Re: [SI] Weapons are available for viewing, finally!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by tony cooper, Jun 19, 2011.

  1. tony cooper

    tony cooper Guest

    On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:06:13 -0400, Bowser <> wrote:

    >Apologies for the delay. The latest mandate for the Shoot-In, Weapons,
    >is available for viewing. Aim your browser here to see them:
    >
    >http://www.pbase.com/shootin/weapons
    >


    My comments.

    A lot of contributors brought out the heavy artillery for this one.
    Some nice sharp images, but they really are not interesting
    photographs. Not in themselves.

    The interesting part was the discussions that the photos triggered.
    Who knew so many posters here have an interest in the history and
    specifics of these big guns?

    Whatever works to divert the discussions from the petty arguments in
    the Viewfinder thread and the infantilism of the Ernie's hair tonic
    thread.

    Tim Conway's cannon was probably the best of the big gun photos, but
    at least Otter included a little people action in his cannon shot.

    I liked the concept of Eric's puffer fish photo, but the mouth kinda
    ruined that one. It looks like the fish swallowed that dive light I
    lost in the Caymans. Still, I respect anyone who sets up a table-top
    photo and presents a fresh approach to subject matter. Turns out,
    though, that the fish is anything but fresh.

    I like the Duck's Navy Colt, but it's a little too monochromatic for
    me. I think I'd like a little more contrast between the gun and the
    background. It reminds me of an illustration in a gun catalog when
    they used drawings instead of photographs. The cropping is a little
    tight left and right.

    Nice detail in the Duck's gun and holster, but - not being a gun
    person - I didn't realize there is anything special about the holster
    until a comment was made. What's that waist size, Duck? 38"? You'll
    be drawing donut jokes.

    Paul's axe is an interesting take. Just for the record, I like the
    original cloth treatment better than the one submitted later. Again,
    though, what's with the too-tight crop? Give me as much space at the
    bottom as the top.

    I learned something in the resulting comments. I always thought the
    term "axe" applied only to electric guitars and came from the way
    performers swung their instrument around. Never thought a sax could
    be an axe. A little off subject, but when did wild physical gyrations
    become mandatory for guitarists?

    I don't get Shiva Das's series. I just don't get it.

    Peter's bird shot is a good 'un, but could use some lightening up.
    I'd mask the white bird and brighten it up and leave the rest the way
    it is.

    I've never really seen a photograph of the Enola Gay. Was the plane
    originally that shiny and bright? For some reason, I thought all
    bombers were flat or matte finish so they wouldn't reflect.

    There have been a number of comments on Alan's shot, and I'm with
    everyone except the bokeh bitching.
















    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Jun 19, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On 6/19/2011 9:31 AM, Alan Browne wrote:

    > I too shared the frustrations of photographing in that museum. It seems
    > the more important the airplane, the less easy it was to photograph.
    > Although the SR-71 had clear shoot lines.
    >
    > The Enola Gay was impossible to shoot in a clean way.


    I agree. The problem faced by the museum curators is a simple one. The
    better the photographic sight lines, the fewer planes they can display.

    With the Enola Gay, though, there's also a security concern, so IIRC
    several of the sight lines are blocked by plexiglass.

    --
    Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
    You don't have to sort of enhance reality. There is nothing
    stranger than truth. -- Annie Leibovitz
     
    Mike Benveniste, Jun 19, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. tony cooper

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Neil Harrington <> wrote:
    >Savageduck wrote:


    >>> I like the Duck's Navy Colt, but it's a little too monochromatic for
    >>> me. I think I'd like a little more contrast between the gun and the
    >>> background. It reminds me of an illustration in a gun catalog when
    >>> they used drawings instead of photographs. The cropping is a little
    >>> tight left and right.

    >>
    >> Yup! I think when I made the B&W conversion I screwed up with the
    >> contrast. I retrospect I wasn't as happy with it as I wanted to be. So
    >> I revisited it after a hint from Paul and came up with this variation.
    >> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1851Navy-Sw.jpg >

    >
    >That's better, but it still doesn't look like an old photo. Maybe it just
    >needs more sepia.


    The gun looks old but the background looks new. I think that the
    contrast is what makes the photo look artificial. Also ...

    It's too even - old film wasn't so uniform in exposure.
    There are no scratches or blemishes.
    There's no vignetting.

    All of those can be added with a tool like Photoshop.

    --
    Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
    | The new GOP ideal
     
    Ray Fischer, Jun 19, 2011
    #3
  4. tony cooper

    tony cooper Guest

    On 19 Jun 2011 18:51:32 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

    >Neil Harrington <> wrote:
    >>Savageduck wrote:

    >
    >>>> I like the Duck's Navy Colt, but it's a little too monochromatic for
    >>>> me. I think I'd like a little more contrast between the gun and the
    >>>> background. It reminds me of an illustration in a gun catalog when
    >>>> they used drawings instead of photographs. The cropping is a little
    >>>> tight left and right.
    >>>
    >>> Yup! I think when I made the B&W conversion I screwed up with the
    >>> contrast. I retrospect I wasn't as happy with it as I wanted to be. So
    >>> I revisited it after a hint from Paul and came up with this variation.
    >>> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1851Navy-Sw.jpg >

    >>
    >>That's better, but it still doesn't look like an old photo. Maybe it just
    >>needs more sepia.


    I don't think sepia fits. What might be interesting is to try to
    duplicate the catalog images of the time. They would have been made
    from steel engravings or a woodcut. I can't find an example of that
    era, but here's a scan from my 1902 Sears catalog. The yellowish
    tinge is the paper color due to the age of the catalog.

    http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f244/cooper213/revolver.jpg
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Jun 19, 2011
    #4
  5. tony cooper

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >On 2011-06-19 11:51:32 -0700, (Ray Fischer) said:
    >
    >> Neil Harrington <> wrote:
    >>> Savageduck wrote:

    >>
    >>>>> I like the Duck's Navy Colt, but it's a little too monochromatic for
    >>>>> me. I think I'd like a little more contrast between the gun and the
    >>>>> background. It reminds me of an illustration in a gun catalog when
    >>>>> they used drawings instead of photographs. The cropping is a little
    >>>>> tight left and right.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yup! I think when I made the B&W conversion I screwed up with the
    >>>> contrast. I retrospect I wasn't as happy with it as I wanted to be. So
    >>>> I revisited it after a hint from Paul and came up with this variation.
    >>>> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1851Navy-Sw.jpg >
    >>>
    >>> That's better, but it still doesn't look like an old photo. Maybe it just
    >>> needs more sepia.

    >>
    >> The gun looks old but the background looks new. I think that the
    >> contrast is what makes the photo look artificial. Also ...
    >>
    >> It's too even - old film wasn't so uniform in exposure.
    >> There are no scratches or blemishes.
    >> There's no vignetting.
    >>
    >> All of those can be added with a tool like Photoshop.

    >
    >Hi Ray,
    >Were you perhaps thinking of something such as this?
    >< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1851NavyFS2w.jpg >


    _Much_ better.

    --
    Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
    | The new GOP ideal
     
    Ray Fischer, Jun 19, 2011
    #5
  6. tony cooper

    PeterN Guest

    On 6/19/2011 12:39 AM, tony cooper wrote:
    snip>
    >
    > Peter's bird shot is a good 'un, but could use some lightening up.
    > I'd mask the white bird and brighten it up and leave the rest the way
    > it is.
    >
    >


    the comments are the more interesting part of these postings. I my mind
    I was shooting the skimmers defending their nest. Tony Cooper's comment
    points out that it is really a tern attacking a nest. i will play
    considering your comments.



    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Jun 20, 2011
    #6
  7. tony cooper

    PeterN Guest

    On 6/19/2011 9:39 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2011-06-19 18:29:40 -0700, Paul Furman <> said:
    >
    >> Alan Browne wrote:
    >>> On 2011-06-19 20:25 , Paul Furman wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Needs more bokeh ;-)
    >>>> http://edgehill.net/temp-/1851Navy-Sw.jpg
    >>>
    >>> Reminds me of my "Bokeh Filter" announcement.
    >>>
    >>> http://preview.tinyurl.com/3rd4ocb

    >>
    >> Well at least the Duck's shot is starting to get some decent schmuckle
    >> going :)

    >
    > Now that I am retired I am here to serve & entertain. ;-)
    >


    You seem to be getting a bang out of posting that image.

    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Jun 20, 2011
    #7
  8. tony cooper

    otter Guest

    Re: Weapons are available for viewing, finally!

    On Jun 20, 4:22 pm, PeterN <> wrote:
    > On 6/19/2011 12:39 AM, tony cooper wrote:
    > snip>
    >
    >
    >
    > > Peter's bird shot is a good 'un, but could use some lightening up.
    > > I'd mask the white bird and brighten it up and leave the rest the way
    > > it is.

    >
    > the comments are the more interesting part of these postings. I my mind
    > I was shooting the skimmers defending their nest. Tony Cooper's comment
    > points out that it is really a tern attacking a nest. i will play
    > considering your comments.
    >
    > --
    > Peter


    You can count on a Tern for the worst.
     
    otter, Jun 21, 2011
    #8
  9. tony cooper

    PeterN Guest

    Re: Weapons are available for viewing, finally!

    On 6/20/2011 8:26 PM, otter wrote:
    > On Jun 20, 4:22 pm, PeterN<> wrote:
    >> On 6/19/2011 12:39 AM, tony cooper wrote:
    >> snip>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> Peter's bird shot is a good 'un, but could use some lightening up.
    >>> I'd mask the white bird and brighten it up and leave the rest the way
    >>> it is.

    >>
    >> the comments are the more interesting part of these postings. I my mind
    >> I was shooting the skimmers defending their nest. Tony Cooper's comment
    >> points out that it is really a tern attacking a nest. i will play
    >> considering your comments.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Peter

    >
    > You can count on a Tern for the worst.


    They had just thrown him out of a delicatessen. He was a tern raking the
    wurst.

    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Jun 21, 2011
    #9
  10. tony cooper

    John Turco Guest

    Savageduck wrote:
    >
    > > On 2011-06-18 21:39:09 -0700, tony cooper <>
    > > said:


    <edited for brevity>

    > > I've never really seen a photograph of the Enola Gay. Was the plane
    > > originally that shiny and bright? For some reason, I thought all
    > > bombers were flat or matte finish so they wouldn't reflect.

    >
    > Only a few B-29's were ever given a paint treatment. The great majority
    > of B-29's were left as they rolled off the production line, and headed
    > to the Pacific in mid 1944.


    <edited>

    The Boeing B-29 Superfortress "Enola Gay" was assembled in Omaha, NE,
    by Martin (which is Lockheed Martin, today).

    --
    Cordially,
    John Turco <>

    Marie's Musings <http://fairiesandtails.blogspot.com>
     
    John Turco, Jun 30, 2011
    #10
    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. alfa1
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    502
    Marnie Northington
    Jul 5, 2003
  2. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,444
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
  3. otter

    Re: Weapons are available for viewing, finally!

    otter, Jun 16, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    525
    John Turco
    Jun 30, 2011
  4. Whisky-dave

    Re: Weapons are available for viewing, finally!

    Whisky-dave, Jun 16, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    301
    otter
    Jun 18, 2011
  5. Bruce
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    325
    otter
    Jun 18, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page