|
Don't know if this has come up yet. A Globe and Mail (large Canadian newspaper) staff photographer talks about what's in his camera bags. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/multimedia/camera-club/whats-in-our-staff-photographers-camera-bag/article1782714/
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2010 00:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 07:08 |
|
|
I dunno, I don't think they screwed their futures as photojournalists. I'm thinking of an analogy to how banks and computer security companies like to hire hackers. If you can expose the weakness of a system, you can avoid some major hazards, and show your employer how to avoid those hazards. The fact they admitted to the hoax pretty much right away, rather than hiding it and risking getting found out, speaks well to their intelligence and creativity, as well as basic honesty, I think. Of course, I'm not a professional photographer nor journalist of any kind. Maybe this episode really does exclude them from photojournalism as a profession.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2010 01:18
|
|
|
I'm behind on my The Economist subscription, but I was reading the October 9 issue this morning and was struck by a comment. At the end of an article about a travelling exhibition of Eadweard Muybridge's work, they sayquote:Something beautifully photographed, Muybridge's entire career reminds us, will be beautiful in the photograph whatever it was like in fact. That profound change in point of view altered the visual arts for ever. Also, the part about "altered the visual arts" implies that prior to Muybridge's work, people believed only beautiful objects could make beautiful images. Could somebody with some Art History background please let me know if this is true?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2010 21:59
|
|
|
HPL posted:No, my idea was to put the camera on burst and shooting in the middle of the burst in hopes that you catch the bullet just as it's leaving the barrel through sheer luck and coincidence. High-speed film cameras used to capture bullets impacting things go through tens of thousands of frames in one second. They use motors that could run a lawnmower to spin the film reels.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2010 04:56
|
|
|
Post it in GBS, that way you'll get some cool lens flairs to replace the watermark (and, probably, somebody's face). Plus, you know, LASER EYES! You want a boring picture, or a bad-rear end picture?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2010 04:46
|
|
|
Casull posted:So how did you guys get into photography anyway? I helped my girlfriend at the time buy a refurbished Canon bridge camera (can't remember details) about 4 years ago, so she gave me her old Nikon Coolpix 5200 - she'll deny it, but she's a very good photographer and used that little P&S to take some awesome bug pictures. I eventually reached my limits for what I could get out of that camera so I started shopping for a DSLR early this year. I bought a car about a year ago, and I've developed the habit of going for long-ish drives every week (e.g. today I'll go somewhere). Initially these were more about the driving than the destination or the photography, but lately they've been more an excuse to get my camera to some interesting spots. It's nice to have complementary hobbies. tl;dr - liked cameras as a kid, played with a film SLR, moved into digital. No clear underlying reason.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2010 18:34
|
|
|
Pick one, if not your most favourite, at least one in the top 10, and send it in with the $15. Then find ways to tell people you have entered a National Geographic photo contest. That's got to be good for something, right?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2010 04:46
|
|
|
Dread Head posted:20 shots of flowers http://www.google.ca/images?hl=en&source=imghp&biw=1366&bih=593&q=national+geographic+flowers&gbv=2&aq=f&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= National Geographic is a good place to send your pictures of flowers, apparently.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2010 05:36
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:If I dress and act like a homeless methhead will it improve my photography?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2010 02:11
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:Hahaha what can I say she is usually willing to let me take photos of her and be patient with me while I am figuring out what the hell I am doing. I need to find some new models.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2010 02:08
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:GAH! She can see us!  I imagined the look on your face was exactly like this old picture from the "Show Yourself!" thread.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2010 05:14
|
|
|
I could be persuaded to engage in a theme. No promises until I see what the theme will be, but I could use a motivation boost, too.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 06:48
|
|
|
Really, the bright red option for the K-x is one of the least-obnoxious options Pentax has run with. I'm seriously considering this lens (SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F/2.4 AL), but the coloured options (12 different colours) cost $300, compared to $200 for black. But that conversation properly belongs in the gear thread.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2011 05:56
|
|
|
Still not a bad proverbial-final-straw to push him over the edge / down to one knee. Think of the wedding registry!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2011 04:00
|
|
|
It was suggested recently in the pictures-of-pets thread that we (people who like to pretend to know a thing or two about taking a picture) could volunteer at local animal shelters to provide photos of animals available for adoption. A bit of googling demonstrates that this does indeed occur, though not particularly often. Baltimore: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2010-07-05/lifestyle/bs-ae-pet-photographer-20100622_1_shelter-animals-baltimore-humane-society Indianopolis: http://www.prlog.org/10590644-squeakdog-indianapolis-pet-photographer-helps-rescue-dogs-shine.html Evanston (a bit old): http://www.pioneerlocal.com/evanston/news/171428,ev-dogcalendar-121406-s1.article Has anyone here actually done something like this?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2011 21:22
|
|
|
SKULE123 posted:Thanks for listening, hope that didn't bore you. I'm also in Canada, and because I live in a tiny apartment and go away for long periods doing fieldwork I can't have pets. I occassionally find myself in the Veterinary Medicine building at the university (long story, nothing to do with photography), and I've asked around in a very casual manner and it seems they are often looking for people to help take care of the dogs and cats - take the dogs outside periodically, socialize the cats, etc. They run an adoption program, and use some of the animals for some of the training - non-invasive stuff like giving vet students a chance to practice doing basic examinations, from what I understand. Sounds like I'll need to find an assistant if I'm going to try to do this. I'll ask around at Vet Med, maybe something can come of this. I was also wondering if there were legal or ethical issues to worry about with something like this. For a non-profit like this, I wouldn't be too worried about copyright weirdness, but there are probably insurance things when a new person is brought into contact with the animals? EDIT: Just saw your Mall-Santa thing. Holy crap, I can't imagine myself working something like that. I loving hate dealing with the general public, especially parents regarding anything about their kids. I can do it (I've worked retail, successfully). I probably would have chucked a plastic reindeer through a clothing rack at the Banana Republic after 4 hours, and popped the flash in full power right in some snotty kid's eyes to see if I could induce photo-epilepsy. You're a stronger person than I. ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Jan 23, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2011 22:30
|
|
|
dakana posted:I volunteer at the Humane Society of Greater Dayton.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 05:11
|
|
|
Does the word-part, word-root, word-suffix, something, "-kor" have a particular meaning in Japanese? I ask because both Nikon and Minolta created a new brand for their lenses, but not for their camera bodies or (as far as I know) other components like flashes, Nikkor for Nikon (which seams reasonable enough) and Rokkor for Minolta (which seems totally out of left field). Or is this just some lame coincidence, probably based on the names of people who founded glass-shops 100 years ago?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 02:08
|
|
|
Looks like "any idiot can take great photos with our camera", which is a half-stop removed from "your camera takes great pictures!". But it is seasoned with a dash of "professional photographers are such snobs, aren't they?". Unrelated to the ad, but a feature of the camera: apparently it has a touch screen. My nose mashes into the screen on the back of my K10D when I'm really concentrating on lining up a shot and checking my settings, I can only assume something similar would happen with that Panasonic. I hate touchscreens as a general principle (give me buttons, dammit!) but one in that position would drive me completely insane. Back to the earlier question: I shoot Pentax. Both Canon and Nikon are evil corporate giants bent on world domination by any means necessary. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 02:17
|
|
|
/\/\/\ Cool, thanks! Does that mean "Rokkor" means "(something) optics", too?ease posted:Who both have sensors that detect if your face is near the screen so it can shut it off when you are looking through the viewfinder. BUTTONS. I JUST WANT BUTTONS. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 03:24
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:I'll be over at Vet Med tomorrow a couple of times, maybe if the pigs don't poo poo explosively upon me / I'm able to wash up effectively I'll track down the relevant people. I'm posting this so that I can guilt myself into actually following through on this idea. If I tell other people, that means I have to do it, right?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 05:16
|
|
|
brad industry posted:Have not seen that book but you should get this one I like the customer reviews. Somebody doesn't understand. quote:Nothing sexy about this book. And, you do not see anything even though there are photographs. Shows mostly homemade models.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2011 00:41
|
|
|
It's certainly been a big part of my life, well before my middle ages. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 05:35
|
|
|
Ola posted: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.  Also, 'sup Minolta MD buddy Nice find, especially at that price!I bought a 70-200mm F/3.5 in MD less than a month ago, and got the pictures from the first roll of film that passed behind that glass back from the shop today. Much fun, and new life injected into my X-700.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2011 03:15
|
|
|
Casull posted:Okay, if I'm going to go absolutely psychoballistic with my shooting I need to either A: Bring my netbook so I can offload my pictures in between shoots, or B: Get a bigger memory card.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2011 00:57
|
|
|
psylent posted:Can a radiographer fake it as a fashion photographer?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2011 18:18
|
|
|
ease posted:Please some one never do this with met-art. Also, am I the only one who prefers the un-retouched images? The final versions don't look human.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2011 02:15
|
|
|
I'm left handed, and I don't have a problem at all with SLRs or other cameras built to be held in the right hand. Focus and zoom are with the left hand, and both hands work together to support the weight and fine-tune composition. I use a computer mouse right-handed, so I'm used to pushing buttons and rolling a wheel with the fingers of my right hand anyways. I don't think a mirror-image version would be any easier for me to use.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2011 05:32
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:If I had $4000 to spare, I'd definitely buy this. How the gently caress did they determine that? What would an "EX+" one look like? You know, for $4000 you could probably build an actually useable camera like that, using modern (but used) off-the-shelf camera gear and gun parts.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2011 02:05
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I have a friend who is pretty much limited to Point and Shoots because he doesn't have a right arm. Too bad for him there's really no market for "people who actually NEED a left handed DSLR"  Left-handed DSLR use (2 of 2) by Execudork, on Flickr  Left-handed DSLR use (1 of 2) by Execudork, on Flickr I had to sit down and put the camera between my legs to remove the lens, but otherwise I used only my left hand (and occassionally had the camera swinging from the strap, but that's my clumsiness, not a handedness thing).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2011 02:40
|
|
|
I thought about putting my P&S on a tripod and posing, but then I wouldn't have clear proof that I actually pushed the button with my left hand. Also, I need to go the goddam gym.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2011 06:08
|
|
|
Is the best 35mm film today still better for this kind of thing than a top-end digital P&S? I was under the impression that digital quality had surpassed film in all but a few specialized applications, but maybe that's just for full-frame DSLRs. Speaking of which, how long is the flash recharge time on the very best DSLR flash money can buy? Is it quicker than the shutter lag + recompose time of dual-wielded P&S?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2011 20:11
|
|
|
HPL posted:In response to the thing about film vs digital P&S, the good film P&S cameras had lenses as good as any SLR. The only difference was that it was a fixed lens. If you took two photos, one from a P&S and one from an SLR with all conditions being equal, they would largely be indistinguishable. It's not like with digital where there's a huge gap in sensor quality. With film, any camera could use the same sensor. In a somewhat related question, why are DSLRs so big, when the sensor is smaller than 135 film? Has anyone heard of / seen a trend towards smaller bodies in "full frame" DSLRs? I'm assuming the size is due to the additional electronics, and the fact a digital sensor is considerably thicker than a piece of film, even taking into account winding mechanisms and spools and so forth. How big is the Pentax 645D compared to the 645N? Are digital sensors and their associated circuitry getting more compact for the same sensor area?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2011 06:49
|
|
|
quote:The LUMIX FX77, released last Friday, has a "beauty re-touch" function that will whiten your teeth, increase the translucency of your skin, remove dark eye circles, make your face look smaller and even magnify the size of your eyes. Weren't we having a discussion a few pages back about "two shades lighter"? Why is the culture of a modern, post-industrial nation following the idiotic whims of a 16-year old "kawaii" blogger? I feel shallower for having read that article.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2011 03:46
|
|
|
Martytoof, you're in southern Ontario, yes? Out here on the flat, barren wasteland of the prairies, Craig's list is as howlingly empty as the nearest ghost town. Kijiji looks like rear end, and the average level of literacy displayed by the sellers wouldn't pass a grade four pop-quiz, but it's the only place I've found with things for sale I might actually want to buy (plus mounds of crap, of course). Sadly, despite their abuse of punctuation, local sellers of camera equipment appear to be aware of actual market values, and there are no amazing deals from the willfully ignorant that I've found. I still hold out hope for the limitlessness of human stupidity (weekly searches include "Pentacks", "Pnetax", "Cannon", and "Nikkon"), but so far, nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2011 01:56
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I have been incredibly tempted to throw in a vibration reduction technology joke out there for the past few days because I'm a horrible peson, but I just can't bring myself to
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2011 01:30
|
|
|
HPL posted:Pretend to be totally incompetent with the camera while your friend lurks further away taking shots with a telephoto. When you're done, show them the horrible photos on the back of the camera and be all like: "Sorry man, I'll see what I can to fix it in Photoshop" then e-mail them the photos your friend took.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2011 06:59
|
|
|
Since we're posting old camera ads... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rj5-49IW_U I am going to drive around with my Pentax hanging from my rear-view mirror, and dangerously pass inexplicably-slow-driving Nissan Z-cars on narrow winding highways. The only SLR ads I can remember were print, generally in National Geographic. Canon has run at least one full-page "Wildlife as Canon sees it" type ad in every issue of NG since the 1980s, according to this. EDIT: Program mode, under various names, is older than consumer autofocus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdmVgugP1NU&NR=1 ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Mar 24, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2011 02:20
|
|
|
Yes, absolutely. And try to convince her to put some of it up on ebay as a bundle, somebody will want it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2011 04:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 07:08 |
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I've always wanted a kim jong il costume, I keep looking for that freaking jacket. That seller is probably not a dude: quote:I am selling my business because I am now homeschooling my kids. Personally, I think a boudoir studio would be an excellent asset for homeschooling - just think how much the kids could learn!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2011 03:27
|
|