Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

rcman50166 posted:

Well I live in CT, United States. So, by the map, it looks like I'm out. Doesn't look like good weather anyways.

I think you're also a day late on the storm.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Ringo R posted:

Rebel film camera with a CMOS sensor :v:
http://bangkok.craigslist.co.th/pho/2035888464.html

Sporting the 2.5-inch LCD display, the EOS REBEL X lets you view the captured photos clearly. :drugnerd:

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Reichstag posted:

e: Also, I much prefer his non-reflected shot.

You're a cold man, Reichstag.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

You should have that camera cast in bronze.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

You could always just pay for some film and shoot it. Instant preset.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Paragon8 posted:

These aren't that great imo.

They're just preset sliders.

I like how the Portra ones actually crank up the saturation. So accurate!

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

xzzy posted:

It is nice in that it has a command line interface so batch processing is super easy, but in my experience it takes a bunch of fiddling to get all the arguments set just how you want them.. it has a habit of dicking around with color tables and doing a terrible job with jpeg compression. Lossless image formats work a lot better.. but will require you to use yet another batch tool to convert them for web use.

Yes, and ImageMagick has a handy "convert" tool provided to do that.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

PDF is actually a great document format. It's a shame people always equate it with slow/clunky software.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Reichstag posted:

As opposed to getting all artsy with a leica in Afghanistan, which is obviously much more acceptable. Come on.

A Leica means you're rich, which also means you're allowed to gawk at those poor brown people

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

spog posted:

Well paint me yellow and call me Susan: I'd obviously blanked those out of my mind and forgotten they existed.

I think my brain automatically deletes anything potential purchase that includes the word 'thousand' in the price.

$6,000 is obviously a lot of cash, but given how cheap medium format stuff is on ebay, I wonder at what price point a digital back would make a full kit in MF be comparible in price to a full kit in FF?

The problem with that kind of scenario is the lack of lenses for MF that would be considered "wide" on 135. You'd be pretty pigeonholed into using teles.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Clayton Bigsby posted:

Unless by "wide" you mean "ultrawide", there are plenty of decent wideangles for MF.

Show me an affordable 35mm lens for 645 and beyond and maybe we can start talking.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Clayton Bigsby posted:

Medium format is not cheap. You said that you would basically be restricted to teles, but on say a P1 P45+ back a 28mm would be equivalent to about a 19mm on a 35mm body. That is pretty drat wide to me. A 35mm would be equivalent to about 23mm. And so on.

Also, if you are sinking 8-10k into a body it is kind of silly to complain about the lenses being too expensive. The Mamiya 35/3.5 is just over a couple of grand, so in the grand scale of things it is not so bad.

edit: OK, I see that you are probably referring to a setup comparative to 35mm price wise, and then you are definitely more restricted. But, Pentax and Mamiya manual focus glass is not too bad; a Mamiya 35mm manual focus lens is like 400 bucks used.

I'm not talking about a setup comparative to 35mm, I'm talking about the viability of a medium format body with a 35mm-sized sensor in it - which would severely restrict your lens choices on the wide end, unless you want to start recessing lenses into the body housing. If we're talking about 645 sized digital backs, it's clearly not an issue.

edit: I'm not crazy for thinking along this train of thought:

spog posted:

I'd love it if someone made a digital sensor back for medium format bodies using a DSLR sensor.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Send them an invoice for their use. You don't have to feel it necessary to enable their dickery.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

If you don't like glitter awards, delete them and stop joining groups that encourage posting them. Not a difficult problem to solve.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

I think you're reaching for a comparison that's not really there.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

You need to turn in your "cool kids club" card, thanks.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Re-film 2 girls 1 cup but with Paula Deen's Whipped Butter instead.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

linkbait

quote:

Romantic writers expressed a preference for sublimity over attractiveness in the late 18th and 19th centuries. Edmund Burke wrote, “For sublime objects are vast in their dimensions, beautiful ones comparatively small: beauty should be smooth and polished; the great, rugged and negligent … beauty should not be obscure; the great ought to be dark and gloomy: beauty should be light and delicate; the great ought to be solid, and even massive.” The experience of watching a sunset usually counts as sublime. The scene unfolds on a grand scale, loud with color and radiance; you get a shivery feeling of time passing as you sip your G&T; death draws just a bit nearer. Sunset pictures, though, reduce and tame that sublimity. Instead of your mortality rising to meet you, you see pretty colors, locked in a small and tidy moment. It’s as if putting sunsets on film magically relegates them to the same cloying aesthetic category as wildflowers and blonde children—other people’s.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

helmacron you're loving disgusting

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

I think his point is that he doesn't like the Photographer's Gallery.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

I hope you're all aware "wilderness area" doesn't mean "national forest" in this context. You can't even bike inside of them. My rights!!!

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

For some strange reason the restriction of commercial photography in conservation spaces doesn't particularly bother me. Does it bother you that you can't walk into national parks for free?

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

I love going all out on lots of things related to photography but organizing my catalog is at the absolute bottom of my list

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

I'm not entirely sure you know what MLM means

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Ask $500

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Geektox posted:

Are the members of portland photo squad also all programmers too?

Either developers or development managers

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Your art is nothing if it's not SOOC

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Wild EEPROM posted:

i shot a roll of cinestill 800t outdoors and everything is so drat blue

No poo poo, it's tungsten film. What did you expect?

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Couldn't you accomplish that with some imagemagick fuckery?

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

burzum karaoke posted:

Personally, I wouldn't be caught dead without my new balances and cargo pants. They just make more sense.

Comfortable and functional

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

A Saucy Bratwurst posted:

Calling that art is like calling a 16 year olds imitation of autosalon art.

Something you could study and learn from, then

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

I've met lots of photogoons in Portland (where I'm based) and Albuquerque.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

8th-snype posted:

I karaoke with several goons irl weekly. Once I had beers with mrblandaverage. Musket drunk texts me semi regularly.

Come to portland on tuesday for musket shenanigans

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

xzzy posted:

Anyone significantly older than us doesn't get this whole internet thingamajig, and anyone under 18 isn't going to have a credit card to pay the :10bux:.
I cajoled my parents into paying for my registration at 15

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Why does Apple have you worried?

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Unless you want to keep up on gaming an iMac will work just fine for years and years

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

One thing you can't get with a build-your-own PC is the iMac form factor. If you're cramped for space it's pretty incredible.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

Dren posted:

think again

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/nuc/nuc-kit-nuc6i7kyk-features-configurations.html

It's not totally build-your-own but what do you expect for that form factor?

I mean an iMac is literally one cable into a monitor, it's pretty hard to beat until you get display + desktop all in one.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/29/us/bh-photo-lawsuit/

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply