how do you get this effect?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 1200 dpi Vertical Resolution 1200 dpi Image Created 2016:03:15 14:18:50 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 1000
>>2848324
which effect specifically?
>>2848343
as in how do you take this kind of picture? what type of film/camera
>>2848324
Shoot film not megapickles
>>2848345
What "type of picture"? A photo of a girl? Literally any camera. What part of the image is throwing you off?
Print the image, then scan the print
>>2848351
>>2848348
>>2848349
this isn't a typical film effect, I want to know how to get the effect even if it involves shooting in film. I just need to know if it's a special kind of process/camera/lense that's used to achieve it
>>2848350
thanks, I'll try that out. can you explain what the rescanning of a print does to make it turn out like this?
>>284834u mean the vhs/lcd weird colour artefacts and the film effects ?
ur probably talking multiple masks in ps and some messing about with film and tape and amplifying the artefacts that appear in digital imaging.
>>2848360
>I want to know how to get the effect
What.
Fucking.
Effect.
>>2848324
good lighting
>>2848360
kinda looks like a film rescanned to me desu
>>2848364
looks like an entirely analogue effect to me brah
>>2848324
Poorly exposed Provia or Velvia scanned poorly on a V300, then printed on an inkjet printer and then scanned in again.
>>2848392
yeh i just didnt explain what i meant properly, i meant mess about creating the effects whatever they may be using tape and film, then amplify and apply them digitally.
https://magazine.the-impossible-project.com/fashion-on-film/
5 seconds on Google gives you the answer.
Jesus, /p/, are you even real?
>>2848373
the overall effect, from my experience this is not a standard picture straight out of a camera
Honestly it looks like a polaroid OP, maybe FP-100c or some other packfilm
>>2848408
Hahaha Impossible Project looks like FUCK.
Also, OP, enjoy your "more expensive than DMF" future.
>>2848408
thats not the answer to is it, u simpleton.
theres obviously more going on to achieve that look than just being a cringe bag and using film...
>>2848433
At the bottom of the article is
>pic related
Which is literally the entirety of how to get the affect.
>>2848434
cant find a singe image taken with that camera or that film which contains this shit.
>>2848440
They were scanned poorly. Those are Newton Rings, from where the film was touching the glass.
>>2848440
That's an scanning fault. Newton rings.
>>2848443
>>284844
interesting, thanks.
>>2848411
It's like asking a live orchestra of 100 "how do u get dis sound" without specifying what instrument you're even referring to.
>>2848516
I love you.
you managed to sum up the essence of all /p/ in one sentence.
>>2848615
pls go back to tumblr
>>2848516
Fucking succinct.
expired polaroid/instant
>>2848516
I guess OP is talking about the light halo/aura over the girl.
>>2848872
i keep hearing this "go back to tumblr" semi-meme and at some point it kinda started making some sort of sense. Even tho I had to really try very hard and make myself get into the shoes of a retard psycho.
So, now that I actually found a genuine one, please give your best shot at explaining what does it mean from your perspective.
Take your time for kek's sake.
>>2848392
You're are a special kind of hipster aren't you? Please kill yourself for calling it analogue you piece of shit.
>>2848324
dat banding tho
>>2850228
<3 <3 <3 P.L.U.R. <3 <3 <3
