|
Rated PG-34 posted:I am sad that this thread closed as I was hoping to get my uplifting evocative photos out for all my friends to see It amazes me that it took people less than two hours to get so many dead animals into the thread. Does everyone have an album on their hard drive of things that died horribly for such an occasion?
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2010 21:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 10:38 |
|
|
squidflakes posted:That's why I crop everything to a circle. They only look rectangular because your brain interprets the signals that way. Pros do it with the vignette slider.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2010 17:46
|
|
|
I was kind of twitching eye over the blob of text at upper right. And hovering over each of his ears. It's like the person who did the cover had a list of copy they were required to fit in, and anywhere the face wasn't, the text went in. I guess that's normal for magazines these days, but it still bugs me. What ever happened to nothing but an awesome photo that made people go "well drat, I have been compelled.. I want to read that magazine"?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2010 22:17
|
|
|
Fists Up posted:What the gently caress First time I saw it, I thought the lady was wearing heels, making her certifiably insane. Then I zoomed in on the picture and it's really just some equipment creating an illusion. Then after studying it, I wanted to know what they were taking pictures of.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2010 15:43
|
|
|
aliencowboy posted:Looks more like an art-deco-metal-building-eagle-face than a gargoyle to me. It's actually a supersized hood ornament on the Chrysler building in NYC. On the 31st floor they have radiator caps!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2010 15:50
|
|
|
One of my favorites from that collection is #58. Part of it is probably sentimental.. my family has roots in the area where that photo was taken, but other than that, it's just a brilliant portrait. The way the dog directs attention to the man, and the expression on his face tells a story of a hard life.. it's perfect. I guess it would be nice if his eyes weren't in shadow, but I'll forgive it. Library of Congress has a pretty cool website for old photos like that.. I spent almost a full weekend browsing through their archives. These color photos appear in there (which you can download ridiculously large versions of), as well as many black and white. http://www.loc.gov/pictures/
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2010 16:48
|
|
|
Well leave SOME of the data in. I kind of like seeing the exposure settings the shot used, as a learning tool.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2010 02:50
|
|
|
I got lucky, I started reading here before I hit the HDR phase. So now I'll never have one.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2010 23:59
|
|
|
geeves posted:No, you're right. But there are quite a lot that are just awful and look like they were made out of pastel construction paper. And the good ones look like screenshots from video games. I can't decide if that's a slight against video games, or the photographer.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2010 16:14
|
|
|
HPL posted:He got hit in the chest. He said his camera got dinged too, came out of it just fine though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2010 17:15
|
|
|
DaNzA posted:Interesting video by canon shot entirely with 8-15 f4L. Stuff after 3min mark was pretty amazing. It's pretty ridiculous how small the gap between "video cameras" and "photo cameras" has become. My sister is a film student, and has never owned her own camera because of the cost of entry. Meanwhile, I'm all  about the cost of a 7D. I'm not saying Micheal Bay is gonna be doing his next movie on a DSLR, but it sure seems like it's only a matter of time before the shift happens.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2010 16:16
|
|
|
I wanna do a photo walk with that thing. "Everyone run, he's got a grenade launcher!" Wonder if the police would see the amusement.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2010 17:17
|
|
|
William T. Hornaday posted:I always wonder how many people out there watching that are knowingly nodding at the ridiculous reenactments, they themselves almost having been garroted by the single, yet sinister, cord that a digital camera requires. And the possibility that these people not only exist, but in numbers much larger than what I could ever willfully envision, frightens me dearly. If such people existed in quantities, film wouldn't be on its way out. Ask any random person and they'd probably be surprised to hear that film cameras still exist. Vast majority of people have gotten comfortable with the digital thing, even if all they do is plug the camera into a printer and spend a zillion dollars on inkjet cartridges to print them out. Vivitar is pretty clearly pandering to the elderly and the stereotype that they're afraid of technology, but I can't name a single one of my grandparents who still use film. Sure it's an anecdote but it's not like your brain shuts off when you turn 80.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2010 05:34
|
|
|
DJExile posted:JC Penney made lenses? Department stores used to do a lot of that. There was Sears branded stuff too. I don't think any of them actually made it, they just bought it from some budget brand and put their name on it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2010 15:30
|
|
|
I would give a kidney to have an opportunity at taking that shot. It amazes me how high up you can be, and still resolve points in a city. He gets from Israel to Tunisia and you can still pick out Cairo.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2010 05:02
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:drat, only 10% light transmission? Can't wait to upgrade to some decent glass. Fortunately 10% of what's effectively infinity is still plenty. A laser pointer emits something like a trillion photons each second, if my random banging into google is accurate. The sun emits a whole bunch more than that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2010 23:00
|
|
|
I look forward to pistol grip cameras in the future when we have LCD glasses to give us a video feed of what the camera sees. Screw awkwardly holding a viewfinder up to my face!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2010 05:30
|
|
|
You can buy electronic timers you can use to delay sending a signal when the trigger is pulled.. giving thousandths of a second accuracy you can adjust with a dial. So assuming that the bullet has no variance in how long it takes to ignite, you can adjust the delay until you get it right. Mythbusters has done it several times for various projects, I'm sure it's a common application but Mythbusters is probably the most widely documented.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2010 22:39
|
|
|
brad industry posted:What did you shoot for the explosion? I can't answer what he used, but I used to shoot bic lighters with a pellet gun and got cute little fireballs out of it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2010 04:18
|
|
|
Yeah, sorry. Just because english is my first language doesn't mean I'm any good at it. Mounting a candle near the object you're shooting is a great way to ignite whatever gas you're putting into the air.  You can also make some glorious fireballs throwing flour on a campfire.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2010 15:41
|
|
|
Image review is a funny thing.. whenever I shut it off, I miss having it on, and whenever it's on, I curse at the camera for not hurrying up and putting the exposure settings back up. I think the only reasonable solution is a camera with two screens!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2010 05:16
|
|
|
aliencowboy posted:Our design instructor in college (animation) was just like this. He was awesome, I honestly wish that kind of critique would carry over into the working world, I really miss it. Maybe he's being taken out of context, but this Roland guy just seems to say whether stuff is poo poo or gold without explaining why. I don't see the benefit of trashing something without talking what might have made it good. Though granted, the people he digs into seem incapable of vocalizing a coherent thought. So maybe they deserve it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2010 01:29
|
|
|
sildargod posted:No! Don't take photos drunk! In Latvia, that's not drunk, that's just quenching thirst.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2010 20:25
|
|
|
My main motivation for getting a DSLR is I wanted to photograph automotive races, and it's one of those subjects where gear definitely matters. A P&S has nowhere near the reach to fill the frame with a car that's 100+ feet away. But I don't go to races every week, so to justify the purchase, I started taking pictures of everything else. I'm still pretty green but I feel like I've learned a lot in the time since. Implementation of the knowledge is still an issue, but that comes with time.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2010 20:45
|
|
|
Well okay, the P&S I owned wasn't up to the task. And believe me, I did try. (Powershot A620, great little camera all things considered)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2010 21:24
|
|
|
moron posted:I was shocked that someone paid me that much for such an old p&s. Is this a sought after model or something? I wouldn't know, but I never had any complaints with mine. I still keep it in the bag as a backup. Only reason I retired it is as stated above.. didn't have enough zoom for what I wanted to do. I do remember when it was new, it had universally good reviews for a camera in its price range. Maybe the guy wanted it as a trade in for the Canon loyalty program? $140 seems pretty high for that, but perhaps he was desperate.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2010 21:42
|
|
|
brad industry posted:It's not like learning math, what you need to hear in an art class is exactly why you and/or your work sucks in the most direct way possible without any bullshit. I'm pretty sure most people agree with this, I know I do. But the video that started the conversation had a teacher that just repeated "terrible" or "boring" over and over again. That's not feedback, that's just being insulting. Stuff like "your colors are poo poo" or "use the drat light meter" is certainly brusque, but at least there's something in there that a student can use to try and do better.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2010 22:31
|
|
|
Helmacron posted:or attaching balloons to a chair and taking photos of the curvature of the earth, whilst breaking plenty of FAA laws. That's the fun of weather balloons: as long as the payload is under a certain weight and dimensions, it's completely unregulated and you can float whatever you want. So leave off the chair part and avoid launching the thing near an airport, the FAA won't care at all. Their biggest concern is what happens to an airplane that runs into it.. if it doesn't crash a plane, it's fair game.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2010 22:51
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:I want a tablet, but I can't for the life of me think of what I'll use it for. It's an elegant solution without a problem to solve. That's one of those things you say until you've owned one for a week or so. The wife and I love the poo poo out of our ipad.. it's our gps, find stuff to do, preview+upload pictures for the family, stream netflix on the road do-everything device. I swear I feel like I'm on Star Trek using that thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2011 16:26
|
|
|
Sounds good to me.. all I want in life is the financial resources to prove I'm as crazy as this guy (both the good crazy and the bad one). The image is absolutely ridiculous when you zoom in. poo poo jumps out that you can't even see in the full version. I'd like to see "where's waldo" style images done with this guy's gear.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2011 04:16
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:That's only 1.6 megapixels and is for x-ray fluoroscopy, not standard photography Then maybe this will impress?  The green dot in the upper left is the CCD from an iphone, for scale. "The scientific sensor array on DECam is an array of 62 2048x4096 pixel back-illuminated CCDs totaling 520 megapixels, there are an additional 12 2048x2048 pixel CCDs used for guiding the telescope, monitoring focus and alignment."
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2011 21:44
|
|
|
dunkman posted:Post your tax-refund-irresponsible-photography-related-purchase you wish to make with it: I've been slobbering over Canon's new 70-300 f4-5.6. Reviews have been positive for the kind of shots I want to take, and I'm expecting a return that could make a huge dent on the purchase.. it's something I'm sure thinking about. (though I'm a cheapskate, and will probably end up with an older used lens with similar capability)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2011 02:20
|
|
|
The "xbox is huge" joke came from the controllers, not the console itself. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2011 20:39
|
|
|
There's software based raid.. never done it for windows but I'm sure someone's got something done out there. There's a performance hit but if all you care about is data integrity, it works fine. The backup in Windows 7 is a decent option if you need free. If you've got a large spare hard drive, it'll give some peace of mind.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2011 06:39
|
|
|
If you do do software raid, don't be an idiot and put three partitions on the same disk in the set. I know a guy that did this and was all "my data is totally safe because it's raid!" He never considered what would happen if the physical disk died.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2011 15:52
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:That doesn't sound anything like RAID, you don't get to choose which disks in an array your stuff gets written to. The whole point is to protect you if one of the physical disks dies. Exactly. But most software based raid solutions don't do any sanity checking on what disk partitions you put into the set. If you want to carve up a 2tb drive into three equal sized chunks, and make it a 3 disk "raid", it will let you. I work in IT, I guess I shouldn't have let my "stupid user" stories leak into a photography forum.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2011 18:14
|
|
|
Or scour them for parts to rebuild other lenses. I get the whole insurance fraud argument, but lenses are not cheap to make. There is no way in hell that it makes sense from an environmental standpoint to throw away something usable just because some other component is damaged. Canon has that video on their site that was linked in this thread earlier this year.. the resources and effort that go into a single element of an L class lens is staggering.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2011 03:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 10:38 |
|
|
The real question is whether he's protecting his camera, or trying to practice for post game photos at the superbowl.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 23:43
|
|