|
Good news! New guy at work is a keen photographer, shoots with a 5D Mk II and wants to go out on shoots with me. Bad news! He showed me his flickr stream and it's full of garish HDR and selective colour bullshit.
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 15:17 |
|
|
psylent posted:Good news! New guy at work is a keen photographer, shoots with a 5D Mk II and wants to go out on shoots with me. Your project is to convert this man into a reasonable human being. Consider it a challenge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 23:08
|
|
|
We'll pay Ken Rockwell 20 bux to post how the 7D is a better HDR camera than the 5DmkII so you can get a nice trade from him
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 23:11
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Your project is to convert this man into a reasonable human being. Consider it a challenge. If he's successful, I'm fairly sure he can write off some taxes under "charitable donations to the eyes of society at large".
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 23:12
|
|
|
Can you tell how far down the HDR path he's gone? Is he an old school guy who used to shoot good stuff, then started tone mapping to see what the hubbub is? I've run into a couple of people like that. All it takes is time and they go back to making good stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2011 23:44
|
|
|
I bought a roll of HP5+ from my local photo store and right after he checked it out, I realized that I'd forgotten to say I wanted 120. He took a look at the reciept and gave me two rolls of 120 instead  just another victory on my path to godhood
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 00:01
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Can you tell how far down the HDR path he's gone? Is he an old school guy who used to shoot good stuff, then started tone mapping to see what the hubbub is? I've run into a couple of people like that. All it takes is time and they go back to making good stuff. To be totally fair, he does have some nice stuff, but his love for HDR scared me a little.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 00:28
|
|
|
A steady regimen of light ridicule and passive aggressive comments should take care of that in no time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 01:09
|
|
|
jeisai posted:It's cool being a direct descendant of an unmarried celibate man. I mean, that's pretty awesome, right? Celibacy is really misunderstood and underrated. It doesn't mean no sex, it means no heirs. You can still gently caress like Charlie Sheen just out of sex-rehab and loaded on ice, you just can't acknowledge any progeny. Priests took a vow of celibacy in the middle ages to prevent bishoprics and arch-diocese being passed father-to-son and church property becoming family estates (instead they were passed uncle-to-nephiew and became family estates), not to have no sex. That's why so many fat rich bishops died of syphilis related symptoms. But most people don't realise the distinction, so you can still try it out as a non-threatening type of pick-up line. And yet despite all that, K-Rock is still full of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 02:04
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:I bought a roll of HP5+ from my local photo store and right after he checked it out, I realized that I'd forgotten to say I wanted 120. He took a look at the reciept and gave me two rolls of 120 instead Every time I get colour negatives developed at the local photo store they throw in a few rolls of film. They are literally just giving it away.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 02:28
|
|
|
I HATE CARS posted:Every time I get colour negatives developed at the local photo store they throw in a few rolls of film. They are literally just giving it away. I'll never be a god at this rate 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 03:13
|
|
|
psylent posted:Nah, he talks about HDR with a mad glint in his eye. He thinks it looks "awesome" and "loves how much the colours pop". You're going shooting with him, not processing. He may have a great eye for subjects and composition, THEN gently caress it up with HDR, so as far as you're concerned, it's a no brainer. Go enjoy having someone to shoot with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 03:34
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:Celibacy is really misunderstood and underrated. It doesn't mean no sex, it means no heirs. You can still gently caress like Charlie Sheen just out of sex-rehab and loaded on ice, you just can't acknowledge any progeny. The overwhelming definition is 'no sex,' especially in Tesla's case. And Christianity didn't invent celibacy, it's been a part of other religions long before the middle ages.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 03:43
|
|
|
It's certainly been a big part of my life, well before my middle ages.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 05:35
|
|
|
William T. Hornaday posted:The overwhelming definition is 'no sex,' especially in Tesla's case. And Christianity didn't invent celibacy, it's been a part of other religions long before the middle ages. Vow of celibacy = not having an heir. It's just a fun fact. Tesla still didn't get any and k-rock is still a lying tool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 06:32
|
|
|
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/01/flickr-deletes-photos_n_817218.html Well, that sucks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 08:23
|
|
|
Spectracide posted:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/01/flickr-deletes-photos_n_817218.html I think this is more common than people think. It seems people have accounts deleted for no real reason (or warning).
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 08:26
|
|
|
What should/could flickr do about it, though? I'm sure there's something in their TOS about them not being responsible for loss of data.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 12:53
|
|
|
I wish flickr would devote a fraction of the resources that they spend of randomly deleting legitimate users for "questionable content" to actually removing creepy fetish groups and stuff that is just actually pornography.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 14:51
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:I wish flickr would devote a fraction of the resources that they spend of randomly deleting legitimate users for "questionable content" to actually removing creepy fetish groups and stuff that is just actually pornography. They couldn't employ enough people to do this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 15:01
|
|
|
Spectracide posted:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/01/flickr-deletes-photos_n_817218.html I use http://www.backupify.com/ as I got in free during their beta
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 16:35
|
|
|
Anyone else hooked on old lenses? I don't have much money to spend on glass, so the bang/buck ratio of vintage lenses suits me just fine. Got this in the post today, 135mm f2.8 Super Albinar for Minolta MD.  Looks almost new, can't find any marks of use at all. (taken with another old lens, Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm f2.0)  The weather outside was too poor for trying it out on the stuff I actually want to use it for, so I aimed it at a dog. Useless lighting (and rollercoaster Lightroom curves) aside, I think it seems like a great lens. Kudos to dog for sitting still for 1/3 second. It goes slightly soft at 2.8 (this is at 5.6) but not by much. Best part? It cost $20. edit: when trying at properly fast shutter speeds, f2.8 actually looks tack sharp. Yay! Ola fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Feb 2, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 16:35
|
|
|
anabatica posted:What should/could flickr do about it, though? I'm sure there's something in their TOS about them not being responsible for loss of data. They could simply disable an account, not let the photos be viewable and send the owner a notice with what the issue is. The owner could then decide if they want to remedy the issue or have their account removed. I can't think of any other big sites that simply delete an account with no way of restoring it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 17:41
|
|
|
Yahoo's so messed up they probably can't spare the extra server space. Who uses Flickr for backup? Seems like a bad idea to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 18:43
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Yahoo's so messed up they probably can't spare the extra server space. Who uses Flickr for backup? Seems like a bad idea to begin with. Yea, I'm sorry, but if you use Flickr as your only backup solution you deserve to lose all your photos. It sucks that he lost his stuff, but is it really that hard to reupload? Honestly this just gave him about 9234928342 times more publicity than his actual photos ever did.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:06
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Yahoo's so messed up they probably can't spare the extra server space. Who uses Flickr for backup? Seems like a bad idea to begin with. That's not the point. He's not sad that he lost his photos; he had backups. He's sad that he lost his links, contacts, comments, and all the other metadata that he had no way to backup and no way to restore now that it's gone. It's not about the actual files.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:16
|
|
|
King Hotpants posted:That's not the point. I actually find it pretty odd that Flickr doesn't have backups of all this stuff anyways. Seriously, only one instance of peoples profile?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:28
|
|
|
subx posted:Yea, I'm sorry, but if you use Flickr as your only backup solution you deserve to lose all your photos. Re-upload 5 years worth of stuff? I'd tell Flickr to gently caress off and demand a refund. If anyone uses Flickr as backup they are pretty stupid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:29
|
|
|
subx posted:I actually find it pretty odd that Flickr doesn't have backups of all this stuff anyways. Seriously, only one instance of peoples profile? I'm not defending flickr; not having an emergency oh-poo poo copy of this stuff is insanity. Not having a step between "everything's fine" and "nuked" is insanity. I keep multiple backups of all my awful photography and so did the guy in question; he's just mad about his comments/links/contacts/etc. It seems like no one reads that part of the story. The account in question belonged to an IT guy, so that's part of why he's so critical of flickr's practices about this stuff--because seriously, in a business, who the gently caress would do that? Furthermore, why?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:36
|
|
|
Maybe it's because I don't use flickr like that. I'm not particularly attached to the comments and stats. They're cool and all, but I would not miss them. It's $30 a year for unlimited uploads. Flickr is definitely messed up for doing that to him. Now if smugmug did something like that with my client galleries, I would be knocking down their doors. Update: they've offered him 25 years of Flickr pro and are trying to restore everything. I can't even fathom what the web will look like in 10 years, let alone 25.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:09
|
|
|
fundamentally flickr is a free service so you can't expect the world from them - if it was smugmug then yes be apocalyptic. Flickr is really hosed up in the way that it deals with legitimate photographers. Fine art photographers get hosed over so much with nudity stuff - yet there are huge groups of cum swilling gangbang wives and foot fetish stuff all over the site. I'd imagine that it's more to do with their report first moderation style - easier for a fussy 40 y/o to report a figure study by a good photographer than for someone to stumble on a "sexy wife" photoset and report it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:38
|
|
|
The last time I got reported I don't even KNOW what I did. They told me to mark all the shots that needed to be moderate, but as far as I could tell I already had. So they told me to do it again, and I did. And then they unlocked it. Thanks...?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:46
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:The last time I got reported I don't even KNOW what I did. They told me to mark all the shots that needed to be moderate, but as far as I could tell I already had. So they told me to do it again, and I did. And then they unlocked it. Thanks...? This is the problem. You don't get told why or what is wrong they just do something (such as delete an account) then you go to log in and nothing. You would think it would go into a review status or something where you could be given an option of changing settings or removing photos instead of deleting everything without your knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 22:11
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Maybe it's because I don't use flickr like that. I'm not particularly attached to the comments and stats. They're cool and all, but I would not miss them. It's $30 a year for unlimited uploads. Flickr is definitely messed up for doing that to him. Now if smugmug did something like that with my client galleries, I would be knocking down their doors. All those glitter comments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 22:27
|
|
|
Hilarious / pathetic: http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/med/2182490000.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 01:05
|
|
|
beeker posted:Hilarious / pathetic: http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/med/2182490000.html One slave, please.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 01:09
|
|
|
beeker posted:Hilarious / pathetic: http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/med/2182490000.html Wow, that listing just gets worse and worse! They haven't the first clue how anything works at ALL.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 01:32
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:Wow, that listing just gets worse and worse! They haven't the first clue how anything works at ALL. I hate the job market so much. It's like this everywhere right now. Everyone is all "dude the economy is totally better, there's lots of jobs!" Yeah loving right. Every single posting demands a certified genius who is willing to work for peanuts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 02:06
|
|
|
http://www.eic.net/ is the firm in that listing. Got this (all I wanted was a response to find out who put up the listing) quote:If you have received this automated reply, then your email address corresponds to a name that is black-listed within our group of companies. This may be due to abuse, SPAM or failure to complete our interview process. e: I didn't exactly send a warm message, so I appreciate the "warmest regards."
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 02:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 15:17 |
|
|
Dread Head posted:They could simply disable an account, not let the photos be viewable and send the owner a notice with what the issue is. subx posted:Yea, I'm sorry, but if you use Flickr as your only backup solution you deserve to lose all your photos. subx posted:It sucks that he lost his stuff, but is it really that hard to reupload? Whitezombi posted:Re-upload 5 years worth of stuff? I'd tell Flickr to gently caress off and demand a refund. AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Now if smugmug did something like that with my client galleries, I would be knocking down their doors.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 13:54
|
|
