INFRARED PANOS LOVE THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Annika1980, Aug 6, 2008.

  1. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Aug 6, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Annika1980

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Annika1980 wrote:
    > A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
    > for an infrared pano!
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
    >
    > This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.


    Hi, Bret, nice.. but... (O:

    Do you shoot these unfiltered? I mean, I know you have a modded
    IR-filter-less D60, but do you *additionally* use an IR-pass filter?
    The reason I ask is that the effect seems too much - more like a snow
    scene..

    For that reason, I think including more sky might have improved it (that
    path could go, and I don't really like the way the pine just touches the
    top frame).

    I can't really post anything competitive, tho' - I'd like to get back
    into IR, but my current cam-of-choice is not well-suited. Maybe later.


    Thanks for posting these to aus.photo, by the way. (grin)
    Mark Thomas, Aug 6, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Annika1980

    Helen Guest

    On Aug 6, 12:07 am, Annika1980 <> wrote:
    > A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
    > for an infrared pano!
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
    >
    > This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.



    Incredibly beautiful work Bret!
    I don't see a sign of where you merged multiple shots. Love the
    reflection in the pond.
    Stunning, very impressive work!
    Helen
    Helen, Aug 6, 2008
    #3
  4. Annika1980

    PeteD Guest

    "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
    > for an infrared pano!
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
    >
    > This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.


    Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared panorama?
    Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all except in very
    special circumstance.

    Pete
    PeteD, Aug 6, 2008
    #4
  5. Annika1980

    Jeff R. Guest

    PeteD wrote:
    > "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
    >> for an infrared pano!
    >>
    >> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
    >>
    >> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.

    >
    > Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared panorama?
    > Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all except in
    > very special circumstance.
    >
    > Pete


    Actually, I'd like to see an IR macro nude panorama.

    Possibly 3D.

    Taken through a 10x ND filter.

    --
    Jeff R.
    (anything else?)
    Jeff R., Aug 6, 2008
    #5
  6. Annika1980

    Noons Guest

    WARNING! THIS WAS POSTED BY CONFESSED PAEDOPHILE AND CHILD ABUSERBRET DOUGLAS, HIDING UNDER THE ALIAS OF ANNIKA1980

    Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 6/08/2008 2:07 PM:
    > A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
    > for an infrared pano!
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
    >
    > This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.
    Noons, Aug 6, 2008
    #6
  7. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    On Aug 6, 1:57 am, Mark Thomas <markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com>
    wrote:
    >
    > >http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original


    > Do you shoot these unfiltered?  I mean, I know you have a modded
    > IR-filter-less D60, but do you *additionally* use an IR-pass filter?
    > The reason I ask is that the effect seems too much - more like a snow
    > scene..
    >


    No additional filtering was used.

    > For that reason, I think including more sky might have improved it (that
    > path could go, and I don't really like the way the pine just touches the
    > top frame).


    Yes, the top of the tree was a victim of the cropping. It was a
    choice of either cropping it that way or showing more sky with a hole
    in the middle of it. I considered filling in the missing sky with
    some cloning, but I have my artistic integrity to think about, dontcha
    know.
    Annika1980, Aug 6, 2008
    #7
  8. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    On Aug 6, 5:08 am, "PeteD" <> wrote:
    >
    > Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared panorama?
    > Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all except in very
    > special circumstance.
    >


    I feel the same way about regular old B&W.
    It's just a different look. Most people either like or or hate it.
    For the photographer, it is a fun way to get pics in what would
    normally be considered horrible light for shooting.
    Annika1980, Aug 6, 2008
    #8
  9. Annika1980

    Helen Guest

    On Aug 6, 9:56 pm, "Frank ess" <> wrote:
    > Alan Browne wrote:
    > > PeteD wrote:

    >
    > >> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > >>news:....
    > >>> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect
    > >>> time for an infrared pano!

    >
    > >>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original

    >
    > >>> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.

    >
    > >> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared
    > >> panorama? Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all
    > >> except in very special circumstance.

    >
    > > Agree.

    >
    > > I do like Bret's shot, most esp. because of its depth, layers and
    > > reflection in the pond, but the whole 'look' is beginning to ...
    > > er, pale.

    >
    > I like the infrared that I've seen because of the sensual
    > characteristics. The Bret photo is an excellent example of how it
    > overwhelms my usual sensibilty with a wash of ummm ummm ummm input.
    > Then I turn the page. There isn't a lot of interesting feature to
    > inspect, and my voyeuristic streak is not particularly stimulated or
    > satisfied. I "like" infrared in a way different from the way I like
    > landscapes and cityscapes and street portraits, for instance.
    >
    > It's a bit like an anticlimax: I can only tolerate a small number of
    > them, and then I'm gone. Or maybe the squirting lapel-flower; who
    > needs a second shot? Not me. A book of these things would be
    > waterboarding for me.
    >
    > Not that there is anything wrong with infrared. It just doesn't fit
    > me. (He said slyly, digging out his IR photos for entry in the
    > Shoot-In)
    >
    > --
    > Frank ess



    I love IR work. Your description of its sensual characteristics and
    how it overwhelms the usual sensibility with a wash of ummm ummm
    ummm, pretty well nails it right on the head for me. One of my very
    favorites is Bret's Thundering Heard.
    Helen, Aug 7, 2008
    #9
  10. Annika1980

    tony cooper Guest

    On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 19:31:00 -0700 (PDT), Helen
    <> wrote:

    >On Aug 6, 9:56 pm, "Frank ess" <> wrote:
    >> Alan Browne wrote:
    >> > PeteD wrote:

    >>
    >> >> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    >> >>news:...
    >> >>> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect
    >> >>> time for an infrared pano!

    >>
    >> >>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original

    >>
    >> >>> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.

    >>
    >> >> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared
    >> >> panorama? Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all
    >> >> except in very special circumstance.

    >>
    >> > Agree.

    >>
    >> > I do like Bret's shot, most esp. because of its depth, layers and
    >> > reflection in the pond, but the whole 'look' is beginning to ...
    >> > er, pale.

    >>
    >> I like the infrared that I've seen because of the sensual
    >> characteristics. The Bret photo is an excellent example of how it
    >> overwhelms my usual sensibilty with a wash of ummm ummm ummm input.
    >> Then I turn the page. There isn't a lot of interesting feature to
    >> inspect, and my voyeuristic streak is not particularly stimulated or
    >> satisfied. I "like" infrared in a way different from the way I like
    >> landscapes and cityscapes and street portraits, for instance.
    >>
    >> It's a bit like an anticlimax: I can only tolerate a small number of
    >> them, and then I'm gone. Or maybe the squirting lapel-flower; who
    >> needs a second shot? Not me. A book of these things would be
    >> waterboarding for me.
    >>
    >> Not that there is anything wrong with infrared. It just doesn't fit
    >> me. (He said slyly, digging out his IR photos for entry in the
    >> Shoot-In)
    >>
    >> --
    >> Frank ess

    >
    >
    >I love IR work. Your description of its sensual characteristics and
    >how it overwhelms the usual sensibility with a wash of ummm ummm
    >ummm, pretty well nails it right on the head for me. One of my very
    >favorites is Bret's Thundering Heard.


    Damn! I knew Bret was good, but it never occurred to me to turn on my
    speakers when I look at his images.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Aug 7, 2008
    #10
  11. Annika1980

    Helen Guest

    On Aug 6, 10:57 pm, tony cooper <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 19:31:00 -0700 (PDT), Helen
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > >On Aug 6, 9:56 pm, "Frank ess" <> wrote:
    > >> Alan Browne wrote:
    > >> > PeteD wrote:

    >
    > >> >> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > >> >>news:...
    > >> >>> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect
    > >> >>> time for an infrared pano!

    >
    > >> >>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original

    >
    > >> >>> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.

    >
    > >> >> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared
    > >> >> panorama? Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all
    > >> >> except in very special circumstance.

    >
    > >> > Agree.

    >
    > >> > I do like Bret's shot, most esp. because of its depth, layers and
    > >> > reflection in the pond, but the whole 'look' is beginning to ...
    > >> > er, pale.

    >
    > >> I like the infrared that I've seen because of the sensual
    > >> characteristics. The Bret photo is an excellent example of how it
    > >> overwhelms my usual sensibilty with a wash of ummm ummm ummm input.
    > >> Then I turn the page. There isn't a lot of interesting feature to
    > >> inspect, and my voyeuristic streak is not particularly stimulated or
    > >> satisfied. I "like" infrared in a way different from the way I like
    > >> landscapes and cityscapes and street portraits, for instance.

    >
    > >> It's a bit like an anticlimax: I can only tolerate a small number of
    > >> them, and then I'm gone. Or maybe the squirting lapel-flower; who
    > >> needs a second shot? Not me. A book of these things would be
    > >> waterboarding for me.

    >
    > >> Not that there is anything wrong with infrared. It just doesn't fit
    > >> me. (He said slyly, digging out his IR photos for entry in the
    > >> Shoot-In)

    >
    > >> --
    > >> Frank ess

    >
    > >I love IR work.  Your description of its sensual characteristics and
    > >how it overwhelms the usual sensibility with a wash of ummm ummm
    > >ummm,  pretty well nails it right on the head for me. One of my very
    > >favorites is Bret's Thundering Heard.

    >
    > Damn!  I knew Bret was good, but it never occurred to me to turn on my
    > speakers when I look at his images.
    >
    > --
    > Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida



    I know the proper spelling Tony. I was referring to the title of
    Bret's IR work here: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/98441768
    Helen, Aug 7, 2008
    #11
  12. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    On Aug 6, 1:57 am, Mark Thomas <markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com>
    wrote:
    >
    > For that reason, I think including more sky might have improved it (that
    > path could go, and I don't really like the way the pine just touches the
    > top frame).
    >


    I re-did it tonight with PTGui. I used a different set of pics (5 in
    all) with a little more sky above the tree.

    http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
    Annika1980, Aug 7, 2008
    #12
  13. Annika1980

    Colin.D Guest

    Helen wrote:
    > On Aug 6, 10:57 pm, tony cooper <> wrote:
    >> On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 19:31:00 -0700 (PDT), Helen
    >>
    >> <> wrote:
    >>> On Aug 6, 9:56 pm, "Frank ess" <> wrote:
    >>>> Alan Browne wrote:
    >>>>> PeteD wrote:
    >>>>>> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect
    >>>>>>> time for an infrared pano!
    >>>>>>> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
    >>>>>>> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.
    >>>>>> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared
    >>>>>> panorama? Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all
    >>>>>> except in very special circumstance.
    >>>>> Agree.
    >>>>> I do like Bret's shot, most esp. because of its depth, layers and
    >>>>> reflection in the pond, but the whole 'look' is beginning to ...
    >>>>> er, pale.
    >>>> I like the infrared that I've seen because of the sensual
    >>>> characteristics. The Bret photo is an excellent example of how it
    >>>> overwhelms my usual sensibilty with a wash of ummm ummm ummm input.
    >>>> Then I turn the page. There isn't a lot of interesting feature to
    >>>> inspect, and my voyeuristic streak is not particularly stimulated or
    >>>> satisfied. I "like" infrared in a way different from the way I like
    >>>> landscapes and cityscapes and street portraits, for instance.
    >>>> It's a bit like an anticlimax: I can only tolerate a small number of
    >>>> them, and then I'm gone. Or maybe the squirting lapel-flower; who
    >>>> needs a second shot? Not me. A book of these things would be
    >>>> waterboarding for me.
    >>>> Not that there is anything wrong with infrared. It just doesn't fit
    >>>> me. (He said slyly, digging out his IR photos for entry in the
    >>>> Shoot-In)
    >>>> --
    >>>> Frank ess
    >>> I love IR work. Your description of its sensual characteristics and
    >>> how it overwhelms the usual sensibility with a wash of ummm ummm
    >>> ummm, pretty well nails it right on the head for me. One of my very
    >>> favorites is Bret's Thundering Heard.

    >> Damn! I knew Bret was good, but it never occurred to me to turn on my
    >> speakers when I look at his images.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

    >
    >
    > I know the proper spelling Tony. I was referring to the title of
    > Bret's IR work here: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/98441768


    That's a pretty clever pun! Full marks for that.

    Colin D.
    Colin.D, Aug 7, 2008
    #13
  14. "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    On Aug 6, 1:57 am, Mark Thomas <markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com>
    wrote:
    >
    > For that reason, I think including more sky might have improved it (that
    > path could go, and I don't really like the way the pine just touches the
    > top frame).
    >


    I re-did it tonight with PTGui. I used a different set of pics (5 in
    all) with a little more sky above the tree.

    http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original

    It looks like that outside at the moment :)

    --
    God made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?
    Atheist Chaplain, Aug 7, 2008
    #14
  15. Annika1980

    Helen Guest

    On Aug 7, 4:32 am, "Colin.D" <> wrote:
    > Helen wrote:
    > > On Aug 6, 10:57 pm, tony cooper <> wrote:
    > >> On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 19:31:00 -0700 (PDT), Helen

    >
    > >> <> wrote:
    > >>> On Aug 6, 9:56 pm, "Frank ess" <> wrote:
    > >>>> Alan Browne wrote:
    > >>>>> PeteD wrote:
    > >>>>>> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > >>>>>>news:...
    > >>>>>>> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect
    > >>>>>>> time for an infrared pano!
    > >>>>>>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
    > >>>>>>> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.
    > >>>>>> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared
    > >>>>>> panorama? Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all
    > >>>>>> except in very special circumstance.
    > >>>>> Agree.
    > >>>>> I do like Bret's shot, most esp. because of its depth, layers and
    > >>>>> reflection in the pond, but the whole 'look' is beginning to ...
    > >>>>> er, pale.
    > >>>> I like the infrared that I've seen because of the sensual
    > >>>> characteristics. The Bret photo is an excellent example of how it
    > >>>> overwhelms my usual sensibilty with a wash of ummm ummm ummm input.
    > >>>> Then I turn the page. There isn't a lot of interesting feature to
    > >>>> inspect, and my voyeuristic streak is not particularly stimulated or
    > >>>> satisfied. I "like" infrared in a way different from the way I like
    > >>>> landscapes and cityscapes and street portraits, for instance.
    > >>>> It's a bit like an anticlimax: I can only tolerate a small number of
    > >>>> them, and then I'm gone. Or maybe the squirting lapel-flower; who
    > >>>> needs a second shot? Not me. A book of these things would be
    > >>>> waterboarding for me.
    > >>>> Not that there is anything wrong with infrared. It just doesn't fit
    > >>>> me. (He said slyly, digging out his IR photos for entry in the
    > >>>> Shoot-In)
    > >>>> --
    > >>>> Frank ess
    > >>> I love IR work.  Your description of its sensual characteristics and
    > >>> how it overwhelms the usual sensibility with a wash of ummm ummm
    > >>> ummm,  pretty well nails it right on the head for me. One of my very
    > >>> favorites is Bret's Thundering Heard.
    > >> Damn!  I knew Bret was good, but it never occurred to me to turn on my
    > >> speakers when I look at his images.

    >
    > >> --
    > >> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

    >
    > > I know the proper spelling Tony.  I was referring to the title of
    > > Bret's IR work here:  http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/98441768

    >
    > That's a pretty clever pun!  Full marks for that.
    >
    > Colin D.



    Since the horses were spooked by the loud thunder, I thought Bret came
    up with a clever pun for the title too.
    Helen, Aug 7, 2008
    #15
  16. Annika1980

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Annika1980 wrote:
    > On Aug 6, 1:57 am, Mark Thomas <markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com>
    > wrote:
    >> For that reason, I think including more sky might have improved it (that
    >> path could go, and I don't really like the way the pine just touches the
    >> top frame).
    >>

    >
    > I re-did it tonight with PTGui. I used a different set of pics (5 in
    > all) with a little more sky above the tree.
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original


    Greatly appreciate you taking the trouble - yep, that looks more
    balanced and much better to me. Still woulda gone for more sky tho!

    Nice work.
    Mark Thomas, Aug 7, 2008
    #16
  17. Annika1980

    Helen Guest

    On Aug 7, 4:32 am, "Colin.D" <> wrote:
    > Helen wrote:
    > > On Aug 6, 10:57 pm, tony cooper <> wrote:
    > >> On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 19:31:00 -0700 (PDT), Helen

    >
    > >> <> wrote:
    > >>> On Aug 6, 9:56 pm, "Frank ess" <> wrote:
    > >>>> Alan Browne wrote:
    > >>>>> PeteD wrote:
    > >>>>>> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > >>>>>>news:...
    > >>>>>>> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect
    > >>>>>>> time for an infrared pano!
    > >>>>>>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
    > >>>>>>> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.
    > >>>>>> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared
    > >>>>>> panorama? Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all
    > >>>>>> except in very special circumstance.
    > >>>>> Agree.
    > >>>>> I do like Bret's shot, most esp. because of its depth, layers and
    > >>>>> reflection in the pond, but the whole 'look' is beginning to ...
    > >>>>> er, pale.
    > >>>> I like the infrared that I've seen because of the sensual
    > >>>> characteristics. The Bret photo is an excellent example of how it
    > >>>> overwhelms my usual sensibilty with a wash of ummm ummm ummm input.
    > >>>> Then I turn the page. There isn't a lot of interesting feature to
    > >>>> inspect, and my voyeuristic streak is not particularly stimulated or
    > >>>> satisfied. I "like" infrared in a way different from the way I like
    > >>>> landscapes and cityscapes and street portraits, for instance.
    > >>>> It's a bit like an anticlimax: I can only tolerate a small number of
    > >>>> them, and then I'm gone. Or maybe the squirting lapel-flower; who
    > >>>> needs a second shot? Not me. A book of these things would be
    > >>>> waterboarding for me.
    > >>>> Not that there is anything wrong with infrared. It just doesn't fit
    > >>>> me. (He said slyly, digging out his IR photos for entry in the
    > >>>> Shoot-In)
    > >>>> --
    > >>>> Frank ess
    > >>> I love IR work.  Your description of its sensual characteristics and
    > >>> how it overwhelms the usual sensibility with a wash of ummm ummm
    > >>> ummm,  pretty well nails it right on the head for me. One of my very
    > >>> favorites is Bret's Thundering Heard.
    > >> Damn!  I knew Bret was good, but it never occurred to me to turn on my
    > >> speakers when I look at his images.

    >
    > >> --
    > >> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

    >
    > > I know the proper spelling Tony.  I was referring to the title of
    > > Bret's IR work here:  http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/98441768

    >
    > That's a pretty clever pun!  Full marks for that.
    >
    > Colin D.



    Since the horses were spooked by the loud thunder, I thought Bret
    came
    up with a clever pun for the title.
    Helen, Aug 7, 2008
    #17
  18. Annika1980

    Jeff R. Guest

    Alan Browne wrote:
    > Jeff R. wrote:
    >
    >> Actually, I'd like to see an IR macro nude panorama.
    >>
    >> Possibly 3D.
    >>
    >> Taken through a 10x ND filter.

    >
    > But where's the challenge?


    Did I forget to mention?
    It must be handheld, and your eyes must be closed.

    --
    Jeff R.
    Jeff R., Aug 7, 2008
    #18
  19. Annika1980

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Jeff R. wrote:
    > Alan Browne wrote:
    >> Jeff R. wrote:
    >>
    >>> Actually, I'd like to see an IR macro nude panorama.
    >>>
    >>> Possibly 3D.
    >>>
    >>> Taken through a 10x ND filter.

    >>
    >> But where's the challenge?

    >
    > Did I forget to mention?
    > It must be handheld, and your eyes must be closed.
    >

    Workin' on it as we speak.
    And I figured it was *obvious* that it would be taken blindfolded and
    tripodless.

    Aren't *all* 10X ND shots?
    Mark Thomas, Aug 7, 2008
    #19
  20. Annika1980

    Jeff R. Guest

    Mark Thomas wrote:
    > And I figured it was *obvious* that it would be taken blindfolded and
    > tripodless.
    >
    > Aren't *all* 10X ND shots?


    Well, I dunno.

    Y'see, I don't have a 10x ND. I use a 1000 Oaks solar filter, so I'm not
    qualified to say for sure.
    Jeff R., Aug 7, 2008
    #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. Annika1980

    THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60 FLIES AGAIN !!!

    Annika1980, Feb 14, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    512
    Freedom55
    Feb 14, 2006
  2. Annika1980

    SHROOMS LOVE THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60 !

    Annika1980, Oct 12, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    564
    g n p
    Oct 12, 2006
  3. HAIL TO THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60 !

    , Feb 24, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    594
    John Turco
    Mar 7, 2007
  4. Annika1980

    THE RETURN OF THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60!

    Annika1980, Mar 31, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    294
  5. Annika1980

    INFRARED STEREOGRAMS LOVE THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60!

    Annika1980, Apr 12, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    534
    Stewy
    Apr 13, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page