A
Anonymous10/14/25, 07:42No.4474666/sqt/ --- Stupid Questions Thread
Snoybob Edition
Old thread autosaged. Dumb questions go here.
72
Replies
A
Anon10/14/25, 07:46No.4474667
Anyway, I've already got one.I want to stack some astro shots in sequator but I've run into a few things.
If I give sequator the RAWs it spits me out a TIFF, which Canon's DPP can't apply RAW corrections to. If I correct them first Sequator complains it works better with RAWs. What the fuck do I do, is there a way to brute force the corrections onto a TIFF?
Also because idk does a TIFF contain basically the same info as an interpolated RAW or am I losing out on something>?
A
Anon10/14/25, 18:49No.4474760
Asked in a different thread
Any reason to use picture profiles or anything similar to it on a sony camera if all I do is RAW shooting? Or should I ask, is it detrimental to use them?
A
Anon10/14/25, 19:05No.4474763
im retarded. everywhere i look about shutter speed, it's always a fraction. yet on the zf dial, its just numbers like 15, 8000 etc. is that meant to be 1/5?
A
Anon10/15/25, 03:43No.4474904
I just got into photography. I know zero and just wondering how to take (relatively) close up photos without getting a fisheye effect - currently sitting at my desk taking photos of my monitor and the top of the monitor appears to curve towards the edge of the photo area.
Is it just some inherent part of photos that they warp at the edges, or is there a setting I haven't gotten to yet that will compensate for that, or what?
I see that people suggest to move further away, then zoom in a bit to reduce it. Is that the only way to accommodate for it?
Got a Conan EOS 1500D (Rebel T7 in the US) if that matters.
A
Anon10/16/25, 21:02No.4475363
Should I avoid (whenever possible) shooting at the widest aperture even in low light?
I noticed several lens reviews mentioning the widest apertures being quite weak (blurrier, full of color fringing and vignetting). For instance for my Sigma 30mm 1.4, it's often recommended to start with f/2 (not much can be done about barrel distortion though it seems). Is this universal?
A
Anon10/17/25, 08:21No.4475459
I am a visual artist (le amawu gril drawer), would this help supplement my skills or have carryover? I am thinking of adding it as a cheap method of making myself seem more of an artsy type to appeal to art hoes, but I would do it anyway regardless since I've picked up an interest in it. I had social experiences under MDMA recently that made me think "Huh, maybe I'm more attractive than I think" and so I wanna double down on the performative aspects of artistry, but also expand my skillset.
A
Anon10/17/25, 10:16No.4475469
Why do boomers love an ultrawide field of view?
A
Anon10/17/25, 10:50No.4475474
why Nikon dslr images look so good compared to Nikon mirrorless? dslr have nicer colors and more pleasing sharpness, can an anon who used both dslr and mirrorless shed some light in this matter
A
Anon10/17/25, 11:00No.4475476
After doing a bit of post editing and whatnot I've noticed something.
What the fuck is the difference between boosting or lowering gamma in post, versus raising the ISO at the time? I've seen the photons to phaggots chart, I have a rough idea that boosting your camera's ISO at certain levels ends up cleaner than the alternative, but after you get past that area, is it basically the same thing? If your camera is completely invariant is the really anything to gain from ISO vs gamma adjustments? I feel like i'm missing something since you can't seriously tell me that shooting at ISO 100 then raising the gamma 6EVs worth is going to look the same as shooting at ISO 6400
A
Anon10/17/25, 11:25No.4475480
yup, the nikon (sony made lol) sensors are basically iso invariant. for example, on the zf/z6ii/z5ii and whatever else that uses the same sensor theres a small drop in read noise from 100 to around 640 because of the dual-gain setup. so using the cameras iso in that range can give you slightly cleaner shadows (as long as youre not clipping highlights ofc). after about 800 it doesnt really matter since its already in the higher conversion gain mode.
the difference in noise is tiny though, were talking a few electrons of read noise (8.3-5.2, whatever that means). just shoot the lowest iso that gives you a good exposure without killing your dynamic range either way
A
Anon10/18/25, 06:01No.4475706
what is dynamic range and what do people mean when they say a camera has good dynamic range? For a while I was mixing it up with hdr like on phones or tvs but now i have no idea wtf they mean
A
Anon10/20/25, 07:01No.4476208
So I was looking around and found a little Canon Powershot SX230 HS at a pawn shop for cheap, so I picked it up, and in looking up the prices on ebay, they go for $150-$200 for a near 15 year old point-and-shoot. I've picked up newer mirrorless bodies for cheaper than that.
Anyone know why these are going for so much? It seems unremarkable, but the going prices seem otherwise. The only thing I really notice about this compared to others is a better set of manual controls for a point-and-shoot.
A
Anon10/20/25, 09:36No.4476226
How long until we get an AI Learn AF-mode? Where you can either teach it live or select exposures you've taken where the focus is perfect to train the camera that that is the type of subject you want it to lock on to? Is this feasible? How detailed is their process in making the AF modes we have now like eye, pet-eye, bird, car, train?
A
Anon10/20/25, 16:39No.4476273
Is it even possible to take a good still life?
A
Anon10/20/25, 18:14No.4476287
I like to take photos from time to time. I basically have close to 0 knowledge in phototography, but somehow I manage to get, by sheer luck, some (in my opinion) decent photos.So, with these few exploitable pics that I took, I'd like to edit some of them with some software but I don't know why, every software that I tried so far showed me different results when I was just browsing the picturesSome of them just modify the brightness automatically, others make the photos totally unwatchable, with some horrible multicolored pixels, and in the end I have absolutelly no idea what my photos really looks like.I tried Rawtherapee (the worst, visually), Lightroom and darktableYou can see on the left I'm using Lightroom and on the right is the same photo using rawtherapeeSo which one if the closest to the picture I actually took ? I'll also post the picture in itself below this post
A
Anon10/21/25, 01:41No.4476369
I'm trying to get back to photography. I did some when I was in university, but never went deep. I bought some Canon 500D and a 50mm lens.
I picked it up recently to take photos for me, landscapes etc. But the camera is damaged now, the autofocus doesn't work anymore and the flash is broken. It still works in most situations (manually and in daylight) but it's whacked. I probably won't be able to fix it, because of the price and rarity of the pieces.
I have two questions:
>1. does the autofocus issue come from the camera or the lens?
How can I check?
>2. I lost the 18-55mm lens, what should I do? I thought about:
Buy the lens for 65$ or directly buy a new camera, a 4000D for 300$.
I also plan to use it to make a little bit of money on weekends, weddings or modeling.
A
Anon10/21/25, 06:12No.4476419
I’m tired of digging thru Sonys menu to select black and white.Is there a way to program a button on my a6400 for immediate black and white settings?