Taintchat: Blockchain-powered game for a crypto hedgefund

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Taintchat: Blockchain-powered game for a crypto hedgefund

«‹›2 »

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

snowman posted:

"Big, long, telephoto lenses are not great, even though they impress beginners.

Every camera maker: Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Zeiss, Leica, the Russians and more, all make big telephotos. So what? Photography is about getting close. Long lenses are for photographers who lack the skills to get close."

He has another page somewhere that explains why nobody needs wide angle lenses. When you're Ken Rockwell, everything around you just moves into your view, regardless of the lens you're using.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2009 16:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 7, 2024 01:55

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

I take it there's not an EF mount version, then? I think it would be hilarious to see this connected to a DSLR with a $20 ebay adapter.

# ¿ Dec 3, 2009 13:41

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Augmented Dickey posted:

I don't know why anyone would buy that in this day and age, don't they have SLR adapters for telescopes now?

I don't know anything at all about telescopes, but browsing around a little bit, I couldn't find a telescope for sale that is quite this long - closest I could find was around 3000mm and $15k. So I guess you could think of it as a $45k telescope with a built-in FD mount!

# ¿ Dec 11, 2009 20:37

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

AIIAZNSK8ER posted:

i like his image enhancement section. http://www.matt-probert.co.uk/de.htm ive definitely seen worse, and if he gets paid for it and makes a living doing it. i wanna know his secret.

There's a guy near me who claims to be professional, and "specializes" in photoshop fake tilt-shift effects with Ken Rockwell saturation boosts. I'm not sure who pays him, I can't imagine there's a huge market for this.

# ¿ Dec 18, 2009 19:03

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Cultural Imperial posted:

I wonder what brand of camera this was? Any guesses?

http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2010/01/15/consumer-lost-camera.html

The guy who found it posted in the comments, said it was an Olympus Stylus Tough:

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1483

# ¿ Jan 18, 2010 02:44

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Whitezombi posted:

EDIT: Is this the guy who said Nikon made a one of a kind left hand camera for him or something like that?

Yes, and he also claimed that he had a custom elephant penis skin put on it.

# ¿ Jan 22, 2010 19:08

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Interrupting Moss posted:

As a testament to the man's madness, I did not immediately dismiss this as a joke.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm#lefty

His proof that the lefty elephant penis F100 is real is the fact that he wears his watch upside down, apparently.

# ¿ Jan 22, 2010 19:29

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Twenties Superstar posted:

e: you shouldn't be concerned with offending me there are far worse things in the world than some guy appropriating a group of people to describe his displeasure about people who like shooting film. I would be more worried about nobody taking you seriously because you are acting like a careless bigot.

so its only ok if you do it, huh?

# ¿ Feb 11, 2010 15:31

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

I think it was more of a stupid joke than an insult, but I believe it was in that thread about the guy who sold his Leica M3 for drug money.

Apologies if I'm thinking of somebody else.

# ¿ Feb 11, 2010 15:51

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

poopinmymouth posted:

You are, because I remember being offended then too. As a straight guy you don't get to say when fag is a joke or insulting any more than a white guy gets to say when he's allowed to use friend of the family without black people getting offended.

Sorry, thats really bad wording on my part*. I wasn't implying that it isn't insulting - it obviously is.

*For whatever reason I always think of "insults" and "things that are insulting" as things that can be but are not necessarily the same. (insert venn diagram here) Which isn't to say that either are ok - whether you intended to be insulting or not, you're still a jerk.

# ¿ Feb 11, 2010 17:05

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Twenties Superstar posted:

You might want to read that thread again.

I know that when somebody says "gearfag" or "filmfag" or "whateverfag" they aren't often trying to be marginalising or subjugating to gay people but it is such an ignorant thing to do. Whether you mean it or not using the words "gearfag" or "filmfag" is basically the same thing as saying "that human being who likes/uses gear/film" and that's pretty clearly not ok.

And that's more or less what was trying to say in my last post.

Again, my apologies if that wasn't you in the other thread - my memory is usually very good when it comes to these sorts of things, but I must be on crack today.

# ¿ Feb 11, 2010 18:48

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Mannequin posted:

My point was that before you were buying a Leica because it was a Leica, and now when you buy a Leica it's part Kodak, which sucks.

One could argue that that part has always been made by Kodak...

# ¿ Apr 7, 2010 05:14

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Beastruction posted:

What about zooms in the pre-computer-lens days? They'd have to be constant-aperture because there would be no way to communicate a changing aperture to the camera's meter, right?

They should just need some kind of mechanism in the lens that moves the prong as it zooms, right?

# ¿ Apr 26, 2010 15:55

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

HPL posted:

I suppose you could get an older M39 Leica lens and put it on a Russian rangefinder. But then again you might get lynched for putting your godly Barnackian creation on a $10 camera.

I have a Zeiss Sonnar on my Kiev. Not quite the same, but I'm sure somebody out there would whine about that.

# ¿ May 20, 2010 02:45

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Stregone posted:

This is pretty awesome: Cuban Polaroid

He should get some of this.

# ¿ Jun 8, 2010 13:01

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Martytoof posted:

Yeap, that's definitely the guy then. 4x5 would definitely be less of a hassle, but I'm trying to stick to just digital and 645 for now since I'm short on moneys. Definitely going to try this tomorrow though.

I know you said you don't want to spend money, but I'd bet the 80/1.9 could get pretty close to that. Cheaper than a decent 4x5 setup, at least!

# ¿ Aug 16, 2010 05:29

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Combat Pretzel posted:

Speaking of DigitalRev, I accidentally landed at their online shop. Are they trustworthy? Googling I read poo poo about import taxes due to them sending from Hongkong?

Some DigitalRev employee spent several days spamming my local craigslist with ads for lens, all because some guy posted an ad for the same model, and was *only* asking $50 less than Digitalrev's price. The ads always got flagged, but he kept reposting about 10-20 times a day for 2 or 3 days straight. I replied to one, yelling at him for spamming, telling him that ads for dodgy Hong Kong retailers isn't what craigslist is for, that he's only making himself look like a jackass, and making his business look even less reputable (their resellerratings score is 4/10, fwiw).

Instead of replying to me directly, he posts my email on craigslist along with some insane rant, quoting random unrelated comments from my website as proof that I'm...well, I'm not quite sure what his point was. Then, he starts reposting this several times a day:

Yep, DigitalRev.

# ¿ Aug 23, 2010 02:40

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Wooten posted:

I'm not sure why you feel the need to be secretive about this.

He's not being secretive, he doesn't know - someone else posted those.

# ¿ Nov 17, 2010 13:59

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

xzzy posted:

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.

On a side note, KEH has a bunch of canon P&S in their as-is section for under $10, in case anybody needs something for this.

# ¿ Dec 1, 2010 06:40

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Or my $20 Canon 55/1.2, from some old lady on CL trying to get rid of her husband's old stuff before they moved to a much warmer state.

I see awesome bargains on forums all the time...I've had great luck buying from people here, rangefinderforum, largeformatphotography, etc. You'll have to be very patient, but better-than-KEH prices can and will come up.

# ¿ Dec 15, 2010 04:34

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

dunkman posted:

Post your tax-refund-irresponsible-photography-related-purchase you wish to make with it:

Not expecting much of a refund, but I did get an end-of-year bonus - a good chunk of which went to a Voigtlander 35/1.2 :swoon:

# ¿ Jan 13, 2011 03:36

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

poopinmymouth posted:

No one had me jealous till this post. What camera are you going to use it on? Post photos! (taken with the lens)

Actually, can you take a photo holding it? I hear it's big, but it's an RF lens, so it can't be as big as my 35mm L

I'm using a Leica M5. Indeed, it's pretty huge for a RF lens, here it is mounted (with a Nikon 50/1.4 for scale):

The first roll of film shot with this lens is drying right now, so assuming nothing went horribly wrong, I'll have some samples soon.

Pompous Rhombus posted:

Nice! They just recently raised the price on those too, may be out of reach for me for a while if the panic spreads from RFF to eBay.

There were a couple for sale on the RFF classifieds shortly before the price increase - I was just about to pull the trigger on a new one when I saw one of those ads, so I really lucked out. I snapped up a CV 21/4 from the same guy, so I ended up with both lenses for not much more than what the 35 alone was going for new.

# ¿ Jan 14, 2011 06:05

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

CF cards are xbox huge too

real post: I did that once and it continued to work, but the plastic casing was broken. I got my stuff off and replaced it.

# ¿ Jan 14, 2011 21:31

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

xzzy posted:

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.

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.

# ¿ Jan 16, 2011 17:35

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

His about page sort of admits to being a troll:

quote:

I have the energy and sense of humor of a three-year old, so remember, this is a personal website, and never presented as fact. I enjoy making things up for fun, as does The Onion, and I publish them here � even on this page.

# ¿ Jan 19, 2011 15:10

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

If it were real, it would probably cost $10000, and also drive prices of film cameras/dead mount lenses way up. I'm fine with it being fake.

# ¿ Apr 5, 2011 12:46

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

mr. mephistopheles posted:

Is anyone else not on board with the obsession with making everything touch screen now? I hate it. It isn't even close to the tactile feel of a physical button. Even if it was 100% accurate I still wouldn't like it. My phone has a touch screen and a keyboard and I use the touch screen as little as possible. It just seems like something that's cool in concept but it's just... I don't know. Maybe I'm getting old. Every piece of technology in twenty years is probably going to just be a giant touch screen. It'll just be one pad thing that you carry around and it will work as a computer and it will have a wireless attachment that turns into a phone (so you don't have to hold the big tablet up to your head) although it will probably all be video phones then.

The future is dumb.

Yep.

Can we throw 3D into that rant too?

# ¿ Apr 19, 2011 02:28

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

I think Leica's target market generally appreciates the fact that their camera isn't full of menus and useless features.

# ¿ Apr 30, 2011 05:07

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

poopinmymouth posted:

I've been having luck with lightroom's perspective adjustment, but I love the look of the perspective controlled shots. I'm wondering if I'm too lazy to actually setup and use a t/s setup though. Has there every been a pocket camera with perspective controls? I don't need full tilt and shift, just shift.

This and a Pentacon Six lens would probably work. They appear to be out of stock now, but it might be worth contacting them.

# ¿ May 5, 2011 12:59

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

For much of what they make, Leica doesn't have a whole lot of competition. I wanted a rangefinder that I know I could focus accurately with any lens, had selectable framelines, a big viewfinder, and decent selection of lenses. This meant Leica or Nikon RF, and at the time, Leica was actually the cheaper option. It does everything I want, and does it all extremely well.

The lens prices have gotten ridiculous over the last year or so - it's hard to find a 50/2 Summicron M for under $1000 now, last year I saw them in the $300 range frequently. I have no idea why this is, but I'd imagine it will correct itself eventually.

# ¿ Jun 23, 2011 15:27

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

I HATE CARS posted:

Voigtlander Bessas? Unless you're talking more than 10 years ago.

I found the base length to be too short for me with faster/longer lenses, and I've found I can focus accurately more consistently with the Leica. My vision isn't the greatest, so this may not be as big a concern for others.

McMadCow posted:

Also, I don't have a Leica RF system, but I do have a Contax G1. It's every bit a competitor to the M cameras.

I considered that too, but they're not really rangefinders, are they?

# ¿ Jun 23, 2011 18:38

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

xzzy posted:

I always have to free a hand to create some shade so I can actually see the screen.

I got one of these for my NEX...it was really nice to have, but it broke after a week or so.

# ¿ Jun 29, 2011 18:05

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

xzzy posted:

The film had her carrying around some generic rangefinder style camera, if I remember right.

I haven't seen the movie but from what I'm seeing on the internet, it's an Argus C3. Those separate rewind and shutter cocking actions IIRC, so double exposures would be no problem.

# ¿ Jul 21, 2011 20:12

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

SeamusMcPhisticuffs posted:

Yeah, gently caress thinking about things, just do it man. Reality is for pussies, I live in a world where I am the only one that is right!

This is the attitude that breeds shitbag cops and shitbag photographers alike.

Yeah man, he should have known to magically turn himself white before going out and attempting to do his job and not break any laws. What a shitbag.

# ¿ Jul 22, 2011 13:37

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

Haggins posted:

Just saw this on CL today:

Oh how kind of them to let the photographer keep their own photos! I'm half tempted to post an add "Seeking a Band for my party", no pay but it'll give you experience playing at parties!

Do it, and be sure to tell them they get to keep their own songs.

# ¿ Aug 18, 2011 05:50

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

My Linhof takes the best pictures :smugbird:

# ¿ Sep 29, 2011 18:42

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

I've gone on a few flickr photowalks. They're usually more about beer than photos or walking.

# ¿ Oct 14, 2011 19:13

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

daspope posted:

The Lytro might be pretty interesting depending on how they share the code. I am curious what the actual pixel count is, 11 mega rays sounds like space talk.

They very conveniently don't mention the resolution anywhere, so I'm guessing its something like 1000x1000.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2011 15:00

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

I'm sure tons of people use them (if not, they wouldn't have caught on), I just can't comprehend how pulling up some camera app and waiting for it to focus and decipher a QR code is ever faster than typing in a URL, unless your website is gopher://members.donnysdiscountdialup.biz/~fjohnso3/.

# ¿ Nov 26, 2011 06:14

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 7, 2024 01:55

FasterThanLight: Mar 26, 2003

QPZIL posted:

What is it about 70s/80s film photography that LOOKS so 70s/80s? Is it the white balance being off?

People wearing 70s clothes too.

# ¿ Dec 2, 2011 16:05

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Taintchat: Blockchain-powered game for a crypto hedgefund

«‹›2 »