|
stealing this from LF to post here:Vernii posted:
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 08:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 02:01 |
|
|
Hot Cops posted:What kind of scrilla are you paying for that place, Brad? You probably need to split surface/usage for tax purposes (you do in the Netherlands, but I assume it's the same in the US), and insurance can be a pain (no idea if that's the case in the US).
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 09:24
|
|
|
Hot Cops posted:What kind of scrilla are you paying for that place, Brad? It's about $2000 (split with a roommate who is also an artist) which is really loving cheap in the Bay Area considering it's about ~1800sqft. It's zoned live/work so there aren't really any legal issues with me living out of here and also having a studio. Some of the other units in my building are being used as office only, some are only being used as living space, most are both. Insurance wise my professional stuff covers my equipment/liability here. I can deduct a portion of my rent relative to what space is being used as work-only as a business expense. Other than that I'm not open to the public or anything so I don't need a business license or a permit or any of that poo poo. We just finished building my bedroom up in the rafters which is pretty sweet, I'm basically living in a treehouse. Will post pics of the studio portion after I get settled and start doing some shoots.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 09:45
|
|
|
brad industry posted:
Who cares about the studio portion? I want to see pics of that sweet living space. Don't disappoint us, man.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 13:53
|
|
|
I've posted on here before about the fact that my main interest in photography is underwater work. I've done quite a bit myself but my Dad did back in the 70's as well. I'm not sure why he ever quit taking photos but he is still in the dive industry. Anyway I've run across some old photos and have been working on a few of them and I thought you guys might like to see some of them. These were all taken around 1974 or so.       My Dad with his original Nikonos ZoCrowes fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Jan 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 18:05
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:I've posted on here before about the fact that my main interest in photography is underwater work. I've done quite a bit myself but my Dad did back in the 70's as well. I'm not sure why he ever quit taking photos but he is still in the dive industry. Anyway I've run across some old photos and have been working on a few of them and I thought you guys might like to see some of them. Those are neat as hell. Does he still have the old camera? The first one and shot of someone swimming next to the wall of seaweed is cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 18:40
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Those are neat as hell. Does he still have the old camera? The first one and shot of someone swimming next to the wall of seaweed is cool. Thanks! It's long gone but I've recently gotten my hands on a Nikonos IV. It needs some repair work (new O-rings mainly) and there is a guy I know who says he still has parts to repair it. Hopefully I can get it repaired and start shooting it soon. I would love to do some B&W wide-angle wreck shots with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 18:44
|
|
|
I like the last one. He looks so ...cool. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 20:29
|
|
|
Is there a particular type of double sided tape that you fashion shooters use?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 20:49
|
|
|
If anyone's interested, Mary Ellen Mark posted a couple images on her facebook; one of the final shot, another of how it was set up. If anyone's really interested, I could help answer questions about it. http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=137871&id=103598652337&ref=nf
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 21:55
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:I've posted on here before about the fact that my main interest in photography is underwater work. Woo! Another dorkroomer who understands that salt water is an essential ingredient for finishing film! Is that a Nikonos III your dad is sporting there? Also, that makes me miss J-valve tanks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 21:59
|
|
|
ZoCrowes, can I be your scuba/photography apprentice? Your dad is badass. I recently picked up a nikonos V, but didn't have the opportunity to take it scuba diving - just did poo poo off the beach with low visibility in the water. The most compelling subject was my fin. If any one is curious I could take some pictures of the nikonos V.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 22:16
|
|
|
Someone really should start an underwater photography thread...
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 22:19
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:Someone really should start an underwater photography thread... I vote ZoCrowes do it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 22:21
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:ZoCrowes, can I be your scuba/photography apprentice? You're European correct? I've been contemplating a move for the past few years. You put me up and you have yourself a deal! A while back you asked me about AIM and I don't actually get on there much anymore. If you want to get in touch to with me to talk diving and such just drop me a line at chrispscott (at) gmail (dot) com. I'm down for starting an Underwater Photo thread. I'll write up an OP at work tomorrow if no one has any objections. Squidflakes - I believe that's an original Nikonos actually. Dad can't remember because he had more than a few over the years. ZoCrowes fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Jan 15, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2010 23:56
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:You're European correct? I've been contemplating a move for the past few years. You put me up and you have yourself a deal! A while back you asked me about AIM and I don't actually get on there much anymore. If you want to get in touch to with me to talk diving and such just drop me a line at chrispscott (at) gmail (dot) com. Cool, I'll pop you an email now. I literally have nobody to talk diving with at the moment. I managed to talk my friend into doing a "discover dive" but his mom had a huge shitfit about him diving. Not because she thought it was dangerous, but she thought it would affect his ambition to go "down" rather than "up."
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2010 00:14
|
|
|
Cyberbob posted:Is there a particular type of double sided tape that you fashion shooters use? For what? As far as I know, everyone just uses gaffers tape, including me. Are you talking about for clothes? Stylist takes care of all that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2010 00:18
|
|
|
Yea, for clothes. Sticking cloth to skin, without it hurting  Just wondered if i should be looking for anything in particular. It's just a smalltime trial shoot, but i need some tape of some sort.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2010 00:21
|
|
|
From what I know, usually clothes are pinned. Otherwise, if you're not real good with pins, you can try bra-tape that women use to tape in no-strap bras. Honestly, just normal double sided poster tape would probably work fine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2010 00:26
|
|
|
I think two things that would probably help is to google up how burlesque dancers keep their pasties on and how female wrestlers keep things from accidentally bouncing out of captivity. I'm pretty sure they use either gaffers tape in a loop or foam double-sided tape.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2010 01:39
|
|
|
I've assisted stylists and they always used small A-clamps or pins to hold clothes together. Mostly pins.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2010 21:36
|
|
|
HPL posted:I think two things that would probably help is to google up how burlesque dancers keep their pasties on and how female wrestlers keep things from accidentally bouncing out of captivity. I'm pretty sure they use either gaffers tape in a loop or foam double-sided tape. Ah yes, this is an excellent thing to "research"
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2010 22:52
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:Ah yes, this is an excellent thing to "research" I had to investigate this for my ICSA entry over in goons with spoons. The answer is scotch double sided tape you can get anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 01:58
|
|
|
I'm excited, I'm shooting film for the first time tomorrow. MF fun (I know, I know)
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 03:52
|
|
|
Wired thinks your DSLR is yesterday's news. http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/01/five-reasons-you-should-ditch-your-dslr/ quote:There’s a new camera category in town. It’s EVIL, and it’s going to kick your DSLR’s rear end. EVIL stands for Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens, and is our favorite acronym for cameras like the Olympus Pen, the Lumix GF1 and the Samsung NX10. These small, mirrorless, finderless cameras can fit in a pocket and outperform bulky DSLRs. Here’s why your next camera will probably be EVIL. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 11:14
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:Wired thinks your DSLR is yesterday's news. Hilarious, quote:There’s a new camera category in town. It’s EVIL, and it’s going to kick your DSLR’s rear end. EVIL stands for Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens, and is our favorite acronym for cameras like the Olympus Pen, the Lumix GF1 and the Samsung NX10. These small, mirrorless, finderless cameras can fit in a pocket and outperform bulky DSLRs. Here’s why your next camera will probably be EVIL. They never mention the "outperform" in the subsequent comments. Not to mention, how exactly are they going to give us a 17-50mm equivalent (the "kit lens") without making them too big to put in your pocket, the sole advantage these seem to offer? Sure, these are great second cameras.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 12:55
|
|
|
A friend of mine got the GF1 and it's a great little camera. I'd love to have one as a carry around, but I don't see it replacing my DSLR any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 13:16
|
|
|
I remember reading an Arthur C. Clarke book a few weeks ago in which one of the main characters was developing some film thinking to himself that although they were on a moon base photography hadn't changed at all in the last 200 years. I feel like the main thing keeping photography from advancing in huge dramatic leaps is the investment the big electronics companies are making in specific systems. It's in their best interest to keep the SLR platform going. Of course, there is also the fact that we've had the capacity to produce stunning images for the last fifty years and if you look at photography's product rather than the method there is no real reason to change it dramatically.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 13:18
|
|
|
I'm not sure much can be done minus a revolutionary change in optics. Until we aren't limited by glass/ceramic optics and the defraction/distortion problems inherent to it, you can only make a 400mm lens so compact and retain any quality. Right now, I'm not sure you can make a 70-200 much smaller than the f/4 of canon, and how important is it that your camera can fit in your pocket if it's stuck on the end of that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 15:06
|
|
|
2 Year Old wins photgraphy contest
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 15:39
|
|
|
I'd love a GF1 myself but generally the Wired article hilights the main problem with Wired since they started publishing. Wired writers are techno fetishists whose eyes get starry over anything, technological or social, that they perceive as new.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 15:46
|
|
|
psylent posted:2 Year Old wins photgraphy contest By the time he's older the camera will be worthless, bit of a shame, but it is a nice picture. torgeaux posted:I'm not sure much can be done minus a revolutionary change in optics. Until we aren't limited by glass/ceramic optics and the defraction/distortion problems inherent to it, you can only make a 400mm lens so compact and retain any quality. Right now, I'm not sure you can make a 70-200 much smaller than the f/4 of canon, and how important is it that your camera can fit in your pocket if it's stuck on the end of that? No but you see the camera is tiny and therefore it must be a technological invention that will cast off the shackles of the previous generation! I like a slightly bulky camera as it gives me something to grip.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 16:06
|
|
|
psylent posted:A friend of mine got the GF1 and it's a great little camera. I'd love to have one as a carry around, but I don't see it replacing my DSLR any time soon. It is lovely, but it's not that small though. Speaking of which, are there any decent pancake lenses for Canon? I'd even go manual if it meant that the body+lense was really light
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 16:59
|
|
|
so the cameras the wired article are talking about have electronic shutters right? does having a mirror and physical shutter still make better pictures because of the optics?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 17:27
|
|
|
What? No. There is nothing about these bodies that results in better optics. Better optics make better optics (to be trite about it). Maybe they're trying to argue that no mirror mechanism allows for smaller and faster optics like rangefinders? The article is so far off from advancing such a viewpoint that I would have to call them absolutely idiotic as to the details of photography if that's what they're trying to say. A worthless piece from Wired, basically.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 17:30
|
|
|
Additionallyloving Wired posted:Unless you have a specific use that these cameras can’t meet or see your composition in daylight or not kill your night vision or have significant battery life
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 17:35
|
|
|
Not that the article isn't riddled with enough technical inaccuracies, but I believe Cartier-Bresson shot most of his famous stuff with Barnacks (older screw mount Leicas), not M's. I hope Samsung has something more in the shape of the GF1/EP1 in the pipeline, a compact 1.6x crop EVIL is pretty tempting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 18:44
|
|
|
To play devil's advocate for a second, a lot of P&S cameras, and things like the Powershot G11 and Olympus EP-1 and EP-2 have shown a lot of promise compared to full-bore DSLRs. They're not equivalent, and may never be, but they're getting a lot closer in some aspects. A ton of people are buying DSLRs just because "I want better pictures!" and probably never take them out of AUTO in their lifetime. I think some of these cameras are taking advantage of that market, as well as the DSLR enthusiasts who might want something a little more pocketable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 19:17
|
|
|
DJExile posted:To play devil's advocate for a second, a lot of P&S cameras, and things like the Powershot G11 and Olympus EP-1 and EP-2 have shown a lot of promise compared to full-bore DSLRs. They're not equivalent, and may never be, but they're getting a lot closer in some aspects. Many P&S cameras can take great photos in broad daylight. It's in low light and fast action where they fall off badly. They're considerably better than they used to be though. I hope it eventually reaches the point that film did where a small autofocus point and shoot like the Olympus Stylus Epic could deliver pretty much the same quality as an SLR in all conditions if you used it right.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 02:01 |
|
|
There's already enough tech across the brands to make a pretty compelling machine once they get their heads out of their collective asses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 19:57
|
|