Naim Forum photo al***
Posted by: count.d on 18 January 2004
1.
[This message was edited by count.d on SUNDAY 18 January 2004 at 12:42.]
[This message was edited by count.d on SUNDAY 18 January 2004 at 12:42.]
Posted on: 18 January 2004 by count.d
2
Posted on: 18 January 2004 by count.d
3
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by count.d
Come on chaps, don't be shy.
With the level of interest in photography on this forum, I thought it would have been good to get a thread going with peoples's images.
You know? discussion, criticism, debate, advice, interesting forum..........
With the level of interest in photography on this forum, I thought it would have been good to get a thread going with peoples's images.
You know? discussion, criticism, debate, advice, interesting forum..........
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by matthewr
I think everyone's already seen the 5 good pictures I've taken in my life. Plus we seem to have lots of people interested in cameras but few interested in photographs.
FWIW I don't like your toning pictures but I generally don;lt like that sort of thing anyway (it always seems too "tricksy" and looks a bit naff IMHO).
I like the second one though. Very Summer of Love.
Matthew
FWIW I don't like your toning pictures but I generally don;lt like that sort of thing anyway (it always seems too "tricksy" and looks a bit naff IMHO).
I like the second one though. Very Summer of Love.
Matthew
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by anselm
i like number one, quite metropolis-esque.
Anselm
all art is contemporary; it is the way we look at it that changes...
Anselm
all art is contemporary; it is the way we look at it that changes...
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Martin Clark
Stones of Stenness
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Martin Clark
Stenness, another day
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by andy c
Martin,
Like those pikkys!.....
Like those pikkys!.....
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by i am simon 2
One from me
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by i am simon 2
My favorite sculpture
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Martin Clark
AndyC - thanks. There's no science to it at all, snaps taken with elcheapo office digital camera while camping last October.
I've noticed I have taken many more (& better)pictures in 'snap' form simply from the habitual carrying of such a small camera. Opportunistic snapping must suit me better than 'tooling-up' with SLR and taking it seriously!
M.
I've noticed I have taken many more (& better)pictures in 'snap' form simply from the habitual carrying of such a small camera. Opportunistic snapping must suit me better than 'tooling-up' with SLR and taking it seriously!
M.
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by BigH47
One of my daughters travel pics
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by BigH47
Heres one of my daughters pics from her travels
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by count.d
quote:
FWIW I don't like your toning pictures but I generally don;lt like that sort of thing anyway (it always seems too "tricksy" and looks a bit naff IMHO).
I know what you mean. The two main reasons for tinting are:
i) I've shot so many "normal" & B+W shots in the past that it's refreshing to explore different avenues.
ii) Clients will ask "can you do anything with this"? or "can you copy something like this"? I'll put a tint on the image to reflect the product it's selling or the mood they want to create and they'll love it... most of the time.
Tinting is fashionable and like most things fashionable, you'll either love them or hate them.
I personally like the colours in pic 1, not sure about pic 3 and I love pic 2. Shots like pic 2 are very difficult to get looking right and one would expect to shoot 30 frames to find one useable image.
What is nice to see on the other images is good framing.
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by greeny
quote:
What is nice to see on the other images is good framing.
On pic 1 you chopped her head off, on pic 2 you chopped her legs off, by pic 3 you had learnt how your viewfinder works
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Joe Petrik
Joe
Nerd info: Nikon F4, 105 f/2DC, available light, Kodak Portra B&W, crappy flatbed scan of film
Nerd info: Nikon F4, 105 f/2DC, available light, Kodak Portra B&W, crappy flatbed scan of film
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Joe Petrik
Joe
Nerd info: Nikon F4, 105 f/2DC, available light, Kodak Portra B&W, crappy flatbed scan of film
Nerd info: Nikon F4, 105 f/2DC, available light, Kodak Portra B&W, crappy flatbed scan of film
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Joe Petrik
Joe
Nerd info: Nikon F4, 105 f/2DC, available light, Kodak Portra B&W, crappy flatbed scan of film
Nerd info: Nikon F4, 105 f/2DC, available light, Kodak Portra B&W, crappy flatbed scan of film
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Joe Petrik
Count,
Looks like you nailed it to me. Great shot.
Joe
quote:
Shots like pic 2 are very difficult to get looking right and one would expect to shoot 30 frames to find one useable image.
Looks like you nailed it to me. Great shot.
Joe
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by jpk73
I like Martha...
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Robbie
Joe,
Quite nice, your pics.
Availlable light......
Regards,
Rob.
Quite nice, your pics.
Availlable light......
Regards,
Rob.
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by anselm
sleeping beauty
my daughter, it may not be the best photo but i love it
Anselm
all art is contemporary; it is the way we look at it that changes...
my daughter, it may not be the best photo but i love it
Anselm
all art is contemporary; it is the way we look at it that changes...
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Joe Petrik
Robbie,
Yeah, I've pretty much stopped using a strobe ever since Vuk chewed me out for exposing film with a vulgar flashlight.
__________________________________________
Jun,
Thanks. (I assume you mean the pic and not the person.)
Joe
quote:
Availlable light......
Yeah, I've pretty much stopped using a strobe ever since Vuk chewed me out for exposing film with a vulgar flashlight.
__________________________________________
Jun,
quote:
I like Martha...
Thanks. (I assume you mean the pic and not the person.)
Joe
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Joe Petrik
ejt,
Define affordable? Film scanners range from less than $200 for a crappy Pacific Image, to many, many thousands of dollars for an Imacon Flextight. I assume you mean somewhere between those extremes, so a ballpark figure would be helpful.
For what it's worth, I ordered a Minolta Scan Elite 5400 the other day. I'll give you a quick review once it's arrived and I've had a chance to play with it.
Joe
quote:
Can anyone recommend a good, affordable transparency scanner?
Define affordable? Film scanners range from less than $200 for a crappy Pacific Image, to many, many thousands of dollars for an Imacon Flextight. I assume you mean somewhere between those extremes, so a ballpark figure would be helpful.
For what it's worth, I ordered a Minolta Scan Elite 5400 the other day. I'll give you a quick review once it's arrived and I've had a chance to play with it.
Joe
Posted on: 20 January 2004 by Dan M
Joe,
Nice pictures! Novice question -- I notice you havent centered the subjects. When you composed them were you using 'the rule of thirds,' or did it just happen instinctively. Having graduated from paper camera to ancient Pentax SLR in the last year, I'm still trying to figure out how best to frame my pictures.
Dan
Nice pictures! Novice question -- I notice you havent centered the subjects. When you composed them were you using 'the rule of thirds,' or did it just happen instinctively. Having graduated from paper camera to ancient Pentax SLR in the last year, I'm still trying to figure out how best to frame my pictures.
Dan