|
ThisQuietReverie posted:I'm looking into giving out Yashica EZ F521 cameras as stocking stuffers. Might work for you. On that note, thrift stores are good places to look for cheap-rear end 35mm point and shoots, like $5 or $10 cheap.
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:43 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Can't you just cheat with hard links? Could you explain this to me?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 20:00
|
|
|
Tshirt Ninja posted:In other news: Holy poo poo, why did no one tell me how much better it is to shoot in RAW until now. I've been shooting and editing jpg for ages. No one ever stressed how much easier it is to recover images in post when shooting RAW.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 20:23
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Could you explain this to me? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_link On windows (with syntax): http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc753194%28WS.10%29.aspx Or, you can just mount the drive under a directory instead of a dedicated drive letter and maybe fool your backup system that way. The cool thing about symbolic links is that you can mount remote filesystems (so you can for example leave all your poo poo on a RAID system in your basement but your programs will think it's local). You have to be real loving careful when deleting links so as to not delete the contents of target. ~~HOPE THIS HELPS~~
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 21:03
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:You have to be real loving careful when deleting links so as to not delete the contents of target. ...and that's enough to scare me away, haha. I'll check out some of these other online options.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 21:57
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:...and that's enough to scare me away, haha. I'll check out some of these other online options.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 22:12
|
|
|
Really basic question, what's everybody's favorite way of focusing before composing? As a noob with a D90, I have things set up in such a way that the shutter-release button does both focusing and shooting in single-servo AF mode. When I want to compose, say a person with a background, I focus on the face first (focus is locked there) and then I can frame things however I want and shoot. Of course the next time I want to shoot, I once again have to focus on face first and shoot again. I believe you can lock the focus even when focusing and shooting both with the same button, is that what most people do? The other option, which I believe is what more advanced people use, is to move focusing to another button and have the shutter-release button be only for shooting. While it works great for a static subject, if you're working with something moving like a person on a street, it becomes pretty tricky to both focus and compose at the same time. What's the solution? Let's assume the face is what I always want to have in focus, should I try to use the face focus AF mode of the camera to cheat? DreadCthulhu fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Dec 17, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2010 03:14
|
|
|
DreadCthulhu posted:When I want to compose, say a person with a background, I focus on the face first (focus is locked there) and then I can frame things however I want and shoot. Of course the next time I want to shoot, I once again have to focus on face first and shoot again. I believe you can lock the focus even when focusing and shooting both with the same button, is that what most people do? Face-priority will never work reliably with the amount of AF points on the D90, and I think it's a LV only affair anyway. Just switch to single point AF-C and stick the point you want in your composition on what you want focused. It's not perfect. I want eye-control AF back 8(
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2010 12:35
|
|
|
The D90 has an AF-L button, yes? You should be able to hold that down when you press the shutter-release button to have the camera not attempt to autofocus.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2010 13:27
|
|
|
DreadCthulhu posted:Really basic question, what's everybody's favorite way of focusing before composing? Move AF to another button. Once you do it for a while, you'll wonder how other people do the whole half-click recompose thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2010 22:28
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:Move AF to another button. Once you do it for a while, you'll wonder how other people do the whole half-click recompose thing. So when you're doing continuous focus, would you basically hold the secondary button down the entire time and then press the shutter-release button whenever ready? That might take either lots of practice or huge hands.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2010 23:44
|
|
|
DreadCthulhu posted:So when you're doing continuous focus, would you basically hold the secondary button down the entire time and then press the shutter-release button whenever ready? That might take either lots of practice or huge hands. Yes, but mostly it's set to a button your thumb hovers over anyway. Keeping it pressed while shooting is extremely simple.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2010 00:22
|
|
|
DreadCthulhu posted:So when you're doing continuous focus, would you basically hold the secondary button down the entire time and then press the shutter-release button whenever ready? That might take either lots of practice or huge hands. It becomes second nature after a day or two of using it, honestly. I don't have huge hands and have used it with no discomfort on even the 1D series of cameras.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2010 00:22
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:Move AF to another button. Once you do it for a while, you'll wonder how other people do the whole half-click recompose thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2010 11:52
|
|
|
Not sure if this is the thread to post in for this question but here goes - I'm looking at buying a Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 but can't decide between the 20mm f/1.7 'pancake' lens or the 14-45mm lens for it. Are there any reasons for choosing one above the other? I'll mostly be using this camera for a wide variety of shots, but mostly for nighttime or for close-ups. Cheers in advance  Edit: I used Google. I'm guessing the Pancake lens would be better for me in this case?
nyoron fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Dec 20, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2010 16:06
|
|
|
wiru posted:Not sure if this is the thread to post in for this question but here goes - Nightime? Definitely the 20mm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2010 17:44
|
|
|
spog posted:Nightime? Definitely the 20mm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2010 20:33
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:What it is: I do this for a couple of things with Dropbox and it works great, I don't see why it wouldn't work for Carbonite or similar. I was using S3 as a cloud backup but I have enough data now where it was becoming a pain in the rear end (and expensive) so I am getting a Drobo soon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2010 20:45
|
|
|
wiru posted:Awesome. How bad would the variable-zoom lens perform, compared to the fixed for nighttime shots/etc? Is it just a case of lowering the shutter speed to get equal quality or is it rather more about how either lens works? The important difference is that the 20mm will let you take photos at f1.7, while the zoom will be stuck at f4. That's a big benefit in low light, where you need to get as much light as possible into the camera snd try to use the lowest ISO possible. It is even more important for the Panasonic, which has a relatively small sensor and so noise can easily become an issue at higher (800+) ISOs. If you were to set the zoom to 20mm f4 and the 17mm prime also to f4, they would be roughly the same in performance*. The biggie here is that the pancake has another 2 stops of light available to you, and in this situation, they are very useful stops. (* not true, actually. The prime is optimised for one focal length, the zoom is a compromise to get the best performance across all focal length. So, side by side, the prime will be sharper, have better contrast and less distortion - but the downside is that you lose the flexibility of the zoom.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 04:36
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:So I just installed the Carbonite free trial with the intention of buying if everything went smoothly, but I'm finding I can't use Carbonite on either of my external drives, which makes it pretty worthless for me, or at least a major pain in the rear end to back everything up. Am I missing something? http://www.backblaze.com/ will back up your external drives. You just have to make sure it gets plugged in at least once every 30 days. I learned that lesson the hard way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2010 07:41
|
|
|
spog posted:[...]but the downside is that you lose the flexibility of the zoom  Edit: Anyways thanks for the reply, time for me to get on Wikipedia and do some reading 
nyoron fucked around with this message at 05:20 on Dec 25, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2010 05:15
|
|
|
What's your typical day out with a camera like? I was thinking about buying an entry level dSLR or one of those fancy mirrorless things just because they're compact and kinda cute but then I sat down and thought that I don't know in what situations I'd actually use it. Do you walk around with your dSLR waiting to find something to photograph? Do you find specific places to go or do you just step out of the front door and wander? Do you go out alone? How many photos in a trip out? How many photos of each individual shot you want? This all fascinates me. I want to know how you people work before I invest a frankly obscene amount of money to pretend to be one of you. I don't know if this exists or how I'd find it but a day's worth of somebody's geotagged photos put onto a map of the area they were taken in and ordered by time taken would be pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 10:29
|
|
|
ascheapaschewinggum posted:Do you walk around with your dSLR waiting to find something to photograph? Do you find specific places to go or do you just step out of the front door and wander? Do you go out alone? How many photos in a trip out? How many photos of each individual shot you want? I also carry my DSLR with me pretty much everywhere - my tiny Lowepro has essentially replaced my handbag (which is good, since it forces me to carry just the essentials). Usually I go out alone. How many photos for each shot depends on whether I'm shooting film or digital and what I'm taking pictures of. Sometimes the picture is there for a fleeting moment and you get one chance to nail it, sometimes you can take your time and see what works. If I'm shooting digital I normally don't finish a photowalk/session with less than 100 pics. If I'm shooting film, I might end up with 10 exposures or one roll of film if I'm somewhere I can reshoot, or if I'm at a location I probably won't get a chance to photograph again, I'll likely shoot several films.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 12:28
|
|
|
ascheapaschewinggum posted:What's your typical day out with a camera like? Why not find out yourself? Just use whatever camera you've got now, or beg/borrow/steal one. It doesn't matter that it's not a "serious" camera like a DSLR. Even if you've had that camera for ages you might look at it differently if you go out specifically to take pictures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 14:36
|
|
|
Photography is so ridiculously faceted that there are all sorts of photographers and branches of photography. A guy really into shooting birds might have a really extravagant setup but only shoot birds so wouldn't carry a camera around with him. I rarely if ever take my camera with me unless I know I'm going to be photographing something but there are plenty of people who do take their camera with them because they get a lot out of street shooting or just finding stuff on the street. Ultimately your milage may vary. I've tried taking my camera out with my doing day to day things but it just ended up being dead weight in my bag. Yet there are some people that can take great images just as happy serendipity anywhere they go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 15:08
|
|
|
backblaze, carbonite, flickr, smugsmug etc... so which one to pick? Sure, different services for different needs and I'm sorry for being lazy but file management is starting to be a pain in the rear. Like tagging photos, it has to be done and somehow I think I would be better off in taking fewer and more quality photos so cataloging things would be easier. Since I'm just an amateur, I think I would like to have flickr pro service since it's integration with facebook and lightroom3 seems very attractive and easy to use. I will probably wait until USB3 disk drives come out and back my photos as a 2nd storage and use flickr as my file dump, I mean portfolio showcase. It's not like I'm going to be relying on photography as a living anyways. My cousin just gifted me an iPad for Christmas and it looks like a fun toy to play with. However, like previous threads, photo management does feel somewhat constricted based on initial impressions. My albums can only be 1 sub folder from the itunes sync and folders 2 sub levels down the directory are not classified as a unique album. And apparently, the camera connection gear is limited in file transfer capabilities? Maybe I'm using the ipad like the PC but if there was a lightroom app or more fluid synchronization that would be awesome. Anyone here have any recommended settings for exporting to ipad? Never seem to figure out the % quality for jpegs. Or the ipad is a huge magnifying loupe to show my inadequacies that I can't focus properly 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 16:21
|
|
|
caberham posted:backblaze, carbonite, flickr, smugsmug etc... the subfolder thing pisses me off hugely. I'd love just one more level, but noooo. The iPad resizes images automatically so you should just be able to export whatever to it
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 16:24
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:I rarely if ever take my camera with me unless I know I'm going to be photographing something but there are plenty of people who do take their camera with them because they get a lot out of street shooting or just finding stuff on the street. I'm with you on this. I generally only shoot planned things and don't take my camera out to explore. I did while on vacation but that's about it. When I first started in photography I used to take photo trips to downtown chicago where I did sit and walk around with my camera snapping pics like I was a tourist on crack. Every picture I took was my own personal master piece. I also shot exclusively in manual. I would never do this now because I think maybe my expectation of work quality is higher and more demanding on originality but I believe this type of activity is essential to really getting your feet wet with the photography world. Doing this will give you an understanding of exactly what your gear can and can't do plus just learning basic photo mechanics. Another piece of advise I'd give, which is unrelated to travel, you won't be an over night success. People might tell you the work you're doing is good, but, are they the right people? Don't let the ego boost you get from your friends go to your head then think you're mr. Big boy pants. Your style, technique, everything always has room for improvement. You will never take a perfect photo and the photo you do take someone has already done the same thing or better. Always strive to better yourself from the last shoot you did. People who let their perceived "incredible talent" go to their head get lazy and stop innovating. Then they come here and post cat photos in SAD for us to see or end up as FlickR superstars. benisntfunny fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Dec 26, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 16:25
|
|
|
I've taken to hauling my camera bag everywhere I go. Too many times I've been out driving, come across a neat scene or some cool light, and not had the camera with me. I keep the bag pretty light so it's not too painful to lug around constantly. Can't say it's improved my pictures much but at least I can't blame not having a camera.. I can only blame my lack of skills.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 17:28
|
|
|
I'm only a hobbyist and never shoot in a studio, so I always have at least two cameras on me, a film and a digital. I walk around with the digital over one shoulder and the film in a bag, because I find I get shutter-happy with whatever's within my grasp. Once in a while on a slow Sunday I might go out specifically looking to shoot, either in a location I've already picked or just wandering, but the vast majority of my shots come from stumbling onto something I'd like to capture while I go about my day. I can take anywhere between 2 and 250 shots in a day, depending on whether I find something I like. I think I average 1 photo worth processing in every 20 shots taken. But it's going to be different for everyone, so take your camera with you and see how much use you get out of it, even if it's not a DSLR.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 19:40
|
|
|
I take my DSLR with me to work every day, and I'm slowly filling my flickr site with page after page of sunrise and sunset pictures as a result. I also take it, with all of my lenses (4) on my usually-weekly Sunday Drives. On a weekday I might take 5 or 10 pictures, then none for a few days, on my drives I'll take a couple of hundred (mostly landscapes and poorly focused and poorly composed shots of birds flying away from me). So, I do both the carry-it-for-the-unexpected thing, and the go-out-specifically-to-shoot thing. And in-between activities, like earlier today I went outside (to the great confusion of my assorted relatives) to shoot the little birds on the back-yard bird feeder, for about 20 minutes. The advice already suggested of just borrowing a camera (film, digital, p&s, or SLR, whatever) and going out to see what you like / want is the best. I'm also curious about my fellow dork-roomers, so it's nice to see the responses. But I think an hour or two wandering around will tell you much more. Pick up a second-hand digital P&S from craigslist or a pawn shop for less than $50 and play with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 22:33
|
|
|
ascheapaschewinggum posted:What's your typical day out with a camera like? If I'm just wandering around for a walk, I usually try to keep a point-and-shoot in my pocket, either film or digital depending on my mood. If I'm doing a casual photo-walk or an island trek, I bring my manual Pentax K1000 with a minitripod hanging from it and my 28mm F/2, 50mm F/2, and 70-210mm F/3.5 lenses to cover a pretty wide range without too much bulk. For planned projects or all-day shooting, I usually bring my K10d dSLR, four or five lenses, a better tripod, and a medium format folder in my pocket for variety. Random walks and photo-walks help me get ideas for planned shooting days, but I don't want to have a ton of weight and junk with me if I'm just walking around, so the film bodies and point-and-shoots are great for wandering or research. As for quantity, If I'm shooting film, it depends on the subject or the day- I can usually get through one or two 36-exp rolls if I'm just wandering around. If it's a planned project, more like 5-10 rolls a day or 400+ digital shots if I'm using the dSLR. For film shots that I think might have some promise, I'll usually bracket and do a few different angles just to improve the odds of getting something useful... or with the digital, I'll just look at the viewfinder and do it over again or scrap the shot if something is wrong. For a lazy and rough ratio though, I estimate that 1 in 10 shots will be okay as a snapshot, 1 in 20 worth putting on facebook, 1 in 50 will go on flickr. 1 in 250 will be printed, 1 in 500 will be printed and framed, 1 in 2000 will sell and then hopefully pay off some of the previous costs. quote:This all fascinates me. I want to know how you people work before I invest a frankly obscene amount of money to pretend to be one of you. That's the wrong way to do it. Don't buy expensive gear to emulate other people if you don't know your own workflow or needs yet. You'd be much better off finding a $10 to ~$100 film camera or a cheap used digital point-and-shoot, with manual function if possible, and lightweight if possible. Mid-90's autofocus film SLRs are surprisingly cheap too, any of the Canon EOS film bodies would be great to work with it you want something more substantial and dSLR-like, and for those $70 EOS film kits, you'd learn just as much about image-making as you would from a $500 entry-level dSLR kit. Cheap but decent cameras, let's try Canon first: http://www.keh.com/Camera/format-35mm/system-Canon-EOS/category-Camera-Outfits?s=1&bcode=CE&ccode=1&cc=79258&r=WG&f http://www.keh.com/Camera/format-Digital/system-Canon-Digital/category-Point-and-Shoots?s=1&bcode=DC&ccode=5&cc=79269&r=WG&f http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-Manual-Focus-Camera-Outfits/1/sku-CA019990513430?r=FE etc. etc. Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Oly, Minolta, any of them would be fine, don't overthink it. Spend a couples days shooting with whatever you get, get prints back or toss the files onto your computer, then judge the hell out of the shots. Which ones failed, and why? What limited you? What did you enjoy? Which ones are interesting to you, and why? What do you want more of? Then shoot more. Now go to the library. Browse the photography section, find a few books (not technical books, but artist's portfolio books) that strike your fancy. Read them front to back, then go shoot more again with those inspirations floating around in the back of your mind. After a few months of practice, ask yourself: where do you want to go with this? What do you want to say? Do you find yourself shooting in low-light a lot? Interiors? Exteriors? Movement? Events? Parties? Closeups? Portraits? What subjects interest you? Research them more. Find some direction, find what you're starting to enjoy BEFORE you go investing in a big, bulky, and expensive dSLR system. Upgrade yourself before you upgrade your gear. Dr. Cogwerks fucked around with this message at 00:03 on Dec 27, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 23:05
|
|
is go
|
I've had my camera for about two and a half months and I've taken 14,000 pictures with it. I take it with me 90% of the time that I leave the house, and I usually don't use it, but occasionally I do and it's really fun. I had a lot of fun just trying to take interesting shots of some friends playing beer pong in a dimly lit dining room. First I had to figure out how to get the pictures to even show anything without using a flash (draws too much attention and makes people too conscious that they're on camera), then I had to find places to stand where I could get a decent view of the game through the crowd of people standing around but I also wasn't getting in anyone's way. Then once I had all the logistics worked out, I had to try to actually get an interesting shot of some random people playing the least interesting game in the world. Having a camera makes every situation into a challenge. To me, taking a good photo is like solving a puzzle. Sometimes you have a lot of hints as to how to solve the puzzle (really good natural lighting, really interesting subjects, good timing) but everything that isn't set out for you requires careful examination of the scene and determining the best way to go about capturing it. I think if you just take your camera out specifically for shooting, then you miss a lot of situations that present the greatest challenge (and henceforth the most reward). But yeah, what other people are saying, don't just go out and drop a bunch of money. I did, but I just knew I would use it all the time. If it's something you think would be fun but you're not certain that it's something you really have any passion for, then rent/borrow one or buy a cheap used body and experiment. When I first got my camera, I was kind of shocked how many pictures I took, and so was everyone that knew me, but looking back, I realized I always kind of loved taking photographs. I can look back to a week long trip I took to Barbados a few years ago where I took something like 800 photos, and I know this isn't particularly unusual, but none of them are the boring "tourists standing in front of a landmark" type. I was trying to take artistic photos, even though I didn't realize I was at the time. I did all that with a $100 point and shoot, so having a DSLR that takes such higher quality photos is ridiculously fun. But if you couldn't have fun taking these photos with a cheap, lovely camera, then you probably aren't going to enjoy it any more with a nicer camera. I know a lot of people who had that inclination, that they would suddenly enjoy taking pictures more if they had a nicer camera, and then they bought one and got bored with it after a week, because if you don't already enjoy it with a cheap camera, it isn't any more exciting having crisper looking images. Really, just go out and buy a disposable camera and use it up over the course of a week. Get the photos developed. How interesting are they? Would they benefit from having a higher image quality, or are they so dull that it doesn't matter? How much do you want the ones that could be improved to be better? Would you get bored taking the same shot thirty times with slightly varied camera settings, trying to find the best possible settings for the scene? If you're not insanely invested in taking really good photographs, then don't dump a ton of money into a really nice camera, because it will only be as good as the time and effort you put into it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2010 23:42
|
|
|
For beginners everybody always recommends Understanding Exposure, by Bryan Peterson. I've read it, it's great. Has anyone ever gone to one of his workshops? He's coming to town in a few months, and while the price is great ($60), I don't know if I can sit through seven hours of instruction on what shutter speed, aperture and ISO do. Not that I'm great, but I've got a pretty good grasp of the basics (You might say I, ahem, Understand Exposure  ). I'm hesitant because it's targeted at the "beginner to intermediate photographer," and in my experience "beginner" often means "I need a little help attaching the strap to my camera which I got for my birthday last week." On the other hand this guy really knows his poo poo, and it's not like good photographers are lining up to come to Richmond; I'd like to support this kind of thing in the hopes of attracting more like him in the future.Anyway, back to my original question: has anybody seen Bryan Peterson, and was it worthwhile? ExecuDork posted:[Rant mode] Why are picture frames in such dumb sizes?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2010 17:58
|
|
|
jackpot posted:For beginners everybody always recommends Understanding Exposure, by Bryan Peterson. I've read it, it's great. Has anyone ever gone to one of his workshops? He's coming to town in a few months, and while the price is great ($60), I don't know if I can sit through seven hours of instruction on what shutter speed, aperture and ISO do. Not that I'm great, but I've got a pretty good grasp of the basics (You might say I, ahem, Understand Exposure Drop the $60, see if there's a syllabus or something, and if it sucks to start, skip out and come back in the afternoon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2010 01:25
|
|
|
Say, do any of you know of a good but cheap bulk-printing service? I'd like to print off like 500 of my early digital shots to put in silly albums, starting to find some weird file corruption in there. 4x6 drugstore-style prints are all I've got in mind for that. I'm guessing that Walmart is probably the cheapest option?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2010 01:52
|
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:Say, do any of you know of a good but cheap bulk-printing service? I'd like to print off like 500 of my early digital shots to put in silly albums, starting to find some weird file corruption in there. 4x6 drugstore-style prints are all I've got in mind for that. I'm guessing that Walmart is probably the cheapest option? Adoramapix is really cheap, and they do a decent job. You can order them for $0.19 per 4x6, or you can buy a pack of 1000 4x6 prints for $170.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2010 01:56
|
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:Say, do any of you know of a good but cheap bulk-printing service? I'd like to print off like 500 of my early digital shots to put in silly albums, starting to find some weird file corruption in there. 4x6 drugstore-style prints are all I've got in mind for that. I'm guessing that Walmart is probably the cheapest option? Check costco.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2010 01:57
|
|
|
My parents have a few reels of what I think is 8mm projector tape. Can anyone recommend a shop to have this converted to DVD? It's somewhat important to them and from what I gather these reels are somewhat fragile, so I'd prefer a recommendation to just picking someone off of google.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2010 04:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:43 |
|
|
jackpot posted:Anyway, back to my original question: has anybody seen Bryan Peterson, and was it worthwhile? Without fail, I always learn something new and useful every time I attend a workshop or presentation. Regardless if I think the subject is under me, over my head, or not in my area of interest. Needless to say I try to attend every photography presentation/workshop in town that I can. With that said, you have to kinda make up a cost/benefit ratio of what's worth it to you. If he was charging $200 I'd forget about because I doubt you'd get your money's worth due to the subject matter. However, IMO, for $60 that seems like a good deal. Plus, his hot wife could be there
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2010 20:09
|
|