|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:dont forget about these http://gizmodo.com/5232604/adobe-creative-suite-pillows-are-all-about-design and you will have the house that adobe built. I found this amusing because adobe is a house building material.
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2009 20:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
I think if you can microwave a D3, it'll probably be okay in space.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2009 22:01
|
|
|
I climb things. I refuse to climb things if there is a light rain, or a heavy fog, or anything that raises the moisture levels. It has rained every night where I live since for three weeks. I wake up at 3am, ready to go, I step outside and pow, rain. I'm never going to finish my folio.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2009 20:49
|
|
|
Just wanted to say, because I read this thread then ventured out in a storm last night, I really believe the way to get noticed with your photography nowadays is to actually get out there and do something utterly ridiculous. I don't even really like the guy's photos, but they are masterpieces, solely because no one else is willing to go to those lengths to get photos like that. And that's why I wish there were brochures I could download, and letters I could send, and clipboarded girls on street corners I could hire, to sell the idea that photography, as we know it, should be criminalized and prosecution chased. I guess it could be argued photography would stagnate, but the photos would at least be worth something.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2010 00:01
|
|
|
Dude I used to work with would always talk about some crazy fucker who you could pay to dig anything, anywhere. Want to dig for footings in the middle of a forest? Pay this guy. Apparently the dude, when he took breaks, would sit and sharpen his shovel on a wetstone. That's the market I dream of getting into. Doing something so ridiculous, people find you and pay you for it. gently caress weddings. gently caress portrait photography and making a collage of artsy cafe photographs. What about those long range photographs into North Korea? What about James Nachtwey visiting the sulfur mines. What about Kevin Carter ala Bang Bang Club. How do you get into that short of buying a camera and sneaking into a warzone and who the hell will you get to publish your picture, on account of everyone having a camera phone? Does National Geographic still insist on using only slides and negatives? Also, on an unrelated note: I saw that picture of the vulture and the starving child, and I bet, despite whatever Kevin Carter said to the vindictive media before he asphyxiated himself, if you could see the rest of that film role, it's everything up to the vulture pecking the child's eyes out and gouging out the child's tongue. Does everyone else think this?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2010 11:06
|
|
|
The front wheel changes aperture, the back wheel changes shutter, if it's in manual mode. If it's in Shutter priority, only the back wheel changes things. If it's in aperture priority, the front wheel does stuff. If it's in P, then neither of the wheels do anything. I feel a little bit perplexed when people get in a tizzy about controls. Both cameras do exactly same thing. They let you control the Shutter, the Aperture, and the ISO values. You need to work out how to do three things on them and you have a helpful little screen on all of them that informs you when you have changed the relevant values. It's not like it's pitch black out there and you're performing your own circumcision with a drop saw. Also D3s is fuckin' A. Where do you live where they actually show them off? When I bought mine, the store was like "selling these is so rare, we have like, one in stock. Ever." EDIT: To be honest, I sort of pride myself on being able to work any camera you give me. So every time I see a camera, I grab it, work it out, and then put it back.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2010 22:53
|
|
|
The only person I have ever met, of all the people I've met who own cameras, who really had a thing about Nikon and Canon was this tall guy who always wore a hat because he balded in a really horrible way (hair above ears, encircling the back of his head, top bald from eyebrows to rear skull) and he used to run into the produce section, where I worked, with fruit or vegetables that resembled genetalia and try to make me laugh. Also he told me off once because, as assistant manager, he could change time tables, and he changed them week to week because he could, and I was an hour late or an hour early, week to week, because he'd swap my shift forward or back an hour. And when he was telling me he was thinking about writing me up for my whatever numbered infraction because I'd arrived late again, I got quite angry and told him to either write me up or shut up, and leave my time table alone. And there was a long silence. And so I added, to fill in the quiet, to stop talking about Nikon and Canon like one was slavery and one was freedom because they both produce cameras and they're both really good. And he stopped talking about Nikon and Canon from there on. Like I flicked a switch. Like I asked the lady at the bank to stop taking out a transaction fee when I make a transaction and she checked the checkbox that says "don't take Helmacron's money". Which was fantastic. Also he stopped being such a fuckhead and he left my timetable alone and also stopped threatening to write me up. It was a pretty decent solution, I think. EDIT: that's not to say he stopped talking to other people about it. He just stopped talking to me. Also, I can only see two yellows there, one for the logo and one for the product launches. Unless you're talking about the logo being different on the plastic bag comparable to the sign of the logo, which I guess you have a point. Ringo: the C modes, on the dial, mean continuous high and continuous low. CH and CL. It just defines what the camera will do when you are pushing the shutter button. I don't know what the equivalent is on Canon, but I'm sure the modes would not be dissimilar to Nikon's PMSA and B modes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2010 03:09
|
|
|
There's a button, where depending on type of Nikon DSLR or SLR you have, that you push then you manipulate the back wheel to whatever exposure you want. I chose Nikon because I have lenses for it, inherited from my father. My father chose Nikon because he liked their other non-camera products. When I broke my D700 last year, I was going to get the 5D Mark II, but I decided, ultimately, I already have Nikon lenses, the body was harder on the Nikon than the Canon and I needed the way I accessed the aperture and shutter controls on Nikon more than Canon. Those were the main deciding factors. Also ISO range on D3s is super nice.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2010 04:07
|
|
|
Here's the thing, if you accuse someone of being defensive about something, there is almost nothing you can respond with without looking defensive, except to be aggressive, and in a way, you still will look defensive. "why's that guy being so aggressive about being defensive?" You can also change the subject, but then it's like "hey that guy changed the subject" and then it could look bad to you or the other guy and it's a bit wishy-washy really and who the gently caress deals in greys? And then, because you've locked someone into a position where they have no words, backed them into a corner, so to speak, that's usually the point where they punch you in the face. In my experience, when someone has run out of words, you're going to get punched in the face. That's why I try really hard not to say stupid keywords like "you're being defensive/ignorant/a oval office" ANYWAY I choose sarcasm. DaNzA posted:But its controls are not that intuitive for someone who never used a nikon before. Are you the guy who refuses to learn new technology because it's for the kids? Do you shake your head at LCD flatscreens and avert your eyes when you see kids with Iphones, or poo poo, just Dubai itself, you're like "gently caress that, man made islands". How old are you? You can't get used to something new? How did you learn a camera in the first place? In your "learn period" between 17 and 9 months and 18 and three months? Do you purchase five toasters/shoes at a time, so you never have to upgrade to the next model? Everytime you have to get a new car, it's another Ford Laser 1989 Executive or it's nothing, Goddammit! People who refuse to learn new things are trapping themselves, they will be old, and they will be ignorant, and they will be scared, just like grandpa who you had to teach the mouse to. Do you remember that? It sucked, didn't it. Learn how to use everything around you, otherwise, you will be that guy you laughed at as a child.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2010 05:54
|
|
|
Oh I didn't know he was referring to that other guy. No, I get that. I thought he was just saying "woah, Nikons man, I can't handle poo poo that's different" and talking about himself. My bad.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2010 06:50
|
|
|
And I'll snatch that credit away with a negative post, because I for one denounce ignorance even if the end result of the ignorance is something you deem appreciative. I'd rather be wrong than be racist. I'll snatch that credit away and loving burn it because encouragement of ignorance is a stepping stone crime to murder one. Ha ha ha man I have no idea what "I'd rather be wrong than be racist" means but it sounds so serious. raaargh. Does anybody know of any instances where someone is prosecuted and convicted of photos they've taken not of illegal acts, but whilst doing an illegal act. For example, someone prosecuted from posting online, photos of urbex? Anyone heard of any cases?
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2010 06:20
|
|
|
I love browsing http://thisalso.com/ and I want to make a website just like everyone on that site but I know I'll be like a kid dressing up in her mother's clothing and putting on her make-up and attempting to strut in high heels and I'll look ridiculous, and it saddens me. Also I think this is my most visited thread in the forums.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2010 20:11
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:And there have been debates throughout the history of photography over how 'sharp' or in focus a photo should be. Who's debating this? Why would they be debating this? It's like debating whether all cheese should be blue or brie. "Forget everything else, all cheese must be gorgonzolla, made from sheep's milk. You! Preen my moustache." Really, someone debated this?
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2010 00:05
|
|
|
I wish I had a large format camera so I could do a 9-stop HDR with Velvia 50. Also if you could make a HDR from a daguerrotype, I totally would. Think of the instilled horror.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2010 00:46
|
|
|
My D3s has a D3s strap. Mostly because I needed a strap and I was like "hey, strap". Then suddenly, five months later, I'm an egotist.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2010 08:45
|
|
|
On the floor in my room. Scattered. Oh and there's one on the floor in my car under some pie wrappers. And I found a disposable camera for $2, bought it, and discovered it yesterday covered in cement in the back of my ute.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2010 01:22
|
|
|
Right yes, early for me means awesome awake time for Americans yes. I've got a friend who found some dude on eBay selling 256gb Kingston usb harddrives, and 32gb Sandisk Compact Flashes for $20 a pop and he spent like, $300 buying them all. And he called me a couple days later and told me this and I said "have you been back to the seller?" and he said "yeah, and he's been deleted or something" and I said "well, email paypal, maybe you'll get lucky and get something back." and he said "why?" and I said "so you get your money back." and he said "but they just arrived. they're awesome. I checked and they're all the correct size and they don't look like fakes." and I said "oh". Lesson learnt? I think I'm never going to get a sweet deal like that because I would never play one of those auctions. Because I'm too smart? Helmacron fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Jun 17, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2010 20:57
|
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:
 ANYTHING EVER I think this could either be really useful or really worthless. Like every new whizbang they bring out... And I can't really use a feature like this for my photos so bah. And humbug.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2010 20:47
|
|
|
I am amazing at using cameras people give me to take photos of them. Seriously. You know how some people look like their pet? Like, big nose guy has big nose dog, that poo poo. Or like, when you see someone on the street and they just look so drat sad, you know they've just found out about their mother dying or something, but they don't know yet that their pet just got hit by a car. Just that look of a person. Well I've got that look of "let's give that guy the camera, he probably won't gently caress it up, and he doesn't look very fast". So now I'm like "yo, Olympus, MJU, very nice, I used this exact camera to take a photo of a japanese man with his little girl on his shoulder last thursday"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2010 09:45
|
|
|
I just bought an auto-focus lens for my D3s because I felt silly having all these focus points and never ever ever ever being able to do anything with them and oh god it's good i'm a little weak at the knees. It's only a 28m F/2.8. I'm never going to buy another big lens again, though. Only little primes for me. Unless I change my mind, and I'll have to hunt down this post and delete it so I don't look wishy-washy.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 01:16
|
|
|
WHAT ARE YOU CONFUSED ABOUT is it just the why of purchasing the camera or the lens or what I don't get it. It seems like you're fairly onto what I've done here. EDIT: Not calling the savviest bastard in the world but you seem pretty on top of my previous post. You seem to get it. EDIT2: You seem like a pretty cluey guy. EDIT3: Like from your post, I'm fairly content with the idea you understood my post. You know? Helmacron fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Jul 20, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 03:22
|
|
|
I like to think it's purchasing an excellent off-road vehicle and purchasing tires adequate for what you want to do, and not going out and getting enormous mud terrains so you vibrate stupid on the freeway, void your cheap insurance or pay for that insurance that makes your hackles rise because you're getting rear end hosed. And then, when you do go drive around in the bush, once every two months, you drive really timidly through puddles and you say to your passenger "oh no, oh no I'm not going to do that one, look how deep it is, I know I have a snorkel but that is just way to deep, yeah, that guy in the shittier car is going through it, but I'll go around, I don't need to go through things when I can go around" and then you get so hosed up the first night on schmirnoff and caffienated alcoholic drinks you can't function the next day, and you hang your head out the side flap of your tent and just vomit and retch until your stomach lining is coming out of your nose and your puke is fluro green. You manage to rouse yourself that night, and cook some dinner with your girlfriend, but you can't say much, can't even stand the sight of drink, and the next day you get up early and go home.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 04:33
|
|
|
Backing and cleaning up my memory cards right now, going to Japan tonight. Woop.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2010 03:32
|
|
|
So I just visited about 8 used camera stores in Tokyo, Ginza and Shinjuku areas. All I wanted to buy was a Hasselblad/Carl Zeiss 38mm Biogon Fisheye and an Nikkor 8mm Fisheye. Not one of them had either. Although one of them had the 6mm Fisheye that I looked at the price of but refused to comprehend it after seeing the amount of zeroes. So I'm a little disappointed. Sure, they have everything from 16mm to 200 plus primes. And they have multiples of each. For example, I saw on the same shelf, 28mm F/1.8, F/2, F/2.8, F/3.5, then starting again with the 35mm and then 50mm and then 55mm, 6#mm and the jump to 85mm and running through all the possible F/stop values. All used but in great condition, all reasonably priced. Basically every lens you could imagine bar anything you want. And for Hasselblad, they had everything up from 50mm. I have a 40mm and I want a 38 fisheye, but both must be rarish. And they do have rare poo poo, I saw a Hasselblad mount zoom lens which I didn't think existed. It was huge. That is all.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2010 06:29
|
|
|
I've bought a lot of poo poo from DigitalRev on eBay. They are quite cheap and good.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2010 00:31
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:That's a pretty amazing test roll. I just stared longingly at the smokin' 20's women.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2010 22:21
|
|
|
psylent posted:... me too. Realistically, they're probably dead. But it doesn't matter. Don't tell me you can't beat off to a 1960's Playboy cover.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2010 02:31
|
|
|
CS5 is kick-rear end. Up to, and including, the new HDR feature. Kick-rear end.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2010 08:43
|
|
|
spf3million posted:Why the gently caress does everyone add an extra e to the end of lens? I can let a few typos pass without comment but jesus, it's spelled "lense" so often that I'm questioning whether it's actually spelled "lens" at all. Am I actually the idiot who's misspelling it all the time? I just swap between them, sometimes mid-paragraph. I like lense better, though, since that's how I've spelt it since I was a young'n. On that note, I was telling an excellent story last weekend, in my own house, and this guy, one year older than me, invited by some acquaintance, stopped me and said "listen, sorry, it's actually "nickon", not "nighkon". Sorry, it was annoying me. Continue." and I just poo poo on him for 10 minutes or so until he was clenching and unclenching his fists, stood up and walked out. Apparently he spent something like $60 on cab fare going home. What made him just stand up and walk out is when I turned off the music and quizzed him loudly on which dictionary we were supposed to use and like, ended up yelling drunkenly about y being e in old english and how we should be using a transcribed word list from the thirteenth century god knows we don't evolve so our language never should either. I feel bad now, though. I should have just plied him with spiked drinks and pissed on him when he passed out.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2010 06:29
|
|
|
girl who is acting on my behalf for printing purposes has called me up asking for a photo that could print to 1.5m in length (whatever height) at minimum 1470 dpi. I said "sure" and hung up and then sat there. And sat there. And if I was a TV show there would be numbers floating gently around my head, sliding past my face like a loving galactic cruiser past a pedestrian shuttle, big goddamn numbers. hrroooomm hrroooooommmm I've worked it out. 86811x43406 And I have to save it as PDF. And it's on material, not paper, like apparently cloth material. I don't get it, what the gently caress sort of material is this. It would have to have some sort of ridiculous stitching, right? So my computer is at full ball right now trying to fit together a panorama at this size. Holy crap.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2010 05:42
|
|
|
Dread Head posted:This can't be right? What would need this kind of detail? I'm just going to do it. What the hell. But yeah I'm sure there's been something missed in either translation or the printer is a fool. I need to put 8gb of ram in this macbook.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2010 06:59
|
|
|
DaNzA posted:8GB isn't going to do poo poo when you are processing 3768 MP, or 3.768 gigapickles. Why wouldn't it. Also I've decided just to process a panorama I have for it at 20000x10000. I refuse to believe he needs it better than whatever dpi that is. Also that alone is going to take forever to compute.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2010 09:49
|
|
|
Panoramas, sort of surprisingly, really just need a lot of storing space as they're processing. I don't really know much about it, I admit, but from my experience, a good computer is great but a big harddrive and patience really do wonders for large panoramas. I was just meaning 8gb of ram (assuming the photo isn't over 8gb, as pointed out), could only ever help. You're saying going to 8gb can hinder in some ways, evil_bunnY? And whitezombi, we're just testing stuff right now. I said "durable cloth of some sort could make my photos a little more renegade" and she reported back this is what he said. I'll hedge my bets and give him a couple different files. The largest these photos I have can go are 30000x15000. my other panoramas can get much bigger but I don't want to exhibit those right now. I just want to get into a bachelor of photography with them. 147dpi would be totally lame and I would say a big ol' gently caress you to cloth.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2010 15:11
|
|
|
I just have to say I don't believe I'm wasting my time compiling the largest possible image I can get from a set of photos because even if they will not work right now, they will certainly work some time in the future and I will have them for perpetuity. Also I have no job.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2010 01:49
|
|
|
I HATE CARS posted:Yes one day in the future when the average human eye can tell the difference between 300dpi and 1500dpi. How's that working out for you Warren Ellis? Transmetropolitan reference? More like one day in the future when I print off my photos at 2m x 1m for an exhibition, which is my dream, I want my photos to be viewable from 5cm to 5m. This is the source of my artistic boner, resolution.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2010 07:54
|
|
|
stizu posted:The point is, 300dpi is fine for even up close, as long as they don't have a loupe with them. Aren't you upscaling to get the 1.4k dpi res? I gave up a page back in trying to achieve the 1400dpi because like everyone said, that is insane. Also, to note, I can't actually make most panoramas that big unless I go out and retake them with (maybe) an 85mm. But I am still recompiling all my photos to their maximum possible size because I haven't had the opportunity to do it on a good computer previously and I've just bought a Macbook Pro. robertdx, I use manfrotto 303sph in field with jerry-rigged welded vice grips and clamps and stuff, (or just a plain old tripod), and on the computer I use PTGui for everything up to the finished compiled image. Then Photoshop for the filter loving. Helmacron fucked around with this message at 00:25 on Sep 12, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2010 00:16
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:You have to wonder, does anyone actually aspire to do what these photographers do? How much did that guy get for the first photo of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt together? Does anybody know the approximate worth of a photograph of Kate Moss attacking a photographer? They're assholes, sure, but what people would do for money... I think I'd do it. The only issue I could possibly see is maybe if you believed in some sort of karmic religious ideal. Or if you're one of those guys who internalize their self-hatred and stow it in that organ that digests grass that we don't use any more and sometimes ruptures when you swallow toothbrush hairs. EDIT: appendix
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2010 05:15
|
|
|
I know it sounds like an insane point of view, but whenever this topic comes up, I always get to thinking about it all again and I know, I absolutely know that I would prefer to live in a world where photography is illegal. In some ways, I realize it will stifle creativity, but we have such an incredibly glut of it right now (I believe). And I realize it would be almost unenforceble. On the spot fines for all toting cameras, sure. And there will be criminal acts by law enforcement officials because there is no one out there documenting. And of course, Nikon will die, and Canon will die. And tamronsigma and so on. And I suppose the idea, this idea of mine, is born from jealousy and chagrin of all these cameras around me all the time. And because I will be one of the few who would continue to pursue outside photography. But really try and see it. A world where cameras are banned everywhere but your own home. Wouldn't you want to see those outside images? Like, wouldn't the mundane suddenly be a little bit amazing. And I've been harassed, I've been kicked out of train stations, cafes, malls, cinemas. I've been kicked out of all of them. I've had people try to charge me to take photos of things. I understand the pain. I'm not ignorant. If there was a way, I would ban photography and I would make the photographer as reviled as the graffitist or worse. Link us with terrorism, link us with pedophilia, link us with cancer, link us with atheism and the absence of soul. Thank you.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2010 06:57
|
|
|
AnotherFreakboy posted:A circa 1908 Wollensak 35mm F5.0 Cine-Velostigmat hand cranked cinema camera lens mounted on a 5DmkII. I go to camera club stuff sometimes in Melbourne and there's a guy there who brings like, reverse connected voightlander on a D90 and so on. They invariably take awful photos and I don't quite see the point. But hobbies are hobbies.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2010 01:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:This statement is retarded. My 'traditional' optical 'viewfinder' showed me 'aperture', shutter speed, 'expo'sure', had a split prism, and is bigger, brighter, and more awesome than any new camera I've ever looked through. How can some laggy display beat that? If they had made this camera in the traditional SLR style I would actually have been interested. Is a split prism the cat's eye thing? Because I always hated that thing. All to often, the problem with tradition is that as we move forward, it becomes regression. And there's always someone out there who forgot to update and still thinks it's the best thing out there.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2010 00:57
|
|