foto up
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
Hi
These are all infrared btw. Prepare for occasional white.
>>2747497
isi I'm usually a fan of your stuff, but this is just awful
Vignette tbqh familique
>>2747500
Ok
>>2747507
This is nice
What's contrast
Fucking jellyfish senpaitachi
I'm unimpressed at everything else apart from this >>2747507 , the vignette is fucking tacky though . The rest is just babby's first DSLR shots. I expected more from you isi
>>2747516
The vignette is from the filter famillama
>>2747517
Don't particularly care how it got there, it's a negative aspect of these photos
>>2747527
Much as death is a potentially detrimental aspect of life.
Don't fear the imperfections. You live one m8.
>>2747538
How do you get this look?
>>2747518
Dat ass.
>Heavy vignetting and white borders on every snapshit
Wow, you're so fucking artsy isi
>>2747650
Thanks I try
>>2747692
got me
>>2747497
>Hi
Hello. How are you?
What sort of exposure times are you using with the IR filter?
>>2748001
2-10 seconds generally, depends a lot on the scene
>>2747499
how do I into infrared?
>>2748009
Get a camera with a sensor (or film) that is sensitive to infrared light. Then, put a filter on the front to block out all visible light (but allows IR through) and expose.
>>2748008
Do you bracket a lot or have you figured out the stops the filter reduces by? Or does the narrow frequency of light not make this possible?
>>2748013
I just eyeball it with bracketing, most of the time I get the middle file workable though. Depends on the sky really.
No idea how much stopping power it adds. A lot. Certainly not handholding anything with an f4 lens.
>>2747497
Hey. Most of your photos are really bland and uninteresting, even if we count them as ordinary snapshits. The only exceptions are:
>>2747507
but you ruined it with obnoxious vignette
>>2747867
because it's cold as fuck over here
>>2747868
because you divided it into three almost equal rectangles and thus made it interesting to look at.
By the way, why did you decide to put the rest here? It's not like you are new to photography, yet these shots look like aforementioned babby's first artsy snapshits.
>>2748019
She posted everything she took yesterday. Not out of the ordinary for her.
>>2748023
More keepers than I got.
>>2748023
Who's she? The cat's mother?
>>2748028
What cat?
>>2748049
It's something my mother used to say to me as a child if I referred to a woman as "she". It's rude apparently.
>>2748058
Sounds like internalized misogyny.
>>2748011
are there special cameras that have those sensors? And what kind of filter would I need for that?
>>2748065
what
>>2748080
Mumsy hated herself for being a woman.
>>2748065
I don't know what that means. We had to say "May I...?" not "Can I...?", is that the same thing?
>>2748084
No, Mumsy was very strong and independent but was just big on manners.
>>2748074
All digital cameras have sensors sensitive to near-infrared. Since this would make photos look unnatural they put IR-blocking filters over the sensors. The newer the camera, the better the filter. Generally speaking.
So, it's because the sensor only pics up what little NIR passes through that filter that you need the long exposure times. You need the NIR pass-filter on your lens to keep out visible light.
You may have trouble getting enough NIR light on your sensor without also getting too much visible spectrum light on it due to the effectiveness of modern NIR-blocking filters.
I think isi shoots a fairly new model of Fuji camera, though, so it's obviously still possible with at least those.
If you want to shoot handheld NIR you'll have to open the camera and remove the NIR-blocking filter. Or have a pro do it for you.
I bought a converted D70s on eBay years ago that had had the blocking filter replaced with a pass filter, so I don't even need the filter on the less. Can't say I put it to much use, though.
>>2748101
>I think isi shoots a fairly new model of Fuji camera, though, so it's obviously still possible with at least those.
Fuji cameras seem to be naturally great for IR style shooting because they have very weak IR filters on them.
>>2748101
>I think isi shoots a fairly new model of Fuji camera, though, so it's obviously still possible with at least those.
Fujis are overly sensitive to IR compared to most digital cameras. Very weak blocking filter.
Most likely why they meter differently as well.
>>2748074
>>2748101
The Nikon D810a and a much older Canon (can't remember which one offhand) have the IR filter removed for astrophotography. Better for recording hydrogen alpha emissions from some nebulae. Expensive though.
Always wanted to have a go at IR. I suppose the narrowband would eliminate CA but any good coloured filter would too. Focusing would be an issue, some older lenses had guides for IR film.
>>2748125
You can dial in the autofocus on a converted camera and use that most of the time in my experience.
There should be a screw or knob inside the mirror housing for it.
Or, you know, just focus normally and then turn the lens a little bit closer to infinity.
>>2747499
Isi, any chance you could post some of the IR photos before the BW conversion? I've seen a few before on flicker but a before/after would be interesting. Did the jellyfish do any thing interesting (not literally).
>>2748136
>Or, you know, just focus normally and then turn the lens a little bit closer to infinity.
That makes sense; longer wavelength.
>>2748143
>Or, you know, just focus normally and then turn the lens a little bit closer to infinity.
>That makes sense; longer wavelength.
Just thought about it wouldn't it be the other way round?
>>2748193
First good photo in thread. Nice!
>>2748195
Isi's best pic. Bravo!
>>2748195
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 1274 Image Height 866 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:01:19 23:52:59 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1274 Image Height 866
>>2748195
That bird looks a little short.
>>2747518
This is an absolutely classic facebook FirstnameLastnamePhotography shot.
>>2748255
Except it's IR and self aware
>>2748268
You realise that the real isi's tripcode isn't secure, right?
>>2748282
Either way, the trip codes aren't the same, in the same thread. She even posted again later with the right one.
>>2748283
no its isi. im sure isi will explain.
Look, it's me, isi.
>>2748268
Or I just changed it up to have fun in my own thread?
>>2748205
Holy shit! Send a copy of this to the Inverness Gazette.
>>2747501
>Vignette tbqh familique
>>2747517
>The vignette is from the filter famillama
>>2747646
>Uneven vignette ruins it
>>2747650
>Heavy vignetting
>>2748019
>obnoxious vignette
What lens were you using?
I read in a very old "Sky and Telescope" magazine review of UHC light pollution filters that they don't work very well with wide angle lenses. Something to do with the angle of incidence and the coatings. A photo of a street scene looked quite funky especially at the edges.
Do you think a slightly longer focal length lens would help?
>>2748316
>Finally takes some good shots and gets nice compliments
>Turns out not real isi
>G-guys it is actually me tho, I just changed my tripcode to have fun because that's totally what people do randomly
>>2748405
why would someone post actually okay photos in an isi thread as isi? it makes no sense.
>>2748409
To fuck with her and show that theres more than just personal bias in her threads, her photos objectively suck donkey balls.
>>2747868
I know exactly where this is and have gone by it 1000 times. Its cool to see someone else in the same area take pics of shit I would never see as being interesting.
Also when the fuck did you take this if you where on the beach the same day as me Im gonna be spooped
>>2748414
Are you a poor negro?
Apparently apart from isi and her inbred family in their colonial house, they are the only people to inhabit the area.
>>2748418
people can go to places where they don't live anon
>>2748195
the only decent thing in this thread
christ what a mess some of these shots are
>>2748424
isi doesn't though.
>>2748512
Isi's family owns multiple homes tho. ;)
>>2748576
Yet all of isi's photos look as though they were taken within the same square kilometer of woodland or beach.
>>2748576
I'm glad mummy and daddy are rich.
>>2748595
That's because you're ignorant and make assumptions.
The "woodland" stuff and the beach are a couple hunnid miles away from one another.
Stay cooped.
>>2748604
Side note, I rarely geotag, but...
:^)
>>2748606
snapshit/10
>>2748606
I'm evious of the mile around your home, that's such a big mile
>>2748606
all those locations, and still no good pictures
>>2748621
you're just being mean spirited about really normal things now, come on
>>2748621
I'm sorry I'm from a country with states the size of other countries and an associated lack of foreign wanderlust or culturally appropative desires to exoticize the 'other.'
I prefer showing what's familiar to me in a certain light instead. Exoticism kills exoticity. That's why you can't find a traveling photo job despite your traveled history, pseudonymous.
>>2748621
America is about twice the size of all of Europe, so I'm not sure why leaving the country would mean anything, other than ticking some random box on a survey that's only important to you. We have swamps, beaches, deserts, mountains, plains, forests, cliffs, huge cities, small towns, and pretty much every ethnicity on the planet. It's very obvious to all observers that your "critique" is based entirely on your personal feelings about the person taking the photos, and it's pretty funny.
>>2748595
Only on /p/ would a consistent style be derided as a bad thing.
>>2748661
Someone's salty.
Going back to SCAD this year btw. Got a grant from the state arts council.
:)
>>2748669
does online scad count as scad?
>>2748661
>Consistently bad is still bad, senpai.
Feel free to go into depth about why they're bad, without expressing your own opinion or bias, with detail and specific examples. Assess the photos based on their own goals and how they went about achieving those goals.
Be sure not to say things like "But look at this one, it's just obviously shit" since that's just your worthless unsupported opinion. Also, feel free to post photos elsewhere on the board!
>>2748671
Yes?
>not understanding the benefit of a classroom with regional variance.
>>2748606
Probably your best shot in this thread.
>>2748725
If your parents were rich and had a whole floor of a house vacant you'd prolly choose to live at home too.
HCB did.
>>2748746
If my parents were rich i'd use my privilege to get a good education and have my own job and place.
Living with parents is for povvo's and dumb dumbs.
