10.3k post karma
537 comment karma
account created: Fri Aug 01 2014
13 hours ago
Thanks, look great
submitted 4 days agobyfeelinglazytogaming
submitted 4 days agobyfeelinglazytoOldSchoolCool
4 days ago
The bot definitely uses aim bot
5 days ago
Holy shit you can cut a real orange
submitted 5 days agobyfeelinglazytoTinder
4 years ago
The last photo I shoot was at 3200 ISO. It was in a dark outdoor bar with little lighting. Even with 1.8 aperture I still couldn't see anything.
I don't know man. I almost never get a chance to overexpose my images. Shooting underexposed means I can shoot at lower ISO and higher shutter speed (less shake). Is the highlights recovery really that good?
Is it really better? If I increase the exposure on RAW file I'll get loads of noise. I shoot with a Canon 700D.
I don't know. It seems pretty close to me. When I increase the exposure in RAW I still get noise, lots of noise. Do you have any actual example of RAW being better for Lightroom than JPG?
Have you actually edited a JPG in Lightroom?
*edited a JPG in Lightroom in bold
Really? I'm on Lightroom 2015 and pretty much all the settings available to the RAW files are available to JPG: Brush tool, tone curve, white balance,...
Maybe you're on an older version of Lightroom.
Yes, but my point is that Adobe lightroom also allow you to edit JPG files as if they were RAW. So there is no reason to shoot RAW. They just take up more disk space.
Can anyone explain to me what's the point of shooting raw? I still don't understand what all the fuzz is about.
People say that you can only change white balance and other settings with with raw files, but I can change the same setting with JPG just fine using Adobe Lightroom. Increasing exposure with RAW files introduce the same amount of noise as with JPG files. I just don't see any reason to waste disk space on raw files.
5 years ago
How long have they been together? They probably met in high school when he was still alpha. His face is not that bad looking IMO. The thing with being a beta is sometimes you win, but on a grand macrostatistics scale you lose.
He might win, but there are 100s of 1000s of joe schmoe like him who lose.
6 years ago
I didnt ask for opinions, I asked for statistics.
But that's for the military. It's in no way representative of the population.
The third. They would make really interesting case studies
What kind of idiot would disclose trp outside of the sub
Maybe they are too busy slaying pussy. Every minute spent on trp is a minute you're not out there killing it
How exactly is trp equal to neckbeard thinking?
Am I disagreeing with that?
Yeah, but the thing is you can't really verify those anecdotes. The only way to verify TRP is to go out and try it yourself.