|
The extra weight might make it more stable if bumped. So wood is not better in any way that matters.
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 02:41 |
|
|
Aargh posted:How is wood better than carbon fibre for tripods exactly? Better knobfeel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
A metal tripod will act like a set of large antenna gathering electromagnetic noise. This will cause your photographs to have reduced contrast and a washed out look. A wooden tripod results in your photographs having much better clarity. Also make sure you use on of our £200 unidirectional usb cables when downloading your photographs from the camera to ensure extra vibrant colours.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:Also make sure you use on of our £200 unidirectional usb cables when downloading your photographs from the camera to ensure extra vibrant colours. This guy doesn't know what he's talking about. UNIdirectional cables?! I don't think so. If you use a unidirectional cable, sure the pictures go from the camera to your computer, but then how does the empty space go from your computer to the camera, smart guy? Pretty soon your camera would just fill up with pictures, because you didn't replace them with empty space from the computers hard-drive. Omnidirectional cables are what you need. I swear, people learn how to press a shutter button, and suddenly think they're the next Krockwell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Piss off scrub, do you even know how flash memory works? The camera is literally using electricity to shock atoms in the SD card to indicate a 1 or a 0. What Sandisk doesn't want you to know though is that there is a "ghost" effect at play.. the atoms remember the original value and if you try to write new data on top of it the storage "averages" the old with the new, resulting in low contrast photos. You can compensate for this in Lightroom up to a point by cranking up the saturation, but you still have to live with owning originals that aren't accurate depictions of the scene as you visited it. You really need to be using a brand new SD card with each shoot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
xzzy posted:You really need to be using a brand new SD card with each shoot. I think Dakana's grandmother fully believed this for a while. She'd fill up the memory card on her P&S and buy a new card. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
A photograph of a person captures a piece of that person's soul. Therefore Deleting a photo from a memory card deletes a piece of a person's soul, you soulless monster
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Yes but you're actually creating soul when you copy it to your computer, back it up to your local backup drive, and then upload it later on to glacier. Then you upload the edited version to flickr, meaning you have X*3 amount of their soul (don't forget to subtract some soul if you slap a stupid watermark on the flickr export). No one will say no to that, that's free soul!
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
 Apparently, only the best photographers have this tattoo. It shows their passion and dedication to never loving stopping down, and always blowing focus because their DOF is best measured in millimeters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
f64 would look like a butthole
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
2.8? weak, try 1.2. gotta get a slice of the cheek in focus for portraits
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
drat son, 2.8 isn't even that bokelicious. Must be really proud of his 24-70 or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
I'm just surprised the text and aperture aren't at a 45 degree angle, considering how much they love the Dutch... angles.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
It was a Portal tat converted
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:2.8? weak, try 1.2. gotta get a slice of the cheek in focus for portraits Pah. try 0.7 to shoot a few dudes in old-timey costumes lit by candle light.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Lenses with such fast apertures are reserved for the guy who helped NASA fake the moon landing. Also, stupid camera aperture tats should be reserved for the goatse man.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Lenses with such fast apertures are reserved for the guy who helped NASA fake the moon landing. it took him a lot of work to dilate to 2.8
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
I want to buy an f/0.95 lens even tho they are generally expensive trash
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 10:59
|
|
|
Someone posted this in a group I follow: https://www.facebook.com/DAllenStudioquote:Hi and Happy New Year everyone. I am making some changes to how I do my photography. Basically I am taking a step back from trying to be a Jack of all Trades and concentrating on what I do well and want to do. Going forward the vast majority of my Photography will be high end Photography that showcases men and women at their best. This is what I do well and what I enjoy doing the most and every time I make an exception or help someone I wind up regretting it or getting taken advantage of especially with my photographing women. I am routinely asked to photograph woman who are grossly obese and yet think it's cool or OK to be seen in skin tight leggings or exercise pants that are so tight they leave absolutely nothing to the imagination even to the point of being able to see lips and yet they are totally oblivious to the people around them throwing up or engaging in violent bouts of projectile vomiting or these confused little girls who get themselves all tatted up and think they are rebelling against their parents or "doing their own thing" when the fact is these clueless ones are only damaging their own futures. Very few people I know will have anything to do with a girl who has so little self respect that she turns her body into a walking billboard and doesn't know the meaning of half of the tattoos on her. Other photographers can handle that, I chose to have absolutely nothing to do with it because I find it disgusting and it turns my stomach. Strong words, but when you're as good as this guy... who needs to take photos of fatties?  It's important to carve out your own style, and the style for pretty much this whole gallery is 'miss focus by about half a mile'. Not featured: 'Not understanding you need to shoot faster shutter when things move'. It's nice that he does stuff for rescues, but I hope to honest God he doesn't charge them (he has a price list, so this *is* an actual business not an amateur)  It's a real shame he watermarked this, as now I'm going to have to go to ShutterStock for 'really half assed photo of some girl behind some monitors I guess?'  This seems to be his forte: awkward looking half dressed girls, badly posed, shot with no real finesse or skill and just loving boring for the most part. What a top dude, hire him for your kids sweet sixteen (if she passes his weight limit and will wear a bikini).
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:
He seems like a pretty awful person in addition to the whole best photographer part. Really, though, It's like 95% of everything on Model Mayhem, except she's wearing a top.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Yeah the worst part of his photography is how boring it is. No time and effort in either setting up the shot and seemingly zero post processing. It was a disappointment after reading the rant, but still an enjoyable juxtaposition based on how good he obviously thinks he is. Wonder if I can find his gear list. I bet he shoots a full frame beast with at least one ridiculously priced lens. At the minimum.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
I love how he nailed the focus on that dog's dick. Edit: OMG he's this guy.        Helen Highwater fucked around with this message at 12:35 on Jan 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 11:00
|
|
|
All photos © 2016 D Allen Studio
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
Those pictures probably look fine to him because his perception of reality is so skewed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
Oi! Stop posting his photos! Haven't you seen his latest post?quote:OFFICIAL NOTICE:
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Yeah I found the post chronicling the last 5 years of his insane amount of area and name changes. Glad to see it's not a new prick, but one that's been here all along. All the comments under that post have vanished now which is a shame, as Facebook says there was a stack of new ones.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
I had no idea all you had to do to avoid censure was to forbid it. This will make my life so much easier! I hereby give notice to the IRS that it is strictly forbidden to take any action against me forcing me to pay taxes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
He sent me a message on Facebook then blocked me. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
Hahaha what did you say to him?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:He sent me a message on Facebook then blocked me. jokes on him. people who shove cameras up asses make a lot of money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Hahaha what did you say to him? He had a previous post where he was complaining about a model who had been working all night the day before and how it was ridiculous that she hadn't told him in advance that she had to work before the shoot. I commented on it and he deleted all the comments and sent me that message via his personal account.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
And now he's deleted his profile.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:And now he's deleted his profile. Will his new profile and alias be better? Let's hope so! Edit: Also the comment exchange in that DIYPhotography blog post is amazing, so many new things learned. ianskate fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Jan 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
The internet is a harsh place, only the strong survive. Hopefully he found this thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Hmm what image will best convey the atmosphere at this deadly fire? Oh I kno
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
Maybe it was his ex-wife?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
quote:We set out with the ambition of not shooting cliche tourist trap shots and find some different view points. This was shot on a 5Dmkiii with a 17-40 F4 lens at F16, ISO125, 30sec exposure. Final editing was done in Lightroom with an approach similar to starting from scratch with a colouring-in book  quote:theres a massive blotch in the middle quote:Can only work with the reflections your given on the day champ quote:thats not the reflection thats a slider being too far quote:Thanks for the tip underage at the vape shop fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Jan 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 12:56
|
|
|
Listing off their gear and settings is a giant red flag, the smarter move was to not engage them at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 02:41 |
|
|
lmao xzzy posted:Listing off their gear and settings is a giant red flag it really is. Every single time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 17:50
|
|