[–] 6 points 11 hours ago

Most of the colours shown I wouldn't really call blue or green tbh. But it's interesting that there's a threshold where something does become too green to be blue. I suspect this is also influenced by whatever screen people view this on

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 12 hours ago

    Yeah there's a whole spectrum, as someone else already commented. Don't worry, you're still just as asexual as someone like me :3.

    Even beyond that, there are of course more types of brains than any set of words can cover. I tried to word it with that in mind, because I don't really wanna make certain asexual or aromantic subgroups feel left out.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 9 points 1 day ago (6 children)

    As someone who's aromantic, asexual, and doesn't like kissing and sex etc: this seems about the same level as kissing on the mouth to me. Definitely less yuck than sex to my brain. Kinda funny seeing all these reactions

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 1 week ago (8 children)

    But voting doesn't counter the street action, it's not a zero sum game. At the very least people should vote for the right people, even if that's all they do. And if they wanna do more, like protest, then that's great because it's really needed. But in the end I'm of the opinion that you can't complain about how bad it is and then refuse to vote. If you vote and then your candidate is shit, you have a reason to complain. If you vote and it turns out they meddled with it, then you can complain. And obviously you can also complain if half of the country voted for some douchebag. But people who encourage not voting are actively lowering the chances of the right people to win, even in a system where the vote is rigged. The more people vote for change, the harder it is to cover up

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 week ago

    I use an OM System OM-5 mark 2 and the Olympus 30mm macro lens for scanning. The OM-5II has a high resolution mode where it shifts the sensor to combine multiple images into a 80MP raw file. Now obviously that's 4:3 and not 65:24, so I had to crop a bit but it's still enough. I did size down the images a bit to be able to upload them, but I don't think that that extra resolution really contained any more detail.

    The detail of medium format film is pretty crazy though. Previously I used an Olympus E-M5 Mark II whcih could do about 50MP in this mode, and when filling the frame on normal medium format square photos there was still detail missing. If I moved the camera closer and scanned the center of the frame at the closest distance, there was still plenty of detail left that wasn't kn the big scan, at least with Kodak Gold. With 35mm negatives I will usually get all the detail, though a few rolls like Ektar 100 and Ilford Pan F 50 did have me doubting whether I got everything.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    So this requires some explanation. Basically, I figured that I could get a "XPan" like panorama experience with my Lubitel 2 by putting a mask in it blocking the top and bottom of the normally square frame. Doing this gives you roughly double the shots on a single roll, in XPan format.

    So I started cutting paper, and put this mask behind the normal film mask (on the inside of the camera). And another one in the viewfinder.

    The positives:

    • The mask worked well enough
    • Using each number and large "dot" on the backing paper to align did work
    • I got some neat images

    The issues:

    • Below f/11 the focus seems screwed, I assume that my modifications slightly pushed the film away. Especially on the right side of the frame
    • On one side I got a light leak (because I put tape there :3) on the other there's a ghost of the tape visible
    • My lubitel 2 is growing a whole fungus metropolis, which ruined quite a few shots with extreme haze.

    Overall a good experience tho, here are some more neat shots:

    And the most messed up shot, after increasing the contrast (because it's at f/5.6 in direct light):

    [–] 1 point 4 weeks ago

    Oh yeah the far left is also not necessarily organized. I feel like either extreme tends to converge to a dumpster fire of infighting. The moderate left is currently actually united here under the PRO (progressive) party, after a merger of the 2 largest left wing parties (our equivalents of labour and greens). And they're the largest in the polls, but only because the center failed to solve problems and the right is splintered into many factions. Unfortunately a lot of people here are still very much right wing.

    Further left there's been plenty of infighting though, as is customary. Whether it's the Socialist Party trying to distance themselves from the communists within their ranks, the animal party getting into a row over defence spending, or the further left party constantly fighting and calling other members of its party racists etc. We have so many parties, yet apparently not yet enough to prevent this constant fighting.

    As a moderate leftist I honestly struggle sometimes to communicate with the far left wing. To me it seems like they're constantly "purity testing" eachother and struggle with giving any kind of compromise. Despite not agreeing with them, the centrist parties like liberals and christian democrats seem like much more reliable and stable partners unfortunately.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Is it though? At least here in the Netherlands, the far right is not much better. There's constant infighting, egos tripping over each other, new "messiahs" taking over and crashing down. We have JA21 and van Haga who both split off of the FvD when the mask went fully off. We have groep Markuszower who split off of the PVV. And on top of that parties like the BBB and people like Mona Keijzer who try to claim the spotlight. The originally liberal VVD trying to get a piece of the pie.

    I'm happy for it though. Much rather this than an organized right.

    But yeah, leftists can definitely be a purity contest sometimes.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Okay Okay, but while you have Disney+, you might as well watch Andor if you haven't already. It's star wars, but unlike the other Disney slop it relies on clever writing, good cinematography, etc instead of the n-th cameo of a character who just happened to be there or explaining a line in the movies that never needed elaboration.

    To watch Andor you don't have to like or know Star Wars (though having seen at least Episode 4 and Rogue One does help). The show isn't about lightsabers and force, but about fighting against an authoritarian empire. It's not necessarily heroes vs bad guys, but rather a story about rebellion an how messy it can be. It relates to so many real world events, both past and present.

    So uhh, yeah, watch Andor. And if you do, know that it mostly follows a 3 episode arc structure, so if the first 2 episodes don't grab your attention, do at least watch the 3rd.

  • source
  •  

    This is an enlarged scan of the full negative, which looks like this:

    It was shot in manual, f/22 and shutterspeed 1/2000th, the darkest settings I could get. I didn't have any filter but it was quite a wide angle shot and I covered the lens after and before shooting. This photo is exactly the same scene, but exposed for the foreground:

    The shape of the eclipsed sun can be seen here as well, though slightly darker than the surrounding sun star and sky. This confused me, but apparently this is called Solarization and is common in film.

    Anyway, this was my first roll of Pan F, and I love this stuff. I didn't expect these photos to really be useful at all, but the latitude and detail of this film is absolutely crazy

    A black and white film photo of the partially eclipsed sun. The eclipsed sun is visible, with a slightly dimmer sun star around it.
     

    I recently converted a cheap, partially broken, E-PL1 to be full spectrum sensitive by removing the filter that cuts UV/IR light. Despite this being a relatively cheap and old camera, the 12-ish megapixels combined with the razor sharp 25mm (50mm full-frame equivalent) honestly delivers plenty of detail.

    A black and white (infrared) shot of grassland, with trees in the distance and clouds towering over the landscape. Due to it being infrared only, the foliage appears bright white in the sunlight and the sky above the clouds is almost pitch black
     

    So, uhhh, yeah. Why process Phoenix II in black and white? Well, let's call it a happy little accident. The lab messed up and thought that it was black and white film. After the initial confusion, I was very surprised that there were somehow photos here. After finding out what happened the lab did a bit more to it, presumably to make sure that it remains stable.

    Too bad I didn't get to see what Phoenix II actually looks like, but honestly this experiment was nonetheless very interesting. Apparently when you process it as black and white film, you basically get Phoenix but in black and white.

     

    My second attempt with Harman Phoenix 200, this time I metered most shots around 125 or 100 iso, which worked quite a bit better. Though I still had more under than overexposed shots.

    Also, I'm very much a telelens person. This was another instance of me forcing myself to shoot with the wide-angle prime. I would've loved to see the 50mm version of this shot

     

    My first time shooting a film stock with an insane iso like this, previously I hadn't gone for anything higher than iso 400 and mostly colour. I also pushed myself a bit out of my comfort zone with the 28mm, as I rarely feel comfortable shooting below 50mm.

    Somehow this was the only shot of the roll that seemed properly exposed, with many others mildly or wildly underexposed. I've since checked the lightmeter of my XG9 against other references at 3200 iso (or rather 1600 iso -1 stop because the XG9 doesn't support 3200 iso). But unless I push it way harder than I'd ever do irl, I see no fault there. Edge markings and this shot are also fine, and the camera has previously behaved normally, so it was probably just a skill issue somehow.

    A grainy black and white wide angle shot of a church, with the church tower filling most of the frame, towering upwards
     

    I'm amazed at how this ended up. Most of the other low-light shots with this camera turned out as a complete blurry mess. It's not sharp by any means, but with the conditions and a moving carousel it went quite well.

    Scanned by hand using my Olympus EM-5 Mark II in the sensor-shift super resolution mode. Slightly downsampled because of the image size limit.

    Image shot at Liquicity Festival

    A colourful carousel at night, slightly blurry
    view more: next ›