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

«‹›391 »

Whitezombi: Apr 26, 2006; With these Zombie Eyes he rendered her powerless - With this Zombie Grip he made her perform his every desire!

I decided to go in a different direction with my portfolio site.

# ? Apr 27, 2010 21:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 12, 2024 02:34

Cross_: Aug 22, 2008

I think you blew the highlights when photographing that Tie Fighter.

# ? Apr 27, 2010 22:12

Bouillon Rube: Aug 6, 2009

Cross_ posted:

I think you blew the highlights when photographing that Tie Fighter.

if i had a nickel for every time i've heard that line

# ? Apr 27, 2010 22:40

Pompous Rhombus: Mar 11, 2007

Martytoof posted:

FFffuuuuuuuuck. I just stabbed a hole through both pouches in my changing bag fumbling around with scissors trying to cut off a leader. I'm going to have to sew this poo poo up later or something

Thankfully I hadn't pulled all the film out of the canister yet (35mm).

Gaffer's tape should do the job.

Whitezombi posted:

I decided to go in a different direction with my portfolio site.

This is beautiful/amazing.

# ? Apr 27, 2010 23:13

HPL: Aug 28, 2002; Worst case scenario.

Pompous Rhombus posted:

Gaffer's tape should do the job.

I used masking tape on mine because that's all I had on hand. It has held up amazingly well.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 00:17

some kinda jackal: Feb 25, 2003; �
�

Whitezombi posted:

I decided to go in a different direction with my portfolio site.

This site is going to serve me so well in the not too distant future.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 00:21

Ol Uncle Anime: Jul 3, 2009; And no one ate dinner that night.

Whitezombi posted:

I decided to go in a different direction with my portfolio site.

This is the best thing I've seen in a while thank you.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 04:48

Ringo R: Dec 25, 2005; ช่วยแม่เฮ็ดนาแหน่เดัอ

Whitezombi posted:

I decided to go in a different direction with my portfolio site.

Aah, the memories! What a brilliant site (geocitiesizer).

# ? Apr 28, 2010 06:45

tuyop: Sep 15, 2006; Every second that we're not growing BASIL is a second wasted; Fun Shoe

This reminded me of the cell phone photography thread.

http://gawker.com/5526004/how-a-guy-using-his-cell-phones-stopwatch-became-the-mountain-lake-park-lurker

quote:

Everyone knows the only thing people do with their cell phones is take weird sex pictures. When moms saw a man lurking around San Francisco's Mountain Lake Park apparently taking cell phone pics of their kids, they leaped into action.

Here's the email that was passed among parents' lists earlier this month, warning of the man in the PT Cruiser:

Please help spread the word to people you know in this neighborhood. I have seen this man 2 times at the lower playground at MLP. He does NOT have children and pretends like he does and is there to do pull ups. He takes pictures of the kids with his phone. He drives a silver PT cruiser and wears sunglasses. He takes pictures of BOTH boys and girls. He looks for kids that don't have care givers near by. I have not confronted him, but take Scout and stand next to him. He gets nervous and puts his phone away and eventually leaves. I personally believe that given the chance he might engage the kids and who knows what could happen....

Creepy! A worried mom snapped a cell phone picture of the guy and emailed it to the San Francisco Police Department. The local news ran a report on the SUSPICIOUS MAN. (We've blocked out his face for reasons you will soon learn.) The police met with 40 terrified members of the Friends of Mountain Lake Park. Soon, the SFPD were working overtime to keep kids safe from meeting some terrible fate in the back of the Mountain Lake Park Lurker's bulbous PT Cruiser of Doom. On April 23rd, SFist reported that "SFPD have been tracking the suspect, who was spotted yesterday at both Mountain Lake Park and outside several local schools." Oh no! That's where all the kids are!

But yesterday, the SFPD paid the guy a visit. Turns out he had no idea he was causing such a panic; he was just looking at his cell phone's stop watch to time his pull-ups. Police searched his computer and his cell phone and ran a background check; they found nothing. Today the police said: "I hope that the results of our investigation help to assuage any worries you have had about the safety of children in our community." Case closed!

Moral of the story: Don't exercise unless you want to be accused of being a pedophile.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 09:13

Bouillon Rube: Aug 6, 2009

tuyop posted:

This reminded me of the cell phone photography thread.

http://gawker.com/5526004/how-a-guy-using-his-cell-phones-stopwatch-became-the-mountain-lake-park-lurker

To be fair, he drives a PT Cruiser

# ? Apr 28, 2010 13:04

BobTheCow: Dec 11, 2004; That's a thing?

Dorkroom creatives, I need help. Walking around campus with a 400/2.8 invariably invites comments like "drat, that's a big camera!" or from those who are really on top of their game, "drat, that's a big lens!"

Clearly a clever retort is in order, but I'm never quick enough to come up with something beyond "...heh, yeah!"

What do you got for me?

e: I did respond once with "I've seen bigger" but that came off more gay that anything.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 18:35

some kinda jackal: Feb 25, 2003; �
�

Why would a man be doing pull-ups if not to be in good shape for chasing and raping children?

Your honour, I rest my case :smug:

# ? Apr 28, 2010 18:41

tuyop: Sep 15, 2006; Every second that we're not growing BASIL is a second wasted; Fun Shoe

BobTheCow posted:

"drat, that's a big lens!"

"That's what she said." :v:

Nah, I've got nothing.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 19:06

Piquai Souban: Mar 21, 2007; Manque du respect: toujours.
Triple bas cinq: toujours.

Martytoof's post worked best as a followup to BobTheCow and not the news story.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 19:53

Wooten: Oct 4, 2004

For some reason the question I always get asked is "what are you taking pictures of?". My response is always "everything, man".

# ? Apr 28, 2010 19:59

Rated PG-34: Jul 1, 2004

BobTheCow posted:

Dorkroom creatives, I need help. Walking around campus with a 400/2.8 invariably invites comments like "drat, that's a big camera!" or from those who are really on top of their game, "drat, that's a big lens!"

Clearly a clever retort is in order, but I'm never quick enough to come up with something beyond "...heh, yeah!"

What do you got for me?

e: I did respond once with "I've seen bigger" but that came off more gay that anything.

"You know what they say about a man with a big lens ... He has a big lens hood."

"I'm not compensating, honest."

# ? Apr 28, 2010 20:40

HPL: Aug 28, 2002; Worst case scenario.

Just say you're putting together a photo exhibition of portraits of smelly people.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 20:43

fronkpies: Apr 30, 2008; You slithered out of your mother's filth.

Wooten posted:

For some reason the question I always get asked is "what are you taking pictures of?". My response is always "everything, man".

"People when there not looking" Is always my response to that question, followed straight away by "fancy a quick portrait?"

# ? Apr 28, 2010 20:59

GWBBQ: Jan 2, 2005

orange lime posted:

The reason we can't easily make f/1.0 lenses (besides the progressively larger pieces of glass you require) is primarily because of spherical aberration that goes absolutely nuts when you start using the outer edges of a lens.

Clearly the problem is that they're not trying hard enough/not Alfred Hitchcock.

BobTheCow posted:

Dorkroom creatives, I need help. Walking around campus with a 400/2.8 invariably invites comments like "drat, that's a big camera!" or from those who are really on top of their game, "drat, that's a big lens!"

Clearly a clever retort is in order, but I'm never quick enough to come up with something beyond "...heh, yeah!"

What do you got for me?

e: I did respond once with "I've seen bigger" but that came off more gay that anything.

The last time someone said "wow, that's a big lens" to me (Tamron 17-50 with lens hood, I guess people are used to point and shoots,) I had the good sense to drop it to crotch level, look down, and zoom it to 50mm. I think the people further down the bar who couldn't hear the conversation found it funnier than the people around me. Maybe you should lower your camera and pelvic thrust a few times?

# ? Apr 28, 2010 21:22

ease: Jul 19, 2004; HUGE

Just tell them the clothing powered xray scope won't fit in any smaller housing.

On that thought: http://www.electrophysics.com/e/nv/nv-intensifiers.html
These are pretty cool.

ease fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Apr 28, 2010

# ? Apr 28, 2010 21:28

OJ.SImpson: Jan 20, 2001

Sorry to bring up the Sony subject again but my first dslr was a sony a100 (got it based on dpreview's rating of it at the time being high and it being cheapish), and i have since moved onto Nikon.

The one thing i LOVED and greatly miss from the sony camera was the color representation straight out of camera. The skin tones were perfect. With the nikon and the canon cameras at the studio, i pretty much always have to adjust the color balance in some manner.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 21:39

HPL: Aug 28, 2002; Worst case scenario.

ease posted:

Just tell them the clothing powered xray scope won't fit in any smaller housing.

On that thought: http://www.electrophysics.com/e/nv/nv-intensifiers.html
These are pretty cool.

I've seen that before. If I ever become a billionaire, I'm buying one for concert photography.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 21:42

TomR: Apr 1, 2003; I both own and operate a pirate ship.

^^ Can you rent one? That would be cool to try.

VV Oh.

TomR fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Apr 28, 2010

# ? Apr 28, 2010 21:47

HPL: Aug 28, 2002; Worst case scenario.

TomR posted:

^^ Can you rent one? That would be cool to try.

I'm pretty sure the resolution on it is poo poo since it's basically a screen inside a lens type of thingy.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 21:51

365 Nog Hogger: Jan 19, 2008; by Shine

BobTheCow posted:

Dorkroom creatives, I need help. Walking around campus with a 400/2.8 invariably invites comments like "drat, that's a big camera!" or from those who are really on top of their game, "drat, that's a big lens!"

Clearly a clever retort is in order, but I'm never quick enough to come up with something beyond "...heh, yeah!"

What do you got for me?

e: I did respond once with "I've seen bigger" but that came off more gay that anything.

What the hell are you walking around with a 400 2.8 for?

# ? Apr 28, 2010 21:56

Whitezombi: Apr 26, 2006; With these Zombie Eyes he rendered her powerless - With this Zombie Grip he made her perform his every desire!

Reichstag posted:

What the hell are you walking around with a 400 2.8 for?

Because he can.

# ? Apr 28, 2010 21:58

orange lime: Jul 24, 2008; by Fistgrrl

OJ.SImpson posted:

The one thing i LOVED and greatly miss from the sony camera was the color representation straight out of camera. The skin tones were perfect. With the nikon and the canon cameras at the studio, i pretty much always have to adjust the color balance in some manner.

Well, on my Canon at least, there is this thing called "picture styles" which lets you program color settings into the camera, and you can even download a set of adjustments that you made to an image on your computer. Plus, post-processing really isn't that bad once you get into the groove. The 30 seconds I spend on each image in Lightroom can easily turn it from a *sigh* to a keeper.

[e] lol who are u ken rockwell or sumthin

# ? Apr 28, 2010 22:08

BobTheCow: Dec 11, 2004; That's a thing?

Reichstag posted:

What the hell are you walking around with a 400 2.8 for?

Because the office I intern in is on one end of campus, and the baseball, softball, and football fields are way the hell at the other.

Also, because I can. :v:

# ? Apr 28, 2010 22:13

Shmoogy: Mar 21, 2007

OJ.SImpson posted:

The one thing i LOVED and greatly miss from the sony camera was the color representation straight out of camera. The skin tones were perfect. With the nikon and the canon cameras at the studio, i pretty much always have to adjust the color balance in some manner.

Does this actually have anything to do with the sensor in the camera (Doesn't Nikon make Sonys sensors, or is it the other way around, but either way...there shouldn't be a large difference between them) I think it has more to do with how you set your WB(custom, incorrectly?) and the quality of the lens you're using. Were you using a higher end lens on your Sony than you use on the Nikon?

# ? Apr 28, 2010 23:05

Pompous Rhombus: Mar 11, 2007

BobTheCow posted:

Dorkroom creatives, I need help. Walking around campus with a 400/2.8 invariably invites comments like "drat, that's a big camera!" or from those who are really on top of their game, "drat, that's a big lens!"

Clearly a clever retort is in order, but I'm never quick enough to come up with something beyond "...heh, yeah!"

What do you got for me?

e: I did respond once with "I've seen bigger" but that came off more gay that anything.

I get it a lot when I bring out the press camera. My favorite is "it's not the size of the camera, it's what you do with it" :v:

But sometimes I wind up explaining that the bigger negative offers much higher resolution than 35mm/digital

# ? Apr 28, 2010 23:34

brad industry: May 22, 2004

Chuck Close posted:

The thing that interests me about photography and why it�s different from all other media, is that it�s the only medium in which there is even the possibility of an accidental masterpiece. You cannot make an accidental masterpiece if you�re a painter or a sculptor. It�s just not going to happen. Something will be wrong.

This is simultaneously photography�s great advantage and its Achilles� heel: it is the easiest medium in which to be competent. Anybody can be a marginally capable photographer, but it takes a lot of work to learn to become even a competent painter. Now, having said that, I think while photography is the easiest medium in which to be competent, it is probably the hardest one in which to develop an idiosyncratic personal vision. It�s the hardest medium in which to separate yourself from all those other people who are doing reasonably good stuff and to find a personal voice, your own vision, and to make something that is truly, memorably yours and not someone else�s. A recognized signature style of photography is an incredibly difficult thing to achieve.

It always amazes me that just when I think that there�s nothing left to do in photography and that all permutations and possibilities have been exhausted, someone comes along and puts the medium to a new use, and makes it his or her own, yanks it out of this kind of amateur status, and makes it as profound and moving and as formally interesting as any other medium. It�s like pushing something heavy uphill. Photography�s not an easy medium. It is, finally, perhaps the hardest of them all.

http://deanbradshaw.com.au/blog/visual-style-in-photography/chuck-close-thoughts-on-photography-and-the-creative-nature-of-the-medium/

# ? Apr 29, 2010 02:06

Mannequin: Mar 8, 2003

I think this is a really great photograph. It's not only funny, but it's also very cleanly composed. The wide-angle lens is really perfect for the shot. I also like the distinctive pose of the robber, the positioning of the man in line who hasn't noticed anything yet, and the casual display of the teller calling the police. This is all so deliberate, yet looks seamless. A very well-executed shot!

brad industry posted:

Chuck Close posted:
This is simultaneously photography�s great advantage and its Achilles� heel: it is the easiest medium in which to be competent. Anybody can be a marginally capable photographer, but it takes a lot of work to learn to become even a competent painter. Now, having said that, I think while photography is the easiest medium in which to be competent, it is probably the hardest one in which to develop an idiosyncratic personal vision.

My definition of "competent" is pretty high. I don't consider most photographers to be competent. (I don't consider myself that competent, lately.) In my mind, the "marginally capable photographer" has already surpassed many levels.

The other angle of photography that is interesting, and maybe this applies to all art, is that it often involves overcoming personal battles that have nothing to do with photography -- at least directly. For example, if you're timid or nervous, it's hard to approach people, and street photography might never be your thing. Likewise, if you're down or depressed, you might not have the inspiration to take pictures, or the creative juices may not be flowing. Being a good photographer means overcoming these personal obstacles, at least this is true for me.

On the flip side, I think if you have a clear mind and are generally at peace with with the world, it's much easier to express yourself. Natural ability under these circumstances can really shine, and that is where people veer off from the pack. I have always thought this is what made Bresson so good. He wasn't held back by himself. He didn't have personal hangups; or if he did, he learned to overcome them so he could be free as a photographer and try new things.

I still think there is a lot of great art to be made.

# ? Apr 29, 2010 08:15

AIIAZNSK8ER: Dec 8, 2008; Where is your 24-70?

Just made a sale of some Christmas party photos, and that is but one reason why I love the internet. 4 months later dude gets around to buying some snaps of him and his bosses and I didn't have to do anything.

# ? Apr 29, 2010 20:01

OJ.SImpson: Jan 20, 2001

Shmoogy posted:

Does this actually have anything to do with the sensor in the camera (Doesn't Nikon make Sonys sensors, or is it the other way around, but either way...there shouldn't be a large difference between them) I think it has more to do with how you set your WB(custom, incorrectly?) and the quality of the lens you're using. Were you using a higher end lens on your Sony than you use on the Nikon?

I was simply refering to the AWB of the seperate systems. The glass is a toss up, i had a 70-200 2.8 G for the sony, and have the 70-200 2.8 for my nikon and the studio has the 70-200 practically glued to one of their canon bodies.

Of coarse i could use color/grey cards and custom presets for each situation, but if i could save that time by having the AWB be as i recall the sony's i would be happier. It really doesnt take much time in PS or LR to bring a picture up to where i want them but collectively over many images taken in varying lighting, it takes time.

Not really a big issue at all because i am overall much happier with my Nikon than i ever was with the Sony. It was just one of the qualities i liked about it.

# ? Apr 29, 2010 20:39

Ringo R: Dec 25, 2005; ช่วยแม่เฮ็ดนาแหน่เดัอ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yILyCIZ4CTM
Posted in the GBS youtube thread. Dave Chapelle chats with some paparazzi, asking about how they work and so on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w462X02gWYw&
Paparazzi chasing Amy Winehouse. Look at all that expensive gear used on something so... useless.

Ringo R fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Apr 29, 2010

# ? Apr 29, 2010 21:52

squidflakes: Aug 27, 2009; SHORTBUS

I'd like to know what percentage of the guys who stuck around to shoot the poo poo with Dave were freelancers and what percentage were on salary.

# ? Apr 29, 2010 22:26

BobTheCow: Dec 11, 2004; That's a thing?

Hahahaha I love that in the Dave video the one guy who he was talking to the most gets his picture taken with him... with his cell phone. So many photographers!

# ? Apr 29, 2010 23:36