Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: [SI] Don't forget to send your favorites!

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: [SI] Don't forget to send your favorites!

 
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-23-2009
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:57:17 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: Don't forget, this month's mandate, Due on the 25th, is "Your Favorite of
: the Month." Send us something you shot and tellus why you like it. Any
: subject matter is OK. Except porn. Put a brief description in the e-mail and
: I'll paste it into the description so we know why you like it. the gallery
: is here:
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/your_favorite
:
: And please send the pix here:
:
: si dot moderator at yahoo dot com
:
: We look forward to your entries.

Martha and I are in, as soon as I finish reducing our entries to 300KB. :^(

: PS: all I shoot this time of year is HS sports, so don't break my chops if
: all I submit are football pix.

Don't worry. You may recall that 11 months ago I had just tried to photograph
a football game the night before Thanxgiving. (My daughter's husband's nephew
is one of the best HS running backs in eastern Pennsylvania; if he doesn't get
injured, we're hoping to see him playing for Mr Paterno in a couple of years.)
My pix were pretty awful, so I know how hard it is!

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Huh ...
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2009
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 20:26:00 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>
>"Robert Coe" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:57:17 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> : Don't forget, this month's mandate, Due on the 25th, is "Your Favorite
>> of
>> : the Month." Send us something you shot and tellus why you like it. Any
>> : subject matter is OK. Except porn. Put a brief description in the e-mail
>> and
>> : I'll paste it into the description so we know why you like it. the
>> gallery
>> : is here:
>> :
>> : http://www.pbase.com/shootin/your_favorite
>> :
>> : And please send the pix here:
>> :
>> : si dot moderator at yahoo dot com
>> :
>> : We look forward to your entries.
>>
>> Martha and I are in, as soon as I finish reducing our entries to 300KB.
>> :^(
>>
>> : PS: all I shoot this time of year is HS sports, so don't break my chops
>> if
>> : all I submit are football pix.
>>
>> Don't worry. You may recall that 11 months ago I had just tried to
>> photograph
>> a football game the night before Thanxgiving. (My daughter's husband's
>> nephew
>> is one of the best HS running backs in eastern Pennsylvania; if he doesn't
>> get
>> injured, we're hoping to see him playing for Mr Paterno in a couple of
>> years.)
>> My pix were pretty awful, so I know how hard it is!

>
>It is a pain, and in another NG I was foolishly debating John Navas who said
>he could shoot night football with his FZ20. I challenged him to post
>results, and he eventually killfiled me. He also claimed that contrast
>detect AF was faster than Phase Detect AF, and a few other pretty silly
>things. Anyway, it's not easy. I shoot at ISO 6400 just to get the shutter
>above 1/250th at f4.


Huh...

And yet all high-school students on their yearbook staffs, armed with only
ASA100 film can, and have, captured those exact types of images for the
last half-century and more and had them published in books for the whole
world to see. Back then they even had poorer lighting that what you have
available now. A quite impressive feat when you consider everything those
beginner photographer teenagers have done in every school across the
country for so long.

Must feel pretty bad that you can't even use a camera as well as a beginner
photographer teenager. I guess you'll just have to keep posting why you
NEED ISO6400 to justify not looking in the mirror and your own pathetic
photography skills.

Sucks to be you, doesn't it.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
mikey4
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2009

"Huh ..." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 20:26:00 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
> And yet all high-school students on their yearbook staffs, armed with only
> ASA100 film can, and have, captured those exact types of images for the
> last half-century and more and had them published in books for the whole
> world to see. Back then they even had poorer lighting that what you have
> available now. A quite impressive feat when you consider everything those
> beginner photographer teenagers have done in every school across the
> country for so long.
>

Was a very long time ago, early 60's, I remember my high school newspaper
photogs shot Tri-X at night sporting events. Of course back then everything
shot for the school paper and year book B&W.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2009
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:03:03 -0400, Alan Browne
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: Huh ... wrote:
: school students on their yearbook staffs, armed with only
: > ASA100 film can, and have, captured those exact types of images for the
: > last half-century and more and had them published in books for the whole
: > world to see.
:
: Most yearbook photos are actually done by pros, companies that
: specialize in school photos. My HS certainly was. Yearbooks also
: include casual snaps of school life - usually done by students. But
: that's a slim part of the whole.

I wonder if you're just showing your age. (Don't take offense; I'm almost
certainly older than you.) My sense is that more such activities are in the
hands of students than was the case when we were kids. That's A Good Thing,
IMO.

I work for a city government, and we of course use HS interns (many with
political connections, but almost all of them very bright) in our Information
Technology Department. A few years ago a student (without any obvious
political connections) badgered me for an interview until we finally invited
him in. He turned out to one of the smartest kids I ever met. His HS and
college careers behind him, he's now one of our most valuable system
administrators. (FWIW, he's a Canon user.)

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
Huh ...
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2009
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS football
>game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.


The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited enough
to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.

You should be more careful about making offers like that, there are
thousands of previous high-school yearbook photographers in existence who
have done nothing but what you are claiming can't be done. I'm certainly
not the only one that can take your fool's money from such a rudimentary
snapshooter.

As for the other trolls claiming that putting those school-related
activities into the hands of hired photographers ... this perfectly
explains why there's so many poor snapshooters (and books written) today,
causing such things like the photographs posted on Flickr groups to get
such high praise. It all makes sense why things have gone from trash to
gutter.

 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2009
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 13:07:29 -0700, "Frank ess" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>
>Alan Browne wrote:
>> Huh ... wrote:
>> school students on their yearbook staffs, armed with only
>>> ASA100 film can, and have, captured those exact types of images
>>> for the last half-century and more and had them published in books
>>> for the whole world to see.

>>
>> Most yearbook photos are actually done by pros, companies that
>> specialize in school photos. My HS certainly was. Yearbooks also
>> include casual snaps of school life - usually done by students. But
>> that's a slim part of the whole.

>
>Some of all that in this middle 1950s album.
>http://www.fototime.com/inv/026DBC694F3BE97
>
>Looks as if the football snaps were flash-lit, and some on the pages
>of casual from-the-family-album shots of Seniors as children look
>surprisingly good. I took several of the school-life shots with our
>family's no-name camera, using 127 film if I recall correctly. Which
>is increasingly doubtful, given the time lapse and ... what was I
>saying?
>
>Do today's professionals bring a backdrop and do the shooting on
>campuses? Several of the no-shows in this graduating class missed the
>book because they worked on the family farm and couldn't get to the
>photographer's studio when it was open.


The student photographs for my high school yearbooks (1952/56) were
taken by a professional in the school auditorium. He had a portable
set-up much like what you see today where a baby photographer will set
up in a store like K-Mart.

The shots of the sports teams in action were taken by student
photographers who worked on the yearbook staff or the school newspaper
staff. All black-and-white. The group shots of clubs and
organizations were also taken by student photographers.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2009
Huh ... <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS football
>>game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.

>
>The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited enough
>to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.


Bleats some anonymous coward who doesn't even use a real name or email
address.

--
Ray Fischer
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Move along folks - nothing but talentless snapshooters here - nothing to see ...
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2009
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:05:25 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>
>"Alan Browne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Huh ... wrote:
>>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS
>>>> football game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO
>>>> 6400.
>>>
>>> The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited
>>> enough
>>> to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.
>>>
>>> You should be more careful about making offers like that, there are
>>> thousands of previous high-school yearbook photographers in existence who

>> <snip the ya-ya-ya-da>
>>
>> Shut up and put up. Walk the walk. Show the goods.

>
>Like Navas, we'll never see anything. 1/8th at f4? Good results? Right......


Or ... 1/32s at f/2.8, or 1/64s at f/1.4. No, no way, there are no lenses
of that size, never was. Panning with a subject, snapping the shutter just
at the full extension of motion or when the subject is reversing positions.
During that momentary pause that ALL decent sports photographer learn to
predict and know like the back of their hand. Easy to do at those speeds
and arrest all motion. Even easier if using Tri-X. Easy for anyone who is
the least bit talented that is. Even teenage high-school yearbook
photographers who are just learning to use a camera.

The fact that you can't do what nearly every teenager on a year-book staff
could do proves just how pathetic you are no matter what camera gear will
ever be in your hands. Thanks for posting and zealously insisting what high
ISOs you require, otherwise we wouldn't have realized just how bad you are
with any camera. Your own words proved it. Unbeknownst to you, until now.

Give it up, you useless talentless snapshooting know-nothing hack trolls.

One more thing. Stop handing out your snapshooter's advice. NOBODY deserves
the pitiable fate of having to learn anything photography related from
talentless idiots like you.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-25-2009
Bowser <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>"Ray Fischer" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:4ae4d05a$0$1659$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Huh ... <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS
>>>>football
>>>>game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.
>>>
>>>The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited
>>>enough
>>>to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.

>>
>> Bleats some anonymous coward who doesn't even use a real name or email
>> address.

>
>Right. Just an attempt at privacy, that's all.


A bullshit excuse.

>As far as privacy, do you stand up in the middle of Grand Central Station
>and shout out your personal info?


Do you realize why that's a stupid question?

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Catch Up
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-27-2009
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:50:09 -0400, Alan Browne
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Bowser wrote:
>
>> Do you think that the troll is a Navas sock puppet? Seriously, 1/32nd?

>
>Some leaf shutters, marked 1/15, 1/30, 1/60 etc. are actually 1/16,
>1/32, 1/64 ... in timing. (I'd bet many FP shutters from yore are as
>well and I wouldn't be shocked if modern DSLR's are so).


Anyone with any modern camera can easily test this for themselves. Set it
for 15 seconds. It times out at 16 seconds. If unsure with the 15 second
test, then set it for 30 seconds, watch the shutter close at a 32 duration.
Easier for the photographer to double or half the numbers if they are
rounded.

1s, 2s, 4s, 8s, 15s, 30s. 60s.

Rather than the true speeds which are

1s, 2s. 4s. 8s. 16s. 32s. 64s

The rounded numbers were only added for convenience. The CHDK team, for
lack of a better term, has defined these rounded values the "marketed
values". This numbering scheme, rounding f/stop, exposure, and even ISO
values to the nearest round had been in existence since the beginning of
photography.

In the other direction, their "marketed value" might be named

1/8, 1/15, 1/30, 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500

But in reality they will always time to

1/8, 1/16, 1/32, 1/64, 1/128, 1/248, 1/496

This is quite confusing to newcomers to the CHDK team. They've never been
aware of this. (Old-time photographers are, but none of the newer
photographers know this.) When people new to CHDK get into the APEX
numbering scheme for setting Av and Tv values, they have to rely on the
true values, not the "marketed values".

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: [SI] Don't forget to send in your wallpaper! Peter Digital Photography 68 06-15-2010 11:37 PM
[SI] Don't forget to send your 46.8 degree images for Sunday, the 17th. Bowser Digital Photography 3 01-18-2010 03:27 PM
Re: Don't forget to send your favorites! Annika1980 Digital Photography 41 11-06-2009 05:10 AM
Re: [SI] Don't forget to send your favorites! Tim Conway Digital Photography 7 10-25-2009 11:04 PM
Re: [SI] Don't forget to send your favorites! tony cooper Digital Photography 2 10-25-2009 05:41 AM



Advertisments