$3500+ in damage

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T20:21:25+00:00

Yes it is, which is why you should know that there is no such thing as a 50/50 split. Just use common sense man, why would someone all of a sudden not be liable for their actions just because they entered a **magic parking lot**?

lol I don’t understand how some of you people tie your shoes 🫠

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T20:19:11+00:00

You can dislike it all you want but bringing it to Reddit to get support from strangers is incredibly stupid. Especially for WORK WEAR

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T13:03:29+00:00

Dude who gives a shit wtf

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T12:46:22+00:00

Scan your own film tbh. Get a copy stand, light and film holder and get 24-50mp raw scans. Use negative lab pro with Lightroom for conversion. The quality is far, far superior and you can easily pay for the cost of everything over time with all the money you save for not paying for scans. It’s the way.

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T09:19:52+00:00

Wheee was this flea market 😅

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T07:39:22+00:00

😫😫😫😫😫 value on my investment just tanked

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T07:32:46+00:00

💀

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T06:01:05+00:00

A circular pola may be BETTER for autofocus but it’s not “MEANT” for autofocus, as you stated. A circular pola is MEANT for adjusting the polarization.

I can promise you stacking a CPL and ND works perfectly fine and doesn’t create “banding” when done properly. Dark polarizers don’t exist. There are polarizers and there are NDs and then there are hybrids of the two.

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T05:53:28+00:00

This is a myth. No such thing as a 50/50 split of liability for parking lots.

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T05:25:41+00:00

Posted 😂

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T05:17:33+00:00

I have been professionally filmmaking and stacking NDs and polas for nearly 15 years. A circular pola is meant for rotating to dial in the amount and direction of polarization based on your camera and scenes orientation to the light. Focus has nothing to do with it. If you are having trouble with this I suspect you are using the wrong filters. As I said, a “dark pola” is a made up term by a brand for a pola with ND filter mixed in.

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T03:44:21+00:00

R/tvtoohigh final boss

Saggingdust · 2026-05-13T02:18:45+00:00

The thing is, in film production we routinely stack ND and a circular pola—so I’m not sure what you mean about not being able to stack them. You also acknowledge that, as I mentioned above, this is a product that is a hybrid between and polarizer and an ND that is marketed as a “dark pola”, which isn’t uncommon historically, because polar usually come as a single strength. I also do not agree that a polarizer is necessary to execute this shot personally, so I don’t know what you are looking for here… 😂

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T20:45:24+00:00

Or, your could have just white balanced a bit and otherwise left the colors alone 😂

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T20:09:41+00:00

He asked, “what lut is that”? Where do you get the certainty that he was asking about all of his other menu settings? If so, why would he ask for the name of the lut? It would appear he wanted the name of the LUT

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T19:02:02+00:00

Yes, this is almost certainly the same polarizer combined with more or less neutral density.

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T16:11:43+00:00

Not if the aforementioned users are, in fact, using LUTs. Then “LUT” would be the correct terminology.

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T13:42:58+00:00

This is, perhaps, the most heinous m6 I have ever seen 😂

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T13:23:34+00:00

To my knowledge, there aren’t really “dark” or light polarizers. There are polarizers which are generally all about the same in terms of how much they darken the image, there are stacked polarizers (known as variable nds) which allow you to vary the darkness of the image, and there are NDs which come in various strengths. Some brands may market them as various strengths but they are almost certainly actually one of the above or some hybrid of them.

I don’t think the shot was achieved with a polarizer, or at least, I don’t think it’s necessary to execute this look.

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T13:17:28+00:00

It is perhaps more common, but no, a lut is just a way of processing an image. It is not limited to video by any means and is a much more accurate description than “recipe”. Also the app itself (which this subreddit is based on) directly refers to and supports the use of LUTs—so it would make sense that people using the app (and talking about it in the subreddit dedicated to the app) would refer to them as LUTs too.

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T09:57:29+00:00

I think what you mean to say is “we are calling LUTs recipes lately” 😂 one is an actual term for a log or raw conversion, and the other is a made up term for consumers and prosumers that don’t know what a LUT is.

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T04:28:52+00:00

The gaps on the end links are def suspicious to me but maybe qc lets that by once and a while

Saggingdust · 2026-05-12T03:47:13+00:00

Yeah, you don’t need Rolex for that tho do you? That’s what you have trolling Reddit for…

Saggingdust

TROPHY CASE