|
I found this ad on craigslist that I thought was amusing. I know this sort of attitude is far from limited to photography, but eh.entitled baby posted:I'm looking for a new, or very good condition slightly used Canon BG-E2N battery grip for my Canon 50D. Will deal locally only. I'm looking to spend around $100 for a good condition used one, or $125 for a brand new unused one. It MUST be the "N" version, and genuine Canon-brand, with box, and not a generic Chinese-made copy There's nothing wrong with trying to score a deal on something, but being so goddamn demanding when you are trying to snake an item for $20-30 less than the cheapest price I can find it online isn't how negotiating works. You either pay more than an item is worth and get to be as picky as you want, or you try to pay less than the item is worth and accept whatever you can get. You don't demand top quality at bargain prices. I kind of want to be a dick and post an ad looking for the same thing and offering $10 more. I don't care that much, though. I thought about sending him the amazon link so he could see what he should be offering, but he probably already knows and is hoping to find some hobbyist who never uses their camera and is just like "$100? yippee!"
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2010 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:50 |
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:...I thought about sending him the amazon link so he could see what he should be offering, but he probably already knows and is hoping to find some hobbyist who never uses their camera and is just like "$100? yippee!" Sometimes I just don't get Craigslist prices. It is on the internet, theoretically anyone who is capable of posting there realizes Ebay/Google/KEH/Amazon exist to price check. I'm more upset about the opposite, where it is overprice film gear with "I used to be a pro, and bought this new, so I know what it is worth (FIRM NO HAGGLING)" tacked on the bottom.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2010 18:25
|
|
|
Jahoodie posted:I'm more upset about the opposite, where it is overprice film gear with "I used to be a pro, and bought this new, so I know what it is worth (FIRM NO HAGGLING)" tacked on the bottom. The funniest thing is seeing the same ad with the same tagline pop up every week for half a year while this "pro" tries to unload some cast iron tripod from 1953 for $200.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2010 18:40
|
|
|
I was shooting some airplanes taking off and landing today, and a pepsi truck drove by as I was just holding the shutter down :
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 00:47
|
|
|
That is loving awesome 
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 00:53
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, the timing is perfect with the spacing of the thumbnails.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 01:01
|
|
|
I would totally stitch that into a panorama.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 03:19
|
|
|
That reminds me of this one photo from the "wacky things you can do" section of my photo book. Makes me glad we have photoshop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
^^^ Photographer's Handbook spotted. There is some weird rear end stuff in that book.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 11:43
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:^^^ Photographer's Handbook spotted. Hedgecoe's a real smart guy, though. A lot of the concepts/ideas still apply in the digital age. I liked reading it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2011 19:10
|
|
|
Agreed. Basic concepts are basic concepts no matter what camera you shoot with. I cracked up at the weirdo vignettes and printing on eggs section though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 05:49
|
|
|
AWESOMENESS sliders to the right! http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1944668
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 17:31
|
|
|
baccaruda posted:AWESOMENESS sliders to the right! I was really surprised at how accurate the instructions in the video are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 17:36
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Agreed. Basic concepts are basic concepts no matter what camera you shoot with. One of my friends has been doing a lot of egg printing for her MFA work. It's weird.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 17:40
|
|
is go
|
Detroit has been rotting for a long time : http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/gallery/2011/jan/02/photography-detroit  
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 21:34
|
|
|
The only picture in that series I really liked was the one through the window down to the street, because of the contrast it shows between the abandoned and the inhabited. Part of this could be because pictures of worn down Detroit have been so common in the last year, making the city seem like a post-apocalypse wasteland. Yet somehow a million people are still living there. It's kind of played out, and picturing a worn down building next to one that's still maintained seems like a much more interesting photo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 21:44
|
|
|
Why are my eyes having a hard time interpreting those pictures? Is that some crazy HDR?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 21:55
|
|
|
xzzy posted:The only picture in that series I really liked was the one through the window down to the street, because of the contrast it shows between the abandoned and the inhabited. I totally agree. I'm so sick of people portraying Detroit like it's some kind of wasteland where people get shot on a daily basis, and completely ignore the regular day to day life and the large parts of the city that are more or less normal or awesome. I mean, come on, where's more of this stuff (not my picture) 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2011 22:09
|
|
|
Here's your next must-have purchase guys: http://theauracamerastore.com/
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 00:11
|
|
|
Now Only $3497.00
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 00:13
|
|
|
I wish there was camera that could take soul portraits http://iasos.com/artists/erial/celestial-soul-portraits/
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 00:15
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I wish there was camera that could take soul portraits http://iasos.com/artists/erial/celestial-soul-portraits/ I would do that for a laugh if it didn't cost $150 for an 8x10!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 00:55
|
|
|
Fujifilm Instax 200 - $100 on ebay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 01:14
|
|
|
nonanone posted:I totally agree. I'm so sick of people portraying Detroit like it's some kind of wasteland where people get shot on a daily basis, and completely ignore the regular day to day life and the large parts of the city that are more or less normal or awesome. I mean, come on, where's more of this stuff (not my picture The fact that the city has a wealth of slowly crumbing fine architecture which in other cities would either have been restored or bulldozed and the lots redeveloped makes it deserving of photographic attention. Why shouldn't these buildings be as thoroughly documented as possible? Where else can the process of age and neglect be so strikingly portrayed? What better way to remind us Americans of our cultural and architectural heritage which we are often much too quick to forget? There's reason for photographing the declining areas of Detroit or of any other city that goes beyond sensationalism, especially in the US where urban planning is rudimentary, where public and corporate investment in art and beauty is as much a punchline as a practice, and where history often runs aground on the reefs of progress or profit. I see this set of photos working in that vein rather than trying to exploit some sense of apocalyptic nihilism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 02:15
|
|
|
psylent posted:Fujifilm Instax 200 - $100 on ebay. Oof. Amazon's prices can be pretty hilarious too. $274 for a new Polaroid One-Step 600, $120 for a three pack of Polaroid 600 film - and a page full of reviews of people bitching about how they'd bought it and found the chemistry all dried up. Then there's some seller trying to get $2000 for a used Instax 200 with three packs of film.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 02:24
|
|
|
Jellyko posted:The fact that the city has a wealth of slowly crumbing fine architecture which in other cities would either have been restored or bulldozed and the lots redeveloped makes it deserving of photographic attention. Why shouldn't these buildings be as thoroughly documented as possible? Where else can the process of age and neglect be so strikingly portrayed? What better way to remind us Americans of our cultural and architectural heritage which we are often much too quick to forget? I feel like it's incredibly important to document, and also that it's been documented to death. Most "urbex" explorers are rich kids from the suburbs looking to show you what Detroit is "really like" or journalists from other areas thinking it'll make a good sob story. (At least, all the ones I've ever met/read about/etc) It's kind of like taking photos of homeless people. Yeah, people should see it. Yeah, it's exploitative and way overdone. After awhile, you just get really tired of seeing photo after photo of "Detroit, the dying city," I've been seeing these kind photos all of my lifetime.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 03:39
|
|
|
beeker posted:Here's your next must-have purchase guys: http://theauracamerastore.com/ Apparently that is the only aural camera endorsed by the person selling the camera.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 03:40
|
|
|
There's a cool NatGeo doc on White House photographer Peter Sousa on Netflix if anyone wants to kill an hour. It gets a little repetitive, but the locations and the access Sousa has are interesting, and his relationship with the President is pretty neat. I was personally hoping for a few minutes of nerdy tech talk about camera equipment, post processing, etc. but could only glean that through what was shown.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 08:38
|
|
|
I was looking forward to photographing Detroit when I was there a few months ago. I had recently seen a BBC documentary called "Requiem for Detroit" and since my shtick is photos of decaying, abandoned buildings (albeit typically in rural settings) I thought I'd love it. Unfortunately, the scope of things are really so large that it is really difficult to capture through a lens. I took a couple dozen shots that were pretty throw-away and gave up. Getting a "Holy poo poo, look at that big building that nobody even cares about anymore" is like shooting fish in a barrel and getting anything that really speaks to the whole problem (which Jellyko more or less covered) is way beyond my abilities.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 09:31
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I wish there was camera that could take soul portraits http://iasos.com/artists/erial/celestial-soul-portraits/ The Lillie one actually looks like an improvement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 11:40
|
|
|
ogopogo posted:There's a cool NatGeo doc on White House photographer Peter Sousa on Netflix if anyone wants to kill an hour. It gets a little repetitive, but the locations and the access Sousa has are interesting, and his relationship with the President is pretty neat. I was personally hoping for a few minutes of nerdy tech talk about camera equipment, post processing, etc. but could only glean that through what was shown. You can also stream it through the PBS web site for those of us without Netflix: http://video.pbs.org/video/1672209202 It's narrated by Morgan Freeman, so if nothing else you can feel pleasantly calmed throughout. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 15:34
|
|
|
Wow, that was an awesome watch. Thanks! I can't imagine what it must be like knowing that your photos are a matter of public record and can't be deleted by law. I guess you just have to put that out of your mind. Also, I wonder what the stats are on how many 5d2 bodies they go through every year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2011 23:49
|
|
|
Richard Nixon was a giant dick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2011 00:30
|
|
|
William T. Hornaday posted:Richard Nixon was a giant dick. He did some cool things.. I guess even a stopped watch is right twice a day. http://www.flickr.com/photos/21944695@N02/2118401405/ (not my picture, the plaque is attached to the Wilson Hall at Fermilab) Fermilab is certainly the coolest place I've ever worked, and it needed a number of Nixon's signatures to be made possible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2011 01:00
|
|
|
xzzy posted:He did some cool things.. I guess even a stopped watch is right twice a day. I'm not saying he had no redeeming value whatsoever, just when it came to photography.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2011 01:38
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Fermilab is certainly the coolest place I've ever worked, and it needed a number of Nixon's signatures to be made possible. The thing is that back then you could get just about anything done if it meant making a discovery that would allow for killing Russians better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2011 02:00
|
|
|
http://techcrunch.com/2011/01/05/twitters-golden-egg-location/ Techcrunch used a photo from Strobist dude, David Hobby, without his permission and it wasn't CC attributed. I like how the comments are all dominated by the photo rights discussion and not the article. There's so many of these types of incidents happening all the time now. Anything I put online, I automatically expect to be used and never even know about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2011 00:18
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:http://techcrunch.com/2011/01/05/twitters-golden-egg-location/ This is loving terrible and unfortunately industry practice for bloggers etc
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2011 01:05
|
|
|
"The only person who thinks this photo is about Jack Nicholson is Jack Nicholson." -Stanley Kubrick Ha!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2011 05:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:50 |
|
|
Owns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2011 09:25
|
|
