|
I'm trying to ID the little silver button on the left side of the body in the photo, above the sync port. That's what was throwing me off since I don't see that on any of the bodies 
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 19:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 03:28 |
|
|
Martytoof posted:I'm trying to ID the little silver button on the left side of the body in the photo, above the sync port. That's what was throwing me off since I don't see that on any of the bodies I think you're looking at the hardware where the strap attaches to. The lens looks like the 10.5mm DX Fisheye.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 19:54
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 22:00
|
|
|
unixbeard posted:ooh i saw this too. I think his picture of the albino african kid will stay with me forever. C/O Berlin has some great exhibitions, i miss it. That one was good, but I have to admit to being a little disappointed. To me Magnum represents people with the decisive eye. These were good photos, and served well as documentation, but they weren't all that moving to me. My favorite was the two hunkered down rebels in the bombed out Holiday in lobby, that was good, spent the most time with it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 22:44
|
|
|
Interrupting Moss posted:thats awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 22:46
|
|
|
Fragrag posted:Guess who I met and listened to for several hours at his house? Quoting myself because the last post on a page generally doesn't receive much attention. If anyone has any questions regarding him, documentary photography or Magnum, I'll try my best to answer it. EDIT: I'm actually going to sleep now though, so I'll only be able to answer them tomorrow, sorry! Fragrag fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Feb 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 22:52
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Has anyone ever been to a camera show/swap meet? There's one near me next weekend, I'm thinking about going. Kinda iffy about leaving a ton of poo poo in the car... do people without a table carry it all around with them or what? You goin over to the one in Largo? I've never been to a camera show but since I'm now starting to get more in to camera stuff I've been planning on going in hopes of learning things and checking out some cool gear. I might even pick up a medium format something-or-other if the price is right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 23:01
|
|
|
Do your research thoroughly before you go to a camera show to buy stuff. Don't just look up what you want, look up variants of it too. If you go in just looking around with no real idea of what to look for, you've got a good chance of getting the wrong thing or paying a lot more than you should have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 23:12
|
|
|
True. Most likely I wont be purchasing anything, but I'm excited to look around at all the gear and maybe play with a few things. Speaking of... If anyone is looking for anything in particular, I wouldn't mind keeping an eye out for it. I think the show is covering a whole range of camera gear, from antiques to digital.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 23:25
|
|
|
Brozekiel posted:True. Most likely I wont be purchasing anything, but I'm excited to look around at all the gear and maybe play with a few things. Even if you don't plan on buying, do your research anyway on stuff you're thinking of buying just in case you see a good deal. The key is to find exactly what you're looking for or better and not to buy the crappy version of whatever you're looking for. For instance, if you're looking for a Mamiya 645 Pro or Pro TL, don't end up buying a 645 Super by mistake.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 23:27
|
|
|
Brozekiel posted:You goin over to the one in Largo? I've never been to a camera show but since I'm now starting to get more in to camera stuff I've been planning on going in hopes of learning things and checking out some cool gear. I might even pick up a medium format something-or-other if the price is right. Yeah, that's the one. Planning on going Sunday (already going to be out that way for something in the evening), hopefully won't miss out on any nice earlybird Saturday deals. I've got a pretty good idea of the prices of anything I'd be interested in buying, mostly going in hopes of scoring a reasonably-priced 4x5 Pacemaker Speed Graphic with a focal plane shutter I can test in person. Seems like 95% of people selling them on eBay hauled them out of grandpa's closet and don't have a goddamn clue how to check them out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 01:15
|
|
|
It looks like Apple just released Aperture 3. http://www.apple.com/aperture/ Nothing mind blowing in it but it does look like a solid upgrade. We all knew that faces and places from iPhoto was a given and that's included. It looks like the most useful additions are the brushes, curves, and presets which I assume were swiped from LR. I feel like I'm the only goon using Aperture so I'm probably the only one who cares. I plan on sticking with it as I see no compelling reason to go to LR3.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 19:55
|
|
|
The video part is interesting, too. I highly doubt the Aperture demographic does a lot of video on the whole, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 20:34
|
|
|
Haggins posted:It looks like Apple just released Aperture 3. http://www.apple.com/aperture/ The most interesting part of this is seeing that it took Apple this long to get brushes/full screen browsing into Aperture. After using LR2 I'm not sure how I'd get along without either of them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 00:15
|
|
|
Haggins posted:It looks like Apple just released Aperture 3. http://www.apple.com/aperture/ I'm using the trial of Aperture 2 right now, and have loved it so far. Will probably spend the money on Aperture 3 when I get my taxes back next week.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 02:19
|
|
|
You know honestly what made me switch from Aperture to Lightroom? The fact that Aperture kept its' photos in that giant fuckall vault file that I couldn't just go into like a normal folder. That aggrivated me to no end for backup purposes. Plus I couldn't just go into a single folder in Finder and copy a photo, I had to export it from Lightroom bla bla bla. I guess it all made sense, it just seemed really clunky to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 07:40
|
|
|
It's loving retarded. Pisses me off every time I want to grab pics from friends with Macs and iPhoto. Plus it means file-based back-ups are out the window. Have fun with your time machine I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 09:44
|
|
|
Serving breakfast on your camera http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYXtvTFLCa4
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 10:28
|
|
|
JaundiceDave posted:The most interesting part of this is seeing that it took Apple this long to get brushes/full screen browsing into Aperture. After using LR2 I'm not sure how I'd get along without either of them. It's always had full screen, I guess it's just better now. As for the lack of brushes I'm sure that's because LR2 came out after Aperture 2 and they one upped them on that. Martytoof posted:You know honestly what made me switch from Aperture to Lightroom? There is an option to make it so Aperture doesn't manage your files.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 12:08
|
|
|
Haggins posted:There is an option to make it so Aperture doesn't manage your files. Really? ... oh now I'm considering giving it a second look  DaNzA posted:Serving breakfast on your camera This would have been a little funnier if I hadn't just read an article on people starving in africa 
some kinda jackal fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Feb 10, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 20:24
|
|
|
DaNzA posted:Serving breakfast on your camera Pfft, deaf kids these days and their expensive cameras and food fetishes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 20:37
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:That one was good, but I have to admit to being a little disappointed. To me Magnum represents people with the decisive eye. These were good photos, and served well as documentation, but they weren't all that moving to me. i really liked it for 2 reasons. Both of them personal so long self-absorbed story ensues. One is my father was born in 1939 Germany, so basically all he knew was war and the consequences of it until he could get away when he was 18. I had no idea how long it took Germany to recover from WWII, I saw another exhibition in Deichtorhallen in Hamburg (Paul Himmel, also excellent but maybe not your thing) with pictures of cities made of rubble in the 60's. That was some 20 years after the war ended and they still couldn't afford to even clean up. I grew up in Australia where everything has always been pretty peachy so had no idea that such things happened, and I couldn't imagine growing up in that environment. He's never really talked about it so piecing it together after some 30 years of knowing him has been eye opening. I also think the starvation and look in that child's eyes is a current reality in Africa and other parts of the world. How can half the world be starving while the other half seems to have an obesity crisis? It really drove home the futility of war and the impact it has on so many innocent people who have nothing to do with it. It was the final nail in the coffin for me becoming unequivocally anti war, which is no small feat considering I used to be in the infantry, at least briefly ... 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 22:55
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:
No, the point is that more photographers doesn't make it more exploitative. It's just as exploitative with 1 or 100 or 1000. Those images of shooters packed around make the point more poignant without a doubt but it doesn't really seem to me that it's the number that is driving the exploitative nature.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 23:48
|
|
|
unixbeard posted:i really liked it for 2 reasons. Both of them personal so long self-absorbed story ensues. I wonīt argue with any of those points, but they donīt really have anything to do with the photography itself, just the content. Iīm saying that the only thing I liked *was* the content, not the photographic skills of the photographer other than *being there*. The moments themselves didn't seem that decisive, the compositions weren't radically moving, the overall photos didn't sing to me the way I like to be sung to when in a photography exhibit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 23:50
|
|
|
New aerial photos of 9/11 released. Some of these are just unbelievable. I can't even imagine what was going through the photographer's mind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 06:06
|
|
|
spf3million posted:New aerial photos of 9/11 released. Some of these are just unbelievable. I can't even imagine what was going through the photographer's mind. Probably something involving "holy gently caress" and "poo poo".
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 06:07
|
|
|
On second thought this was a bad idea.
XTimmy fucked around with this message at 10:02 on Feb 11, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 07:09
|
|
|
spf3million posted:New aerial photos of 9/11 released. Some of these are just unbelievable. I can't even imagine what was going through the photographer's mind. I'd be the guy who forgot to check his camera and took all the photos handheld from a helicopter at 1/20...
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 07:26
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:Put a bullet in me. What is it about other people taking photos the way they want that makes you so upset as to use the word "fag" as a pejorative?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 09:35
|
|
|
Twenties Superstar posted:What is it about other people taking photos the way they want that makes you so upset as to use the word "fag" as a pejorative? Haha nothing, just I see that style over-used and it entertains me that someone has developed a camera specifically to pander to it. I also find it odd that lens vignetting, something that would be considered a fault in most cameras is here used as a selling-point. Also I can't believe I'm replying to a troll. VVVVVV Yes I was reading up on their history page. Very interesting, my point is more the audience the camera panders to and the advertising that's used, less than the camera itself. I appreciate the "acting like" by the way. XTimmy fucked around with this message at 09:46 on Feb 11, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 09:38
|
|
|
Well, fwiw, Holgas were around a long time before that style was ever popular or trendy. They were designed as inexpensive cameras for poor/middle class families in China. 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. Twenties Superstar fucked around with this message at 09:44 on Feb 11, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 09:39
|
|
|
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.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 15:31
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:so its only ok if you do it, huh? I've never heard 20s use fag as an insult, so not really sure what you're talking about. I don't often agree with his crits, but he does put them forward in a mature manner, which is more than can be said for most dorkroom critiques.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 15:45
|
|
|
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 posted: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. 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.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 15:55
|
|
|
40 years from now people in their 20s will be talking about their homophobe parents that always call dumb people "fags" and things they don't like "gay," like I deal with my father who says calls black people he doesn't like "niggers" and "thugs." That's about the best illustration I have for how dumb "fag" looks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 16:06
|
|
|
Twenties Superstar posted:What is it about other people taking photos the way they want that makes you so upset as to use the word "fag" as a pejorative? It's called context, I doubt he was refering to homosexuals. The word fag doesn't necessarily mean homosexual. It's a word that's changed meaning over the years and now a days in certain places (like a forum that replaces the word s-i-r with fag) it's not a pejorative towards gays. I certainly don't think everyone in a Jane Austin is a homosexual.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 16:49
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I certainly don't think everyone in a Jane Austin is a homosexual. Not to mention cigarettes and bundles of sticks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 16:52
|
|
|
Haggins posted:It's called context, I doubt he was refering to homosexuals. The word fag doesn't necessarily mean homosexual. It's a word that's changed meaning over the years and now a days in certain places (like a forum that replaces the word s-i-r with fag) it's not a pejorative towards gays. Tell me more about the usage of the word fag, mr straight male.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 16:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 03:28 |
|
|
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. *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
|
|