Not signed in (Sign In)
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.
  1.  (7334.741)
    @ microclimate-I wonder how Cartier-Bresson would have made out shooting the latest sale items for next week's Best Buy flier?
  2.  (7334.742)
    @ William George -

    Yes, but how likely are non-phtographers going to be able to tell if what I have in my hands is the PentaxK10 or the newest model? Or the difference between Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, etc? I think they see size and shape and don't investigate further.

    At least, I hope so.
  3.  (7334.743)
    And of course Jane Bown herself, who apparently has pretty much one fixed setting yet is one of the finest portrait photographers around. Anyone ever see when somebody submitted a couple of lovely Cartier Bressons to one of these camera anorak/bore forums and watched them nit pick ad-nauseum about little framing/cropping niggles? Was hilarious...
  4.  (7334.744)
    Yes, but how likely are non-phtographers going to be able to tell if what I have in my hands is the PentaxK10 or the newest model?


    @ Rachael- No idea. I assume most of them can't tell the subtle differences between all of them. But they can't all be totally ignorant if imagery is a vital part of their advertising or what have you.

    Anyone ever see when somebody submitted a couple of lovely Cartier Bressons to one of these camera anorak/bore forums and watched them nit pick ad-nauseum about little framing/cropping niggles?


    @ JonCarpenter - One of the things I love about this thread is the lack of geek wank. It's really bad on Flickr and Photo.net can make you want to gouge out your eyes sometimes.
  5.  (7334.745)
    Jon,

    Absolutely- she'd just turn up with a basket containing a single camera, and use available light. I saw her "exposures" exhibition earlier in the year, and it's a perfect example of how the camera doesn't make the shot. Her ability to put people at ease and capture their essence is inspiring. So many of those images were iconic. Actually, they were often stunningly well-taken too, but just so unfussy.

    Also, HCB always brings me up short. I was at "Exposed: Voyeurism, Surveillance and the Camera" at the Tate Modern last week, and while there was a load of stunning stuff there- including some really iconic Weegee stuff and the like, but without fail, the ones that had me stopping in my tracks always turned out to be HCB when I looked at the caption. Yes, so he didn't use cars full of flunkies, hell, he wasn't always in focus- but when he was off it was because he didn't have time, because he needed to capture the moment, which was more important. The fact that the picture was affecting to look out trumps all joyless pixel peeping every time. We could all learn from that.


    William George:

    I wonder how Cartier-Bresson would have made out shooting the latest sale items for next week's Best Buy flier?


    Just fine, I expect. He could do a lot more with a lot less than most people, and wasn't against more modern gear- he owned six Contax T, for a start. However, product shots aren't really a good yardstick, any reasonably intelligent adult could take a short course on basic product photography, buy a generic Canon full frame DSLR and a copy of Aperture, and then crank out those underwhelming studio shots for "next week's Best Buy flier". There's not a lot of fun in that.

    Ah, why am I telling you this? You know this stuff inside-out anyway. By the way, I loved the overlapping frames/multi exposure shot you posted a little bit earlier in the thread. That was a happy accident, thanks for posting it!
  6.  (7334.746)
    You guys make me so happy. :) I love the real conversation and the photos have been excellent.

    Rachel - I thought I was the only Pentax lover here. :) I had one for ages till it got stolen and I still miss the shit out of it.
    •  
      CommentAuthoroldhat
    • CommentTimeJun 6th 2010 edited
     (7334.747)
    I've read in many sources that customers want to see a photographer holding the latest and biggest, even when it's not needed for the shot.


    @William In some cases that's true, but only if one of the people you deal with actually knows cameras or owns the biggest and newest but doesn't know how to use it. I've gotten a lot of disapproving looks when I mention that I own a Nikon D50 nowadays, but thankfully, my work tends to speak for itself and trumps any techhead's comments. The most flak I've gotten is for working with the light of the area and not owning a lighting kit or something to help bounce the light. But that's all stuff that happens before they see the final product, which tends to make them magically forget all they said previously.
    •  
      CommentAuthoroldhat
    • CommentTimeJun 6th 2010 edited
     (7334.748)
    ...and I went photo-taking today. Only one good shot came out of it, but still. It's pretty.
  7.  (7334.749)
    Cloud porn <3
  8.  (7334.750)
    Cloud porn <3


    uhuhuh, you like make the sexy with clouds eh? Sir, you are a man of exquisite taste. I have something special for you, for the true connoisseur...



    Cloud porn

    Cloud porn

    Cloud porn

    Cloud porn


    Rachel - I thought I was the only Pentax lover here. :) I had one for ages till it got stolen and I still miss the shit out of it.


    I still have my old K1000, with a 1.4 50mm lens. It was a 19th birthday present from my dad, I'd never get rid of it even though it's battered to hell. He's still a pentax user - I started in photography with old spotmatics with screwfit lenses that didn't even have light meters...
    •  
      CommentAuthorphotomagex
    • CommentTimeJun 6th 2010
     (7334.751)
    I went to our local Canadian Armed Forces base to see the air show.







    Notice these planes are coming from opposite directions.



  9.  (7334.752)
    [Leslie Phillips]
    Oh, behave!
    [/Leslie Phillips]

    Very nice indeed.
  10.  (7334.753)
    Are we showing each other clouds, then?

    Ok, this is old, and it's grainy.... but it's.... it's.... TOM BAKER in the FUCKING SKY. seriously.

    Celestial Tom Baker


    aaaaand am I allowed to mention that I'm selling off the half a dozen or so matted prints I have left? (maybe sell off the unmatted ones that are not quite 8x10 in the near future, too...)
  11.  (7334.754)
    I think that's known technically as "TOM BAKER in the FUCKING SKY with JELLY BABIES", n'est-ce-pas? Insanity, either way.

    A random scattering of sky, some of which has probably appeared here before:

    Irritating Stick

    Hand of Bob

    Skyrise

    Mapped
  12.  (7334.755)
    I've been trying to put up a shot every day from where ever i've been spending my evening.
    It's only from my phone camera, but some of the shots I really like, mostly because they're from my balcony. I'm seriously thinking of investing in a better camera that I can take proper shots of.

    I've been doing it nightly so far, and tonights came out really badly, it is a foul day http://twitgoo.com/yyoh4 :(

    But some of them really aren't that bad http://twitgoo.com/u/PintSizedCat
    Sunset
    Number two
    •  
      CommentAuthorCOOP
    • CommentTimeJun 7th 2010
     (7334.756)
    New Yawk:

    L1010125.JPG

    L1010127.JPG

    L1010115.JPG

    L1010100.JPG

    L1010061.JPG

    L1000842.JPG

    L1000828.JPG
    •  
      CommentAuthorMunin
    • CommentTimeJun 8th 2010
     (7334.757)


    short burst transmission
    •  
      CommentAuthorCOOP
    • CommentTimeJun 9th 2010
     (7334.758)
    L1000675.JPG

    L1010175.JPG
    • CommentAuthorUsh
    • CommentTimeJun 9th 2010
     (7334.759)
    Sky & Balloons
    •  
      CommentAuthorphotomagex
    • CommentTimeJun 9th 2010
     (7334.760)
    Nice job on that flower Munin. What, if any, post production was done on that and what kind of lens are you using?

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.