GARY FONG?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Eric Miller, Jul 30, 2007.

  1. Eric Miller

    Eric Miller Guest

    Having just wandered from the political thread, I thought I'd toss out a
    puzzle of sorts that might get back OT. Does the type of diffuser really
    matter? If you think so, then tell me what kind of diffuser was used in
    this photo? Heck, if you can't tell, just give your opinion as to
    whether you think it did a good or even adequate job.

    http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html

    Here is some additional info:

    Camera Canon EOS 5D
    Lens Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
    Aperture 1.8
    Shutter 200
    ISO 100

    Clues: The model, my daughter, is sitting on a bed in our upstairs
    bedroom. To her left, camera right, is an open window. The room has
    white walls, a low white ceiling and light carpeting. The room was a bit
    dark and it was cloudy today, so without flash her right side would have
    been in shadow. That was filled with a canon flash with a diffuser on it.

    If you need a hint, I'll narrow the choices:

    Gary Fong Lightsphere
    White Post-it note
    Larry Thong Light Bottle
    Lumiquest Pocket Bouncer
    Cream colored business card and tape
    Sto-Fen Omni-Bounce

    There you have it. No doubt the people who think the equipment matters
    will nail this one.

    Incidentally, this isn't being offered as an example of a good photo,
    but if you want to critique or flame me, go for it. I will post the
    answer later if anyone is interested.

    Eric Miller
    www.dyesscreek.com
    Eric Miller, Jul 30, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Eric Miller

    Paul Furman Guest

    Eric Miller wrote:

    > ...Does the type of diffuser really
    > matter? If you think so, then tell me what kind of diffuser was used in
    > this photo? Heck, if you can't tell, just give your opinion as to
    > whether you think it did a good or even adequate job.
    >
    > http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html


    Looks like on-camera flash, not bounced off the ceiling, that leaves two
    possibilities unless I don't know what those others are. I can see a
    pretty sharp shadow under her chin so actually I vote for no diffuser.
    Cute kid!

    > Gary Fong Lightsphere
    > White Post-it note
    > Larry Thong Light Bottle
    > Lumiquest Pocket Bouncer
    > Cream colored business card and tape
    > Sto-Fen Omni-Bounce


    I'm repeating what I wrote in the political thread as I think it got lost:

    I just invented my own diffuser with some experimenting. For the
    built-in flash on my D200... I started with tracing paper... almost no
    difference... then dug up an old pplastic garden path light diffuser:
    plastic designed to diffuse with ridges & frosted surface... a little
    better but not a big difference... still harsh flash shadows... then I
    cut that in half & doubled it with about a 1-inch gap between the two...
    big improvement. This is based on a pricipal I learned from interior
    designers for diffusing light through a window you use two sheer white
    curtains with some separation, one doesn't do much but two really gets
    the job done.

    I'm not showing pics of it cause it's butt-ugly but what I did was cut a
    piece of plastic to slide into the hotshoe & taped that to the diffuser
    which curves over the popped up flash & rests on the lens. Easy to
    remove with the hot-shoe attachment.

    Then I designed a bouce card. Crinkled foil does a much better job that
    a white business card... attachment is with another piece of plastic
    (plant label bent with 4 folds), which then slides thru a slot in the
    business card after mounting on the hot shoe thru the hole in the pop-up.

    BTW I suck at flash... I always avoided it. I don't even get the iTTL
    deal: there is almost no change in shutter speed in aperture priority
    mode, it just provides fill light, even in slow synch mode and results
    in a brighter exposure when flash is a major part of the exposure.
    Hmmmm. I figure if I'm going to play with these diffused versions, I'll
    keep it cranked up to max output since it's just a wimpy on camera flash
    diffused.


    --
    Paul Furman Photography
    http://edgehill.net
    Bay Natives Nursery
    http://www.baynatives.com
    Paul Furman, Jul 30, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Eric Miller

    Eric Miller Guest

    Paul Furman wrote:
    > Eric Miller wrote:
    >
    >> ...Does the type of diffuser really matter? If you think so, then tell
    >> me what kind of diffuser was used in this photo? Heck, if you can't
    >> tell, just give your opinion as to whether you think it did a good or
    >> even adequate job.
    >>
    >> http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html

    >
    > Looks like on-camera flash, not bounced off the ceiling, that leaves two
    > possibilities unless I don't know what those others are. I can see a
    > pretty sharp shadow under her chin so actually I vote for no diffuser.
    > Cute kid!


    No, I didn't cheat, I definitely used a diffuser. She does have her chin
    tucked down, hence the shadow.

    Eric Miller
    www.dyesscreek.com
    Eric Miller, Jul 30, 2007
    #3
  4. Eric Miller

    Ben Miller Guest

    On Jul 29, 8:32 pm, Eric Miller <>
    wrote:
    > Having just wandered from the political thread, I thought I'd toss out a
    > puzzle of sorts that might get back OT. Does the type of diffuser really
    > matter? If you think so, then tell me what kind of diffuser was used in
    > this photo? Heck, if you can't tell, just give your opinion as to
    > whether you think it did a good or even adequate job.
    >
    > http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html
    >
    > Here is some additional info:
    >
    > Camera Canon EOS 5D
    > Lens Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
    > Aperture 1.8
    > Shutter 200
    > ISO 100
    >
    > Clues: The model, my daughter, is sitting on a bed in our upstairs
    > bedroom. To her left, camera right, is an open window. The room has
    > white walls, a low white ceiling and light carpeting. The room was a bit
    > dark and it was cloudy today, so without flash her right side would have
    > been in shadow. That was filled with a canon flash with a diffuser on it.
    >
    > If you need a hint, I'll narrow the choices:
    >
    > Gary Fong Lightsphere
    > White Post-it note
    > Larry Thong Light Bottle
    > Lumiquest Pocket Bouncer
    > Cream colored business card and tape
    > Sto-Fen Omni-Bounce


    Who knows, but I'm right there with you, brother! AAMOF, here's a fun
    game. See if you can tell me which picture was taken with a Nikon
    supplied SB-800 diffuser, which one was taken with a Lumiquest
    Softbox, which one was taken with a gallon milk jug cut in half
    slipped over the flash and pointed at the celing and which one was
    just a bounce:

    http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/82704960

    http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/82704544 (this room is about
    220' long, for reference)

    http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/63601448

    http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/73382919

    In case you noticed, PBase doesn't list the flash as having fired in
    the EXIF - this is a PBase issue - all were most definitely shot with
    flash.
    Ben Miller, Jul 30, 2007
    #4
  5. Eric Miller

    Paul Furman Guest

    Ben Miller wrote:

    > See if you can tell me which picture was taken with a Nikon
    > supplied SB-800 diffuser, which one was taken with a Lumiquest
    > Softbox, which one was taken with a gallon milk jug cut in half
    > slipped over the flash and pointed at the celing and which one was
    > just a bounce:
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/82704960
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/82704544 (this room is about
    > 220' long, for reference)
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/63601448
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/73382919


    The baby was a bounce.

    --
    Paul Furman Photography
    http://edgehill.net
    Bay Natives Nursery
    http://www.baynatives.com
    Paul Furman, Jul 30, 2007
    #5
  6. Eric Miller

    dmac Guest

    "Eric Miller" <> wrote in message
    news:ncbri.5240$...
    > Having just wandered from the political thread, I thought I'd toss out a
    > puzzle of sorts that might get back OT. Does the type of diffuser really
    > matter? If you think so, then tell me what kind of diffuser was used in
    > this photo? Heck, if you can't tell, just give your opinion as to whether
    > you think it did a good or even adequate job.
    >
    > http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html
    >
    >
    > Eric Miller
    > www.dyesscreek.com


    I can't see the page but I'll wade in with 10¢ worth.

    The notion that "Gary Fong" can reinvent the wheel and charge 30 times the
    cost of the vinyl thingy he sells is pretty much self explaining.

    Diffusion of harsh light has been taking place for as long as Photography
    has existed. Igniting flash powder to produce even harsher light than the
    sun to level out the light and shade was perhaps the earliest example.

    Later methods, many of which survive today all centred around scattering
    light rather than allowing the raw (harsh) light from a small source to
    illuminate the subject. Perhaps the most durable way of doing this is by
    using a woven diffusion screen. (call it a soft box cover).

    A German seller on eBay offers a set of "diffusers" for speedlites. One of
    these is a sock made from a Woven diffusion screen material that looks
    amazingly like the face of my softbox. It has a black panel sewn in one
    side. It's main failure is needing +3 stops of flash increase to get close
    to correct exposure.

    An accessory diffuser that comes with this "kit" is way more useful. It's
    like the vertical card trick for specular highlights except it has a slope
    to it so the flash is directed more closely towards the subject. This device
    works remarkably well. Much better than the "Gary Fong" thing which consumes
    a considerable amount of the flash's power, just to function.

    As other's have said in the earlier thread, these 6¢ plastic wonder caps -
    first the "Sto-Fen" now the "Fong" all have one thing in common... The
    producers are out to make a big buck from those stupid enough or lazy enough
    to think this will cure their lighting problems.

    Doug
    dmac, Jul 30, 2007
    #6
  7. Ben Miller wrote:

    > http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/82704544 (this room is about
    > 220' long, for reference)


    Not bad, but you lost intensity and even distribution of the light. This is
    the perfect situation for Larry Thong's LightBag! The LightBag would have
    evenly lit that room without hotspots or harsh shadows. And 220' is a spit
    in the bucket for the LightBag.






    Rita
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Jul 30, 2007
    #7
  8. dmac wrote:

    > As other's have said in the earlier thread, these 6¢ plastic wonder
    > caps - first the "Sto-Fen" now the "Fong" all have one thing in
    > common... The producers are out to make a big buck from those stupid
    > enough or lazy enough to think this will cure their lighting problems.


    BRAVO! I'm glad another person out here understands this. What's really
    perplexing is Bret uses a Fong and claims it has improved his photography so
    it has to be good.






    Rita
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Jul 30, 2007
    #8
  9. Paul Furman wrote:

    > BTW I suck at flash... I always avoided it. I don't even get the iTTL
    > deal: there is almost no change in shutter speed in aperture priority
    > mode, it just provides fill light, even in slow synch mode and results
    > in a brighter exposure when flash is a major part of the exposure.
    > Hmmmm.


    Surely you wouldn't get much change in shutter speed in aperture-priority,
    'cause it works by modulating the flash intensity.
    Richard Polhill, Jul 30, 2007
    #9
  10. Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
    > dmac wrote:
    >
    >> As other's have said in the earlier thread, these 6¢ plastic wonder
    >> caps - first the "Sto-Fen" now the "Fong" all have one thing in
    >> common... The producers are out to make a big buck from those stupid
    >> enough or lazy enough to think this will cure their lighting problems.

    >
    > BRAVO! I'm glad another person out here understands this. What's really
    > perplexing is Bret uses a Fong and claims it has improved his
    > photography so
    > it has to be good.
    >


    Well I'm sure Bret's photography can be improved by it. He just has to put it
    over the lens.
    Richard Polhill, Jul 30, 2007
    #10
  11. Eric Miller

    Guest

    Eric Miller wrote:
    > Having just wandered from the political thread, I thought I'd toss out a
    > puzzle of sorts that might get back OT. Does the type of diffuser really
    > matter? If you think so, then tell me what kind of diffuser was used in
    > this photo? Heck, if you can't tell, just give your opinion as to
    > whether you think it did a good or even adequate job.
    >
    > http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html
    >


    To be fair, Eric, your shot doesn't exactly scream out for large soft-
    box type lighting..! I'm not having a go at the shot - it's lovely
    and you have balanced the light very well. But it's not like she has
    complexion issues to hide, she is fully face on with an up-tilted
    button nose (so it's really just under her jaw that a shadow is
    obvious), and you obviously have nice soft indirect window light
    (bouncing off all those white walls!) - so it looks as if the flash
    contribution is not that great (which is backed up by the flash shadow
    not having an awful lot of contrast...

    Lastly, at the size displayed, the amount by which that shadow edge
    has been softened is very hard to detect.

    Having said all that, I'm tempted to go with the post-it, or the
    business card even.

    I agree with your premise, although if I was shooting for a huge
    poster of a supermodel for a cosmetic company...
    , Jul 30, 2007
    #11
  12. Eric Miller

    Paul Furman Guest

    Richard Polhill wrote:

    > Paul Furman wrote:
    >
    >> BTW I suck at flash... I always avoided it. I don't even get the iTTL
    >> deal: there is almost no change in shutter speed in aperture priority
    >> mode, it just provides fill light, even in slow synch mode and results
    >> in a brighter exposure when flash is a major part of the exposure. Hmmmm.

    >
    > Surely you wouldn't get much change in shutter speed in
    > aperture-priority, 'cause it works by modulating the flash intensity.


    Is there a way to set the flash power & have the darn thing adjust the
    shutter speed? I did read the manual, apparently not carefully enough. I
    would think the metering should change right away when popping up the
    flash but yes, it obviously doesn't know exactly what impact the flash
    will have until the iTTL business does it's preflash, especially without
    focus distance info from the lens... hmm. If I shoot in manual mode, is
    that the way to use the full power of the flash?

    --
    Paul Furman Photography
    http://edgehill.net
    Bay Natives Nursery
    http://www.baynatives.com
    Paul Furman, Jul 30, 2007
    #12
  13. Eric Miller

    Allen Guest

    Richard Polhill wrote:
    > Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
    >> dmac wrote:
    >>
    >>> As other's have said in the earlier thread, these 6¢ plastic wonder
    >>> caps - first the "Sto-Fen" now the "Fong" all have one thing in
    >>> common... The producers are out to make a big buck from those stupid
    >>> enough or lazy enough to think this will cure their lighting problems.

    >>
    >> BRAVO! I'm glad another person out here understands this. What's really
    >> perplexing is Bret uses a Fong and claims it has improved his
    >> photography so
    >> it has to be good.
    >>

    >
    > Well I'm sure Bret's photography can be improved by it. He just has to
    > put it over the lens.

    Apparently, you mistakenly put one over your eyes.
    Allen
    Allen, Jul 30, 2007
    #13
  14. Eric Miller

    Annika1980 Guest

    On Jul 30, 6:02 am, Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
    > dmac wrote:
    > > As other's have said in the earlier thread, these 6¢ plastic wonder
    > > caps - first the "Sto-Fen" now the "Fong" all have one thing in
    > > common... The producers are out to make a big buck from those stupid
    > > enough or lazy enough to think this will cure their lighting problems.

    >
    > BRAVO! I'm glad another person out here understands this. What's really
    > perplexing is Bret uses a Fong and claims it has improved his photography so
    > it has to be good.
    >


    I made no such claims. I said it gives excellent results, much better
    in fact that bounce cards, alcohol bottles, tracing paper, and even
    some other commercial diffusers. I've used all of those tricks and
    more.
    You, and the others who argue the point, claim to know differently
    even though you've never used a LightSphere. Thus, your opinions are
    suspect.

    I have no financial interest in touting Gary Fong's product. I tout
    it because it does what it says and I encourage anyone looking for a
    lighting solution to try it. You rag on it only because I tout it,
    not because you have any expert knowledge of the subject.

    You are slowly sinking down into the loony Troll Hole with D-Mac.
    Annika1980, Jul 30, 2007
    #14
  15. Eric Miller

    Ben Miller Guest

    On Jul 30, 5:01 am, Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
    > Ben Miller wrote:
    > >http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/82704544(this room is about
    > > 220' long, for reference)

    >
    > Not bad, but you lost intensity and even distribution of the light. This is
    > the perfect situation for Larry Thong's LightBag! The LightBag would have
    > evenly lit that room without hotspots or harsh shadows. And 220' is a spit
    > in the bucket for the LightBag.


    Riiiight. But really, that shot was just fine for the purpose at
    hand. It wasn't a photo shoot, I only had one light, the SB800, and
    save for one or two minor instances, the shadows aren't harsh at all.
    Ben Miller, Jul 30, 2007
    #15
  16. Eric Miller

    Eric Miller Guest

    >
    > To be fair, Eric, your shot doesn't exactly scream out for large soft-
    > box type lighting..! I'm not having a go at the shot - it's lovely
    > and you have balanced the light very well. But it's not like she has
    > complexion issues to hide, she is fully face on with an up-tilted
    > button nose (so it's really just under her jaw that a shadow is
    > obvious), and you obviously have nice soft indirect window light
    > (bouncing off all those white walls!) - so it looks as if the flash
    > contribution is not that great (which is backed up by the flash shadow
    > not having an awful lot of contrast...
    >


    I have now posted one of the shots taken without flash for comparison.
    The window isn't all that big, given the size of the room. I think the
    difference is fairly noticeable. Same link:

    http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html

    Eric Miller
    www.dyesscreek.com
    Eric Miller, Jul 30, 2007
    #16
  17. Eric Miller

    Matalog Guest

    Cream colored business card and tape







    "Eric Miller" <> wrote in message
    news:ncbri.5240$...
    > Having just wandered from the political thread, I thought I'd toss out a
    > puzzle of sorts that might get back OT. Does the type of diffuser really
    > matter? If you think so, then tell me what kind of diffuser was used in
    > this photo? Heck, if you can't tell, just give your opinion as to whether
    > you think it did a good or even adequate job.
    >
    > http://www.dyesscreek.com/hidden_pages/diffuser.html
    >
    > Here is some additional info:
    >
    > Camera Canon EOS 5D
    > Lens Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
    > Aperture 1.8
    > Shutter 200
    > ISO 100
    >
    > Clues: The model, my daughter, is sitting on a bed in our upstairs
    > bedroom. To her left, camera right, is an open window. The room has white
    > walls, a low white ceiling and light carpeting. The room was a bit dark
    > and it was cloudy today, so without flash her right side would have been
    > in shadow. That was filled with a canon flash with a diffuser on it.
    >
    > If you need a hint, I'll narrow the choices:
    >
    > Gary Fong Lightsphere
    > White Post-it note
    > Larry Thong Light Bottle
    > Lumiquest Pocket Bouncer
    > Cream colored business card and tape
    > Sto-Fen Omni-Bounce
    >
    > There you have it. No doubt the people who think the equipment matters
    > will nail this one.
    >
    > Incidentally, this isn't being offered as an example of a good photo, but
    > if you want to critique or flame me, go for it. I will post the answer
    > later if anyone is interested.
    >
    > Eric Miller
    > www.dyesscreek.com
    Matalog, Jul 30, 2007
    #17
  18. Annika1980 wrote:

    >> BRAVO! I'm glad another person out here understands this. What's
    >> really perplexing is Bret uses a Fong and claims it has improved his
    >> photography so it has to be good.

    >
    > I made no such claims. I said it gives excellent results, much better
    > in fact that bounce cards, alcohol bottles, tracing paper, and even
    > some other commercial diffusers. I've used all of those tricks and
    > more.


    And like we both concluded that you are simply suffering from the "placebo
    effect" that will dissipate in short order.

    > You, and the others who argue the point, claim to know differently
    > even though you've never used a LightSphere. Thus, your opinions are
    > suspect.


    I've been down the road before but I had the luxury of not having to pay for
    the privilege of being fleeced.

    > I have no financial interest in touting Gary Fong's product. I tout
    > it because it does what it says and I encourage anyone looking for a
    > lighting solution to try it. You rag on it only because I tout it,
    > not because you have any expert knowledge of the subject.


    And so will a host of other free household articles. I'm not ragging on
    you, you are just pissed because you know you got duped and are trying to
    save face.

    > You are slowly sinking down into the loony Troll Hole with D-Mac.


    LOL! Whatever. It's all good! Try doing macro with the Old Fong and come
    back and tell us how good it is. The old Thong was built with versatility
    in mind. It works great in a large conference hall as well as in a field
    chasing bugs.







    Rita
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Jul 30, 2007
    #18
  19. Ben Miller wrote:

    >>> http://www.pbase.com/sigphotography/image/82704544(this room is
    >>> about 220' long, for reference)

    >>
    >> Not bad, but you lost intensity and even distribution of the light.
    >> This is the perfect situation for Larry Thong's LightBag! The
    >> LightBag would have evenly lit that room without hotspots or harsh
    >> shadows. And 220' is a spit in the bucket for the LightBag.

    >
    > Riiiight. But really, that shot was just fine for the purpose at
    > hand. It wasn't a photo shoot, I only had one light, the SB800, and
    > save for one or two minor instances, the shadows aren't harsh at all.


    I wasn't complaining or criticizing the shot, in fact it is very good. You
    just reached the limitations of the flash, that's all I'm saying. The SB800
    is a superior and powerful flash and does a great job for its size. My only
    point is striving to maximize performance and versatility from our flash
    units.






    Rita
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Jul 30, 2007
    #19
  20. Eric Miller

    Julian Guest

    On Jul 31, 12:31 am, Annika1980 <> wrote:
    > On Jul 30, 6:02 am, Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
    >
    > > dmac wrote:
    > > > As other's have said in the earlier thread, these 6¢ plastic wonder
    > > > caps - first the "Sto-Fen" now the "Fong" all have one thing in
    > > > common... The producers are out to make a big buck from those stupid
    > > > enough or lazy enough to think this will cure their lighting problems.

    >
    > > BRAVO! I'm glad another person out here understands this. What's really
    > > perplexing is Bret uses a Fong and claims it has improved his photography so
    > > it has to be good.

    >
    > I made no such claims. I said it gives excellent results, much better
    > in fact that bounce cards, alcohol bottles, tracing paper, and even
    > some other commercial diffusers. I've used all of those tricks and
    > more.
    > You, and the others who argue the point, claim to know differently
    > even though you've never used a LightSphere. Thus, your opinions are
    > suspect.
    >
    > I have no financial interest in touting Gary Fong's product. I tout
    > it because it does what it says and I encourage anyone looking for a
    > lighting solution to try it. You rag on it only because I tout it,
    > not because you have any expert knowledge of the subject.
    >
    > You are slowly sinking down into the loony Troll Hole with D-Mac.


    The curious thing about you Bret, is the way you make wild asumptions
    without a shred of evidence to support your statement. You know
    absolutely ZERO about me or my equipment yet you make statements as if
    you had walked through my studio and done a stock take of all the gear
    in it.

    Can you tell me now, how you get your foot into your mouth so it's
    already there when you open it? Is it something to do with anal thing?
    do you sit on it like a lady and take a deep breath with a peg on your
    nose? Come on mate, you can share it with us.

    Doug
    Julian, Jul 31, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Ray Paseur

    Gary Fong's LightSphere

    Ray Paseur, Feb 20, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    318
    Eric Gill
    Feb 20, 2005
  2. Ben Miller

    Gary Fong embedded video

    Ben Miller, May 5, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    284
    Ben Miller
    May 5, 2007
  3. Annika1980

    GARY FONG LOVES THE 20D !

    Annika1980, Jul 27, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    652
    Views:
    8,446
    George Kerby
    Aug 16, 2007
  4. Annika1980

    GARY FONG KEEPS THEM HANGIN !

    Annika1980, Sep 27, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    108
    Views:
    2,155
    Fishermac
    Oct 7, 2007
  5. Annika1980

    THE RETURN OF THE GARY FONG!

    Annika1980, Jul 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    92
    Views:
    1,747
    Chris Malcolm
    Aug 7, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page