YCIAPOS - The Something Awful Forums

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > YCIAPOS

superior choices only
	yoshotography
	yosotography
	yostography
	yosography
	yosgraphy
	yosraphy

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

echinopsis posted:

for xmas i’ve gotten my son a 550d

it was $250 and it’s come with a tripod and that 18-something lens which is poo poo but he can borrow some of mine

what I love about this day and age is the low barrier of entry. like bloody says, can still take a great photo. biggest bummer is the lack of low light ability but still, he’s only 12, he’s so fortunate to have this kind of thing to play with

yps: at a beautiful cottage with gf for weekend but I have zero ability to take interesting photos lol. i would love a decent photographer to show me their workflow because it depresses me a bit how I can’t do something with this as beautiful as it is 😒

i need to think, how can I somehow put the viewer there and make them feel idk something

yah. i have the gear but not the skill to take good photos

# ¿ Dec 11, 2021 03:22

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 23, 2022 05:50

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

Sagebrush posted:

i think i made this point before, but it's funny to me how photographers are all about having the most perfect unaltered image from the camera, perfectly circular bokeh with a gaussian falloff, reduced dynamic range capture, zero flare, zero grain, no chromatic aberration or vignetting or pincushion or blown highlights or any other image-making artifact

and meanwhile cg artists are like gently caress yeah, give me all that poo poo, i want hexagon bokeh, donut bokeh, flare everywhere, halos and ghosts, tri-color chromatic aberration, ultra grainy, film scratches, motion blur, contrast blaster, micro depth of field, hunting for focus, just give me every poo poo thing that cameras do to gently caress up an image. because that makes my cg look realistic

related: i noticed that when doing 3d stuff and the image looks off somehow, my first instinct is to mess around with the lighting and do everything “in camera” with minimal processing

with photography my first instinct is “eh, i can probably fix that in post”

# ¿ Dec 14, 2021 06:48

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

sony seems to be the most popular here, and then nikon

# ¿ Dec 17, 2021 00:42

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

those new dji cameras with the gimbal built in have a lidar focus system that looks pretty neat

# ¿ Dec 17, 2021 00:48

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

https://youtu.be/CDwsaOPt8WM

this thing. cool how you can see the guys face show up on the right hand side in the top down lidar view

# ¿ Dec 17, 2021 00:51

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

Sagebrush posted:

it's neat, but what's the purported advantage of this over phase detection?

i dont really know but it looks neat. the only thing ive seen anyone say about it specifically is for video, it lets you see different potential focus points on a top down 2d view and drag on the touch screen to manually pull focus to exactly where you need it

# ¿ Dec 17, 2021 02:28

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

echinopsis posted:

what
has anyone at all even said they are a nikon noodler

i mean here, among irl people i know and what i see in the stores. not yospos

# ¿ Dec 17, 2021 03:49

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

Sagebrush posted:

here's a cool article i read about how smartphone photography works these days. there are far more computational techniques going on behind the scenes than i was aware of. obvious stuff like exposure bracketing and color correction, but also poo poo like focus bracketing, subpixel stacking, shutter coding, computational depth-mapping, ai convolution. it's nuts.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/9828658229/computational-photography-part-i-what-is-computational-photography

in essence, good smartphone cameras (iphones, google pixels) don't necessarily have better optical hardware than other phones. they take the same relatively crappy input that other phones capture (physics is physics) and do extensive computational image synthesis to make the output look great. most of the improvements in phone camera quality in the last few years are just from having enough ram and processor power to pull this off.

i wonder what would happen if you combined these techniques with a full-frame sensor and a big lens?

barely scratching the surface here, but these guys did something kinda like that. they did something vaguely similar to these techniques on an original iphone camera's pictures to "compare" that to a new iphone

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gXSLJfwfwk

# ¿ Jan 5, 2022 06:55

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

echinopsis posted:

what I want to generate is raw camera data and achieve everything camera end by taking a different picture

i want to play around with individual computes afterward

that article professor sagebrush posted up there talks about plenoptic cameras that basically use a bunch of microlenses behind the main lens to capture a "light field" instead of an image. kind of like taking the same photo from a bunch of slightly different angles at once, optically. he says given a light field you can calculate any possible individual image within that field, which allows you potentially to change the angle, focus, aperture, etc to a limited extent. these would be real optical changes as a post processing step, not just faking it with blur filters and crap

# ¿ Jan 5, 2022 08:22

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

maybe good enough for the blurry crap photos you take

# ¿ Jan 5, 2022 08:53

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

echinopsis posted:

ok that’s interesting. the use case I wonder about is lens on a the back of a phone.

and I always wondered how that lytro camera actually captured the info. very interesting

thanks for sharing

this stuff is interesting from a purely interest sake perspective. in real life i’m more interested in taking better photos so that one day people think i’m ok 😩

they won’t think youre ok until you get that fancy plenoptic camera

# ¿ Jan 6, 2022 01:05

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

the apple photos app has a skew adjustment op. sounds right up your alley

# ¿ Jan 6, 2022 06:36

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

do wedding photography

# ¿ Jan 14, 2022 05:35

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

echinopsis posted:

what can go wrong

if its crap, just pay for them to have the wedding again as insurance

# ¿ Jan 14, 2022 08:22

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

i like drugs, i should be a pharmacist

# ¿ Jan 14, 2022 16:00

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

echinopsis posted:

the way that values clip at the top of the range is where I kind of got inspired for the principle behind that led code of mine, but in a very hosed up way

I really like the idea of 3d luts because they should in theory be able to take the digital data, as long as it’s not clipped, and replicate the way film deals with highlights, including if it creates colour shifts. but if there are light bleeding effects in film which I believe there are, that’d require a bloom like filter which I am still in search for (a bloom filter that works with high dynamic range stills and has a shoulder not a threshold)

I enjoy the post shooting process as much as shooting so I shoot raw, straight to jpeg would take half my enjoyment away.

and whenever I take any raw image into photoshop or affinity photo it makes me “develop” it before using it so you can’t really play around with the high dynamic range, at least well maybe Im just too stupid to work out how to.

this sounds like what they call convolution in audio gear. is it the same thing?

# ¿ Jan 25, 2022 02:17

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

echinopsis posted:

hahaha

when I was using the 100mm I never had the sense that I was standing away from the person, we just weren’t close, but this is definitely speak-up territory.

i’ve got the loaned 85mm to compare it to at the moment, but if I discover I prefer the 85mm i’ll be gutted.: not wanting to face purchase regret i’ll probably just avoid this conclusion

it’ll come down to, are the potentially better shots worth the extra difficult it working with the lens? time
will tell.

and mates I am excited to play with the flash. I reckon I need a filter to yellow/orange up the light because my primarily intention is for outdoor and white flash with outdoor light apparently looks like poo poo and understandably too.

you know what you must do now. buy a medium format camera to go with your long lens

# ¿ Feb 3, 2022 02:49

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 23, 2022 05:50

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005

Jenny Agutter posted:

oh wow I am simply shocked they were illegally recording everything Americans do and say, what an unprecedented revelation

e: misunderstood thread, disregard

agreed

# ¿ Feb 12, 2022 15:36

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > YCIAPOS