|
how do i take turtle pics
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2022 01:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 14:52 |
|
|
there's one right there. you can have it
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2022 01:46
|
|
|
i have not photographed many turtles. other than one my dog found in the grass in forida, just these two at the zoo  which are kinda meh, but i don't have easy turtle access that said they're not a particularly difficult subject imo. what aspect are you having trouble with?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2022 01:58
|
|
|
i figure it's the lighting humans love looking at faces, even animal faces, but that big ol' shell leaves the head in shadow if the turt is facing the wrong way maybe you could bring up the exposure on that area in post or something?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2022 02:07
|
|
|
 extremely ordinary
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2022 03:38
|
|
|
oops! all bokeh
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2022 03:49
|
|
|
   just some photos
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 09:51
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:
these are really nice echi protip: you basically give away that its for instagram by cropping to 1:1
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 12:15
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:
hell yeah, good pics
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 15:15
|
|
|
i think "1:1 => instagram" only works for people whose brains are poisoned by that app already, it doesn't look like square is being forced on the images or anything to me zuck already owns too much, im not giving that man his own special aspect ratio
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 15:19
|
|
|
Corla Plankun posted:i think "1:1 => instagram" only works for people whose brains are poisoned by that app already, it doesn't look like square is being forced on the images or anything to me oh i don't use it at all, i get sent a lot of other people's work and its an instant tell lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 15:21
|
|
|
I like square crops. if you're trying to min/max insta engagement you need to go 4:5
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 15:28
|
|
|
gimme all the pixels 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 15:51
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:
i like these, good work! i've found myself cropping to 1:1 sometimes as a challenge to take an otherwise uninteresting frame and to force myself to think about it in an unusual way. as an example,  i was walking around a pollinator garden with my 77mm wide open trying to paint with bokeh and wasn't paying especially close attention to viewfinder composition. i don't know that this is a great photo, but whatever garbage not-defocused-enough flower stalks were off to the sides originally, i'm happier with it as a square than as a 3:2. personally, i almost never post to instagram 1:1 because that's not how I see the world in camera. i also guess i should really start pulling back from there anyway since they bury photo posts now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 15:55
|
|
|
lol that's a pretty big beenurrwick posted:i'm happier with it as a square than as a 3:2. personally, i almost never post to instagram 1:1 because that's not how I see the world in camera. i think this is part of why i'm so wary of cropping actually. i never really thought about it before but yeah, i usually try to nail the composition in-camera. probably doesn't help that my sony pics are natively 3:2 but MFTs are 4:3 (pentax q as well). if it's not marginally fixable within the same frame boundaries i usually ditch the shot altogether e: to be fair though that does result in a lot of unused stuff and i'm a harsh critic for my own work. idk Beeftweeter fucked around with this message at 16:06 on Sep 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 16:03
|
|
|
it's some combination of having worked on film and having the advantage of the absolutely massive and bright pentax mx viewfinder to work in and then moving to digital in the 6.1 megapixel era, but i actively avoided making ANY crops to images for years. i didn't have the resolution or glass to support it at the very beginning of digital for me, and even with the k20's 14mp sensor, i still felt like cropping was just showing me the limitations of the sensor more than allowing me to correct for framing mistakes (or allowing me to make intentional choices about alternative framing). it wasn't until like six months ago, about seven years into my k-3, that i realized 1) i kinda don't care, it turns out, and 2) the glass and resolution both support what i do well enough to let me throw away framing information. i still find myself holding the shift key when running the crop rectangle because i like 3:2 as a starting place, but it doesn't have to be all of the original frame for me anymore. i'm also beginning to poke at in-camera jpeg stuff and wondering if there aren't situations where that would be Decidedly Good Enough. i wish the k-3 had more jpeg presets and it were easier to switch between them, but i don't know. it feels wrong, or like cheating, or something. but as i have started to actually want to understand the tool i've been using, its hard to resist the urge to let myself run a little more free with it. i do wish pentax's camera presets were in lightroom and didn't require me to learn their software to get at. maybe i'll buy the one package of them someone has tried to duplicate into existence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 16:40
|
|
|
I bought a AliExpress light box and my gf bought me a wind up toy for my birthday https://i.imgur.com/CZ5vOPP.mp4
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
i keep meaning to configure my camera to make smaller, shittier jpegs so its easier to sort through the raws before i copy them over right now the only thing i dont like about photography is that it takes like a half hour to sync my desktop with a day's shooting on my k-50
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 17:03
|
|
|
nurrwick posted:it's some combination of having worked on film and having the advantage of the absolutely massive and bright pentax mx viewfinder to work in and then moving to digital in the 6.1 megapixel era, but i actively avoided making ANY crops to images for years. i didn't have the resolution or glass to support it at the very beginning of digital for me, and even with the k20's 14mp sensor, i still felt like cropping was just showing me the limitations of the sensor more than allowing me to correct for framing mistakes (or allowing me to make intentional choices about alternative framing). it wasn't until like six months ago, about seven years into my k-3, that i realized 1) i kinda don't care, it turns out, and 2) the glass and resolution both support what i do well enough to let me throw away framing information. probably true, although with film it's kinda easy to crop in an enlarger. i started with a canon digital elph (the original) as my first digital cam, then basically used canon stuff of varying quality until i switched to mirrorless. for the q system pentax lets you export to DNG, which is obviously very well supported by adobe. it embeds color profiles and lens distortion info (plus stuff like stuck pixels etc.), so the sensor really punches above its weight there i think (12 MP, but 1/1.7") personally i wouldn't use the jpeg output on anything, though, but thats because i usually end up doing some tonemapping after stacking exposures, so jpeg would gently caress up the usable color info (plus add artifacting). ime it obliterates some detail also: most of the bodies i have will do some really awful noise reduction even if it's not needed at all, and you're basically going from being able to choose a LUT/palette/profile after the fact to being stuck with the one you chose at the time. then there's the ridiculous post-process sharpening they all seem to do. idk, your use cases might be entirely different or you just might not care about the above; it doesn't really matter so long as the result is good, imo. i've been impressed with a few things that were definitely just jpeg-only as output (like phones), but i usually recognize that's an essentially automatic process and people don't know how to do raw processing there, so it skews a bit jeez now i feel like i just try to squeeze every single usable goddamn thing out of my equipment lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
fins just casually dropped this in another thread and it slapsfins posted:worked for them for a decade. living the dream, no longer touching other peoples computers! look at the rhythm of the layers, the diversity of textures, jfc its really good
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 18:02
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:for the q system pentax lets you export to DNG, which is obviously very well supported by adobe. it embeds color profiles and lens distortion info (plus stuff like stuck pixels etc.), so the sensor really punches above its weight there i think (12 MP, but 1/1.7") because brainworms, but: it sounds like you shoot with a q and enjoy it. is it a recommendable system, with the understanding there will never be new lenses for it, and that it's got a few inherent limitations because of the sensor size? i have been disappointed with the output of the iphone 13's cameras and that's a big part of the reason i've moved back into the slr world, but there are a whole bunch of ~10 year old cameras that people really seem to enjoy as tools that filled the gap back then when all phone cameras were trash. the big-sensor qs are there, the mx-1 is there, even old ricoh GR models, but i don't know that i'd actually ever leave the house with intent to shoot in the kinds of environments where something like this would shine. i think i internalized a LOT of bullshit about what cameras and imaging are for just by latent exposure to the discussions on places like dpreview way back when, and i'm only just now starting to get to the point where i never should have read anyone else's opinions about the technical points of any given piece of gear. like... i get it, the movie mode on my k-3 sucks and if that had at all been important to me, it would have been helpful to read other people's thoughts. but these are the same people who these days proudly declare the pentax FA limited lenses to be relics of their time and no good because of purple fringing, and that's no-questions-asked about what you intend to do with them. at least i never bought into ken rockwell's brand of bullshit. "bad: made in korea" is a thing he wrote and posted in his review of the irix 150mm macro in 2019 (and it's still there), and he thinks foreground blur is a 100% forbidden technique.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 18:22
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:these are really nice echi lol you’re not wrong, but I only crop square if I think it works, i’ve got this image up on insta  and that’s almost cinematic ratio (lmao shut up) I’ve discovered I actually prefer square crop and generally use it unless the image looks better without
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 19:10
|
|
|
nurrwick posted:because brainworms, but: it sounds like you shoot with a q and enjoy it. is it a recommendable system, with the understanding there will never be new lenses for it, and that it's got a few inherent limitations because of the sensor size? i have been disappointed with the output of the iphone 13's cameras and that's a big part of the reason i've moved back into the slr world, but there are a whole bunch of ~10 year old cameras that people really seem to enjoy as tools that filled the gap back then when all phone cameras were trash. the big-sensor qs are there, the mx-1 is there, even old ricoh GR models, but i don't know that i'd actually ever leave the house with intent to shoot in the kinds of environments where something like this would shine. short version: no. lol long version: it's an excellent system for what it is, but you're still bound by those constraints. it's a really tiny sensor (its in fact the smallest digital interchangeable lens system) and body, and that's great, but to be blunt unless you really know how to process the poo poo out of images i imagine it would be too limited for most uses these days. a phone camera (while not interchangeable) will likely offer higher quality results with far less fuss. that's not to say you can't push the gently caress out of the q system if you want to, but be prepared to not go above iso 640, ever, and even then those results will be barely usable; in low light you basically need to bracket and stack. that said, if you can accept those limits, it's fun as poo poo. beyond the official lenses (which are seriously fantastic, i have the entire set) the sensor size makes lens converters for other systems into a funhouse, lol. most poo poo becomes a super long telephoto unless it's something like a c-mount lens, in which case it's basically focal length equivalent if you're looking for an older system to just gently caress around with that has a ton of lenses available and great camera bodies for cheap i can't stress how much i loving love MFT. some of the bodies aren't much bigger than my Q7, actually, and i've got probably 20 or so lenses; none were more than $700 (and thats from when it was still a "new" system, lenses are much cheaper these days). it's also pretty great even without bracketing. here's something i was just working on:  and from the weekend:  Beeftweeter fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Sep 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 19:11
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:lol oh wow dude that's gorgeous much improvement. very good
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 19:25
|
|
|
oh, i forgot to mention that MFT raws are basically like i described DNGs from the q system earlier: they automatically populate the camera's built in color profiles, embed lens info with distortion characteristics, etc. along with an asston of other metadata. it's just not wrapped in some adobe trash. this is true for panasonic or olympus, it doesn't matter - part of the spec
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 19:37
|
|
|
my iphone frustration comes from... i don't even know how to describe how this is disappointing to me. i've watched it happen to images after i open them, where apple's imaging algorithms finally finish a picture i took and all of the sudden a bird that should look like this crop from a video frame: turns into a picture that overall looks like this:  with the bird being interpreted to look like this absolute mess:  all of those should be clickable for more "detail" but i've been really disappointed overall in the cameras module on the iphone 13 pro max and the way apple's software insists on 'improving' the captures. idk maybe there's a way to defeat this in the stock camera app... but i've tried a couple of third party apps and they just are not fun to use and like... i guess i could write an automator or whatever script to open a different camera app but i'd rather just use a camera camera at this point, since it's clear to me there will never be an acceptable-to-me camera in a phone ever again, rip lumia 1020. e: all that's to say: this is why I find alternative hardware from a decade ago fascinating. echi, very nice snow mesa.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 19:40
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:oh, i forgot to mention that MFT raws are basically like i described DNGs from the q system earlier: they automatically populate the camera's built in color profiles, embed lens info with distortion characteristics, etc. along with an asston of other metadata. it's just not wrapped in some adobe trash. this is true for panasonic or olympus, it doesn't matter - part of the spec i use the native pentax raw format, pef. i should try futzing around with dng, i suppose... maybe the dng format out of it would save color profile. lens information does get embedded and is readable in lightroom, though i don't know if it is using the camera's corrections or applying its own. i assume the latter. clearly i'm not *unhappy* with what i can do with the native format or anything, i'm just very lazy and like the idea of having between 6 and 12 quick-click color profiles to ooh and ahh at before i go back to natural and do whatever i was going to do anyway. ughghhh artistic expression is hard work as penance for lovely whining in the last post and this wall of text, here's a picture i took a very long time ago of some cubes in a brutalist atrium 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 19:51
|
|
|
nurrwick posted:my iphone frustration comes from... i don't even know how to describe how this is disappointing to me. i've watched it happen to images after i open them, where apple's imaging algorithms finally finish a picture i took and all of the sudden a bird that should look like this crop from a video frame: it's due to the small sensor and lens size, you don't get much contrast hitting it using something the size of your actual thumb nail, lol. you might wanna try shooting in raw on your iphone (if you're not already); lightroom itself also has a camera that shoots raw and some other poo poo, like it does some neat hdr cloud processing (but it's clearly processed). on ios, for ease-of-use pixelmator photo (not pixelmator) is pretty good for editing stuff outside of lightroom or something, as is snapseed. i've also got a huawei mate 10 with leica lenses and the results are unquestionably better than iphone for me, plus that supports native dng as well nurrwick posted:i use the native pentax raw format, pef. i should try futzing around with dng, i suppose... maybe the dng format out of it would save color profile. lens information does get embedded and is readable in lightroom, though i don't know if it is using the camera's corrections or applying its own. i assume the latter. clearly i'm not *unhappy* with what i can do with the native format or anything, i'm just very lazy and like the idea of having between 6 and 12 quick-click color profiles to ooh and ahh at before i go back to natural and do whatever i was going to do anyway. yeah i'd give it a try, why not? i haven't used pef myself but a cursory search makes it sound like the old canon raw format (cr2 i think?). that would mean that yeah, lightroom would download camera and lens information: it's not actually embedded there, just the metadata for it is. with MFT you can literally see it disappear hot pixels when it first load a file and those are some neat cubes!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 20:03
|
|
|
   same set e: lol wow i really had some dirty lenses Beeftweeter fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Sep 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 20:05
|
|
|
are these poison? they kinda look like poison
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 21:14
|
|
|
PokeJoe posted:I bought a AliExpress light box and my gf bought me a wind up toy for my birthday you know the convo we were having about art recently? this is it
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 21:19
|
|
|
nurrwick posted:echi, very nice snow mesa. thankyou 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 21:31
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:you know the convo we were having about art recently? this is it lmao how in the hell did i miss that
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 22:11
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:jeez now i feel like i just try to squeeze every single usable goddamn thing out of my equipment lol this is an artistic decision, and perhaps explains a mentality behind people who are very pro sony, for very good reasons mind you for me, idk. I'm just always trying to do something different. I never want my camera to hold me back, but generally I am not using it to it's extents at all. its 30.3mp and my lens is sharp (more than one review I've read claims it's perhaps the sharpest lens they've ever used), so it tolerates cropping well, but I also end up often adding noise to soften the image, reducing the contrast, raising the blacks, and generally removing imfornatiopn I absolutely love photography in the way that there are so many different ways and expressions of the same scene. often I'll get people saying "ya should have done this or that", but often I've made purposeful decisions around things to make things look the way they do. sometimes later on I regret those decisions, sometimes not, but I generally try to be very open minded and approach each image with a sense of "how can I make this image appeal to me the most", which for me, doesn't mean squeezing every atom of light into the exposure. theres a lot of good photographers out there. millions of amazing ones. I am not one of them, and I don't aspire to me, you could spend a life time browsing incredible photos. I don't feel much of a need to be in that game. I just want to make squares that appeal to my lizard brain went out this morning with two photographers to take some sunrise shots of the cherry blossoms around town. both better photographers than me, and one of them is a extremely high quality landscape dude. absolutely knows his poo poo. but they were nice to me, even though I am like a deformed monkey respectively. what I am trying to say here is please hold on to your butts because stereotypical blossom photos are a coming. finding a way to do something different while doing something millions of people do every spring is challenging and ultimately I fail, but if the photo is nice and the colours are nice I am happy here's a sneak peak 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 22:43
|
|
|
yes a lot of words to excuse mediocre work 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 22:49
|
|
|
no thats really kinda pretty but a bit on the noisy side for my tastes. you're definitely improving really quickly man i'm happy for you i feel like you might be right on a few points there, too. believe it or not pretty much everything i've posted comes from some MFT body though  stacking raws to increase the available contrast and color works pretty well when you've got a sensor thats on the smaller side. heres one from my panasonic g85 as a 16-bit png (38 MB, watch yo clicks): https://ia601506.us.archive.org/9/items/1170158-hdr/_1170158-HDR.png open it up in an editor and play around with the curves or something for a minute. import it to lightroom and go loving nuts on that dehaze slider. blow out the shadows. brighten those clouds. it's fun Beeftweeter fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Sep 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 23:14
|
|
|
here it comes. cliches upon cliches. some were taken very early in the morning so do have some nice morning sun colours. over here we call it a "sunrise"     
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 23:23
|
|
|
Beeftweeter posted:no thats really kinda pretty but a bit on the noisy side for my tastes. so here's the same image with no fake noise on it. its the same, but different, and I A/B tested them and came to my own conclusion which I preferred. but I do appreciate your opinion 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 23:25
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:so here's the same image with no fake noise on it. its the same, but different, and I A/B tested them and came to my own conclusion which I preferred. but I do appreciate your opinion well with that sort of contrast i'd prefer a bit of noise to increase the spatial resolution, just not that much lol  something like that i think 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 23:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 14:52 |
|
|
echinopsis posted:here it comes. cliches upon cliches. some were taken very early in the morning so do have some nice morning sun colours. over here we call it a "sunrise" that's some drat fine work man idk why you'd be all sheepish about it (lol nz) i just have one point there, on the first one specifically. the luma curve looks like it got inverted towards the top end, making your highlights look like shadows (this kills the bokeh). i can try and do a quick fix if you don't really know what i mean
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2022 23:52
|
|