it because normal people like it?

>You suck because I mastered the blade!
Caring is for nerds.
>You-you need to learn the technical..
Nerd.
>Fuji is BAD!
Nerd, aspie, and incel. I bet you're an antisemite and racist too.

>>4453398
It's been fun watching as the photography community has been turning against Sony now that they haven't had a mainstream release in a while, so Youtubers can't shill spec-centric thinking in photography and autistic redditors can't spec-fag all day over their new purchase.
There are still autistic hold outs that dominate threads as they're perma-online, but it's been like 10 years of nothing but Sony fanboyism in most online photography discussions.
>>4453400
Sony fanboys represent like 90% of gearfagging.
>>4453406
DSLR light meters are way more reliable than judging exposure based on the screen. (Not that mirrorless light meters are less reliable, but then DSLR light meters aren't either).
>>4453412
anon.... autists do go aspie over pencils and paint brushes. It's the same exact shit you see in the photography community, the exact same attitudes.
>NOOOOO you can't make a good painting with that brush, the bristles are half a grade too soft because only Brand X has a rational grading system!
>Nooooo how dare you use pencils that cost half the price of mine! The chemical composition of your pencil's graphite are clearly inferior and is 5% more susceptible to oil from your fingers on the paper! Don't you care about the quality of your drawings?

>>4453403
gearfagging goes both ways, if you enjoy your hobby then it doesnt matter at all
you dont need all the fancy extra features, you want them because it makes things easier
i dont give a singular fuck about what you use, if it brings you joy to use a €5k toy then good for you but you dont NEED a €5k toy to take a good photo
this is something normalfaggots cannot comprehend, someone enjoying the same thing you are but for a different reason
OP unintentionally proved himself to be 100% correct about online communities
>>4453412
>you never see autistic men getting all aspie over pencils
oh you sweet summer child

>>4453420
Skill issue. If you want details, then yeah.

>>4453421
>You used the word better, but you think an auto mode snap of a girl in front of the eiffel tower is better than my perfectly exposed trees, corners, and backs of heads. Curious
An auto everything mode snap of a girl in front of the eiffel tower is better than your perfectly exposed autismography of ETTR building corners and ISO 32 huskies.

>>4453308 (OP)
Thats a great shot of the cheeky bird

>>4453427
Just plain stupid, shut the fuck up doctor of /p.

>>4453308 (OP)
Serious question, how can you and I help change the community? I apologise for our retarded brethren

>>4453430
On average people who don't know or care about camera technology or how to toggle a focus mode take better photos than turbospergs who polish their skill issues but not their f8 and being there issues. No matter how perfect you become at using your crappy camera, somewhere in the world, a normal person who doesnt know or care just bought the camera with the best auto mode and took awesome photos in paris and venice with their fujifilm x100vi.

>>4453433
You give too many details, autism is hitting fr.
Gearfag conosseur.

>>4453433
and this matters because...?

>>4453423
Actually the only things you got right are the ones you bet on, kek.
I don't hate fashion, in fact its one of the photography genres I respect and practice. What I can't stand is retards trying to put down a camera for supossedly technical reasons when it's superior to the one they're suggesting, and then later admitting the looks of the camera is what they cared about. You're talking about the camera as a prop, not as a camera. And it's not even a good prop. All Fuji models are hopelessly aspirational, they vaguely resemble the thing the buyer actually wants to purchase but can't afford or justify. They're derivative and inauthentic, the Zimmer Automobile of cameras.

>>4453434
>no u
Literal 14 year old girls are taking amazing photos with their sony and fuji cameras in auto mode while you autists are discussing the finer points of spot metering the system zones and drawing "logical reasonable purchasing rules" for how good photos have to be before upgrading gear lol

>>4453429
Thanks, the EF 135 f/2L makes magic.

>>4453432
p/ cannot be changed and sadly most people either. Just don`t be too serious when you use forums, there`s stupid people and trolls everywhere.

>>4453439
Pressing the same button over and over. I'm not even discussing rn, just making you waste your time typing shit that your head is full of.

>Professional /p yapper.

>>4453438
>bla bla bla if you were a real car guy...
Chads and stacies take better photos with the fuji x100 than you will ever take no matter how good you get at using your DSLR.

While you were mastering the spot meter and discussing the charts, they bought a square hood because its cute

This is how real photography works.
https://www.fujirumors.com/annie-leibovitz-price-harry-are-x100-shooters-and-why-limit-your-possibilities-x100st-increases-your-freedom/

>>4453442
https://www.fujirumors.com/celebrity-curiosity-x-shooter-beyonce-x100s-jane-goodall-x20-and-ara-guler-x-t1-fuji-toy-capsule-cameras/
the best photographers have the worst gear, from a techie standpoint
>cant even change the lens!

the worst photographers are experts at maximizing the image quality of the canon 5diii and selecting the ideal lenses

>>4453426
it's literally not a skill issue. There are things you can't do with old manual cameras

>>4453449
you're not thinking like a nerd

you can do those things manually, and then tell other people how good you are at using ancient junk and aren't a "consoomer cattle".

>>4453443
Oh yeah, Beyonce, always looked up to her photography /s
You are just a fashion victim.

>>4453454
You know beyonce's name
Beyonce doesn't know yours

Think about that, if you're still human enough to get it, incel.

>>4453454
gb2r

>>4453449
Blurry, crooked and barely in focus with a Leica absolutely means you're either too stupid to operate a camera (skill issue) or it's broken/deteriorated.

>>4453458
>Skill issue. Real photographers use a tripod below the 1/2nLog*EV/Flen(equivalence) rule.
Snore.

Or, just buy an x100vi... it has autofocus and stabilization.

>>4453455
>You know beyonce's name
Not because of her photography, simp.

>>4453449
At the same level, no it's impossible.

>>4453465
Just push XX and don't have Parkinson's, it's that simple.
As for crooked and barely in focus, more ineptitude.

I just wish some nigga here actually WOULD critique my fucking photos, so I'd know what to improve as a total beginner, instead of nobody replying to anything on here.

>>4453420
>There's just a tier of photos you can't take if your camera is really slow.
ok, name that tier. is it sports? what are you referring to exactly, enough with the vague generalities that gives you outs to move your goalposts.

>>4453482
From my personal POV it seems pretty great although not certain what the main subject is, is it the post, the bench or the road or the trees, maybe try some more shots from different positions to highlight specific elements

>>4453489
my goal posts have never moved. I gave you and example of leica street photography. On a better camera they wouldn't cope about their blurry snapshits actually being art

>>4453469
Based.

>>4453492
snapshitters being shit doesn't make the equipment incapable. less efficient i will grant you, but certainly not impossible as you suggest. and i agree with you that ascribing yourself some kind of superiority or arrogance because you can wrangle the older equipment is stupid. but it's not impossible, perhaps it's just my autism kicking in but those are two different things.

>>4453491
I guess the bench. When I took the photo, i didn't really think of what the main subject is. Just that I wanted the post, the bench, and the light hitting the forest between them to be the main eye draw. Does there have to be one MAIN subject in a photo? Genuinely asking. This one has shitty resolution because I lost the origianl.

>>4453482
It makes me wander between the sign and the bench, perhaps crushing the shadows a bit.
Was that the best framing you could get there?

>>4453500
Well it was at the time. I was hiking with a friend, so I didn't have all the time to find a better framing. There probably was, but that's the shot I took.

>>4453502
Well what was your intention with the shot? Does it make you reminisce that day or you just wanted to do something creative?
Taking photos in a hurry rarely leads to something geat.

>>4453496
you can improve reaction time and prediction but ultimately the photo you want to take can be very fleeting. The camera slowing you down reduces the chances you can get it

>>4453482
stop taking photos of rocks and tree trunks

>>4453534
>tree trunks
Worked for Chris Marker :^)

>>4453597
forgot to attach pic

>>4453482
Mark in Red: The Subject, and arrows throughout indicating the path you anticipate the eye to take
Mark and Blue: The general compositional elements

>>4453497
There doesn't necessarily have to be an obvious main subject of the photo, but there should be compositional "anchors" which most often are subjects and secondary subjects. Both of your photos lack that.

>>4453482
>>4453612
Here's an example using my own image.
In blue I've overlayed a golden ratio -- the photo can be said to generally follow a golden ratio type composition. Note the lady on the left acts as a "tail" to the golden spiral, the handrail acts as the tail going into the spiral, it follows up along her hand, is supported by the frame of the photo, and lands on her head.
Also, generally, there is a rule of thirds present -- the ladies' eyes and sun line up wit the general third line, the hands and railing on the bottom. Both ladies line up on the left and right thirds line respectively.
The handrail and the top of the window both help act as "leading lines", and with an opening geometry, suggest your eye to start on the left (where the tail of the golden spiral is) and to wander to the right.
Balance-wise, the large, black area of the left helps balance with the high contrast of the right.
Multiple compositional elements are supporting this photo.
The two ladies act as the subjects of the photo, even though it's more-so of a photo of the sunset. But the sun hardly acts as a part of the composition. The focus helps emphasize this compositionally. If I had just taken a photo of the sunset, it would've been really boring.
I anticipate one's eyes to start at the left lady's face, the high contrast and composition landing your eyes there first. They might dart to the left looking for details but return as there is little there. They will follow the handrail and golden spiral to the other lady's face where they land as a "resting point". They'll circulate back and forth between her, and the sun and buildings in the back, and even the details and highlights of the left lady's face, before finding their way back to the face of the right lady to rest.

It's not a very interesting photo overall (I'm not doxing myself lol), but I think it's a good example of composition at minimum and it is a photo people generally find pleasant I think for the composition.

>>4453482
Effortpostin
>technical
the focus is on the sign, leaving the bench and trees falling unpleasingly out of focus
would recommend stopping down and focusing farther so that everything is equally in focus or do the opposite and lean into selective dof
as is it just looks poorly focused
room to grow as far as sharpening/nr settings go, and the highlights are a bit overexposed
>creative
it almost looks like two separate scenes that were blended together
the path on the right leads right into the edge of the frame which makes it feel as if stuff is missing
the weightiness of the pole on the left side doesn't feel balanced with the bench + surrounding empty area
the bottom 3rd of the frame is relatively boring, if it doesn't add to the photo, take it out
provided some examples of crops that i think look a bit better
try taking bunch of shots at all kinds of different angles and play around with various crops to see what feels best

>>4453482
The first mistake here is the four thirds meme. Crop to 3:2 and most of it will be automatically more pleasant.

>>4453427
Lol the incels here ain't gonna like hearing the truth

>>4453427
Subject is king but it really depends. Most of those will be disposable snaps only valuable to them, at best as important as anon's pics. Some particularly beautiful and stylish girl posing at the right place with the photographer at the right place too, can be a striking pic. Chances are all the girls will take are snapshits that get posted to insta and soon forgotten though.

It's just 4chans photo community... every other community I've gotten into people are very nice usually supportive of my work. And at the end of the day, I do it for me, and I make little calanders at the end of the year for Xmas gifts for family and friends.

>>4454819
The most vocal people here actually hate photography.

>>4454819
It's not just 4chan but most photography communities online. They're all autistic as fuck.
IRL communities are usually way better. The autists and gearfags do find their way in but everyone treats them like >wow very interesting anon, you make a good point about exposure and vignetting, you're so smart. ANYWAY ....
It was really fun watching gearfags get frustrated and drop out first year of photography school because they couldn't comprehend anything beyond Photo 101, which primarily concerned itself with the basic technical aspects of photography like exposure. After that class they were fish out of water.
First week they're having a blast telling everyone why their cameras suck and why they all need to go out and buy the latest Sony camera, or an older Sony camera if they're poor (literally heard someone say this shit), and then watch as the rest of the semester as they're literally taking pictures of sticks and rocks and their pets with razor sharp focus every assignment, and the other students are becoming increasingly creative. And it only accelerated after Photo 101.
>>4454827
This is it. Their hobby is cameras, not photography.
>wow anon that looks like a nice camera, do you like taking pictures?
>why yes, I like taking pictures, so I can view them at 400% zoom and admire the way one pixel is distinct from the other pixels.
>oh thats neat anon . I bet you're a the creative and artistic type.
>creativity? art? YOU MISUNDERSTAND MERE HUMAN. Clearly your brain is not as advanced as mine, I dream of the day my kind successfully implement eugenics. Photography is the mere process of documenting. There is no meaning nor value beyond that.
>uh... uh... ok anon *takes 3 steps away*, so uh, nice to meet you anon, I have some errands I need to run, see you next time (omg that dude was weird).
Photography is literally one of the most attractive hobbies and anons around here be fucking it up for themselves.

>>4453308 (OP)
>I like photography
>But I hate the photography community.
Based. Same. Especially this shithole.

>>4454873
I don't understand how actual photography courses still exist, I just got an old dslr and watched YT videos and went on hikes taking pictures.

>>4455088
People like to do things with other people

>>4454873
>Their hobby is cameras, not photography.

>>4454873
No one has ever said any of this they just said your snoy/foolturd/foolji was shit compared to glorious full frame canon

>>4455332
Yep its the latest shit camera consoomer cope

They will cope endlessly when its pointed out real photographers (not washed up teachers) use good gear lol. Good gear is better. It saves time. It saves effort. It lessens the need to learn some shitty techno-gadget like some kind of computer geek gamer kid.

The best thing about the photography community is that actual photographers are mostly pretty chill and usually easy to avoid if you need to.

It's the twats that bloviate about gear and/or art that are the arseholes

>>4453343
>In any male dominated hobby
opinion immediately disregarded

There's a big difference between taking a photo with my old Canon 60D vs my recent R8 and anyone who claim otherwise is lying to themselves.
I agree that gears with a 1 or 2 generations difference don't matter that much but if they are 10 years apart it's as clear as day.
Can I take good photos with my $180 phone? Sure. Composition and lighting knowledge still matter quite a bit. But do I wish I had my R8 available instead? Also yes.

As a liberal woman, people who have a problem with expensive cameras make me feel unsafe. It is a deeply bigoted prejudice with roots in white chauvinism and fascist feudal systems where only the educated male lords had the right to even participate in the arts. We should be less like fascist europeans and beocme a more global and accepting culture where anyone can buy the newest sony and then share it with all their friends. Stop gatekeeping, listen to marginalized voices. Buying a sony a1 "he didnt need" could put a young urban POC onto the fast track to success if it turned out he had talent. Do anti-gear people really want poor black boys to fail? How racist of them. It could also be conceptualized as discriminatiom against gay males or jews because they tend to earn more money, and therefore achieve better representation in photography than white people who spent most of their money on wives, children, and loans.

It is henceforth proven that discriminating against or making microaggressions towards sony users and other users of nice cameras is racist, sexist, and even homophobic and antisemitic.

>>4460593
10/10

>>4460593
Checks all the boxes without tripping the Jannie and spam filters. Well done.