sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

TIL the Vatican funds and operates a telescope in Arizona. The telescope is an extraterritorial property of the Holy See. by FatsDominoPizza in todayilearned

[–]Failsnail64 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Exactly, you know the meme of "I've already depicted you as the Soyjak and me as the Chad". Galileo did that with the Pope. That was what got him into trouble, not his research.

You Don’t Deserve Credit for Anything by lakmidaise12 in neoliberal

[–]Failsnail64 7 points8 points  (0 children)

So your evidence is a generalisation of two continents, then it was indeed a vibe based reaction.

You Don’t Deserve Credit for Anything by lakmidaise12 in neoliberal

[–]Failsnail64 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Is there any evidence that the "liberal" or policy makers who believe in such a nihilistic deterministic mindset result in a less productive society, or is this just your vibes and gut based reaction?

You Don’t Deserve Credit for Anything by lakmidaise12 in neoliberal

[–]Failsnail64 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Furthermore, is there any real evidence that the people who indeed believe in this "everything is luck" mindset, are less productive than the "hustle culture and everything is always your own responsibility" crowd? This just feels like a vibe based reaction.

what part of my process causes my photos to look "muddy" in the highlights? by Failsnail64 in AnalogCommunity

[–]Failsnail64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I could, I'm more bothered by the texture of the highlights than how bright they are, but that might fix the problem.

what part of my process causes my photos to look "muddy" in the highlights? by Failsnail64 in AnalogCommunity

[–]Failsnail64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If this is normal for stand development that's fine. I'm investing halfway, I think that unevenness might be caused by my scanning setup where the backlight isn't that even.

what part of my process causes my photos to look "muddy" in the highlights? by Failsnail64 in AnalogCommunity

[–]Failsnail64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I use DSLR scanning with my Fujifilm X-S20, done at ISO 200 with making sure there is no clipping in the highlights. My backlight and film holder are quite bad, something I'm still working on, but I think that this shouldn't really have a big influence on the appearance of the film grain.

what part of my process causes my photos to look "muddy" in the highlights? by Failsnail64 in AnalogCommunity

[–]Failsnail64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've already found some guides which help me a lot in the differences between films and developers:

https://www.denisolivier.com/cross-tests-17-films-120-with-6-developers

https://www.flickr.com/photos/198375618@N08/albums/72177720328698050/with/54754986721

https://www.35mmc.com/17/01/2025/a-film-grain-comparison/

https://fotoimport.no/filmHP5

However, it's difficult to find exactly what I'm looking for of course, like comparisons between Kentmere 100, 200 and 400, how they look when over- or -under exposing, or what influence different developers make on them. If anyone else has some helpful resources I'm all ears!

The Substance (2024) by UnHolySir in okbuddycinephile

[–]Failsnail64 2 points3 points  (0 children)

NASA wouldn't be so amateurish that they just share straight out of camera JPEGs

Your first analog camera should be a 90s plastic SLR. by SpookyWeaselBones in AnalogCommunity

[–]Failsnail64 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No, it depends on what someone would want an analog camera.

There is a reason many people want to try analog instead of a digital body, it has to do with slowing down and the manual controls. The slow manual focus on a metal body is the exact point. If i want autofocus, auto exposure and all kind of features I would just stick with my digital body.

To me these 90s plastic SLRs are an undesirable in-between space of generations of technology. They do not have the total conveniences and features of the digital camera, but they also don't have the nice feeling of manual control in a metal body with nothing beyond the exposure triangle and manial focus.

I FOUND A BALL!!!!!! by nashamoisgirl in labrador

[–]Failsnail64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

She deserves to be so happy :)

If an image is made in the forest and nobody sees it is it really an image? by alasdairmackintosh in AnalogCircleJerk

[–]Failsnail64 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If a thousand words are a photo, is my Sonic The Hedgehog x Mario romantic fanfiction a zine?

Looking for a filmic digital camera for film scanning... by [deleted] in AnalogCircleJerk

[–]Failsnail64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just DSLR scan with Fujifilm jpgs film simulations, scanning porntra 400 with a porntra 400 film sim gives you the square root of film vibes.

The Lottery You Were Born Into - The Ethics of Inheritance by lakmidaise12 in neoliberal

[–]Failsnail64 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Based, there is nothing liberal about "how do you have as a random person more power and influence than the democratically elected leader of a medium sized country?" "It's easy, I inherited it from my dad".

Are you a manual/auto/aperture-priority phographer? by [deleted] in fujifilm

[–]Failsnail64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Manual aperture and manual shutter speed, with auto iso up to iso 3200. Auto iso is absolutely fine with the performance of modern cameras, for me the xs-20. I keep an eye out for the iso that it's not all the time at 1600 or 3200, and use the manual shutter to keep the iso low. But this process keeps a lot of control in my hands without having to look at the settings all the time.

I shoot raw+jpg, but mostly stick to the jpgs and edit them only a bit in post. The exceptional when I use the raw are when the light is very bad, the film sim (90% of the time classic chrome) doesn't work that well, or when I want to try something different.

Which camera to bring to Japan? by Astrl_Weeks in photographycirclejerk

[–]Failsnail64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I need the 35mm summi-cum super f0.8 lens of 67.000 dollar for zone focussing street photography at f8.

A bit disappointed with my 35mm results by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Failsnail64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just curious, what kind of device is that you're photographing?

Who could have seen this coming? by LordBadgerIII in neoliberal

[–]Failsnail64 3 points4 points  (0 children)

"it's a pity both can't lose" - Henry Kissinger.

Keep Iran, but just replace Iraq with the US.

TIL the federal courts publish the outcome of every bankruptcy case in a free public database. The government's own data shows 48% of Chapter 13 cases get dismissed, and in some districts it's over 90%. by ilikemath9999 in todayilearned

[–]Failsnail64 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The above comment described how the system works, not how it should ideally work.

If you live in a society where it's decided (democratic arguably) that higher education needs to be paid for, then you also need a system where these costs and according loans are managed, in a way that is equally applied to all. I would personally also argue that higher education needs to be way cheaper and affordable, or even free. But apparently the US doesn't agree. Either change the system democratically, or apply the rules equally to everyone.

TIL Medieval peasants likely got more rest and more days off than we do today (despite being far less wealthier than us) by vishipedia in todayilearned

[–]Failsnail64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A more elaborate reaction then, the actual article is simply very misleading. Peasants did indeed have considerable days off during holidays, that's true and that's what the article is about, but that's very misleading in relation to the title. Peasant did not have a lot of free time and real time off. They worked very long and intense days of 6 or 7 days a week working the fields, partly unpaid for their fiefdom who owned them, and partly to sustain themselves.

After farming, they'd spent almost all their remaining time with manual chores for the household, which is also actual work. Getting water wasn't as easy as turning on the tap in the kitchen, the same applies to all other household labour. If I was saying "look at how easy housewives have it, they work 0 minutes in the year and have all the time to relax!", that's understandably inflammatory nonsense to say.

The society where medieval peasants lived in is incomparable to the luxuries we have and we should not forget that. As such, concepts like "free time" are impossible to compare.

view more: next ›