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. Advertisements

  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. Advertisements

  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. Advertisements

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
  1. Annika1980

    THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60 FLIES AGAIN !!!

    Annika1980, Feb 14, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    700
    Freedom55
    Feb 14, 2006
  2. Annika1980

    SHROOMS LOVE THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60 !

    Annika1980, Oct 12, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    724
    g n p
    Oct 12, 2006
  3. HAIL TO THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60 !

    , Feb 24, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    786
    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:
    432
  5. Annika1980

    THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60 GOES ARTSY-FARTSY!

    Annika1980, Apr 1, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    450
    Bob Williams
    Apr 1, 2007
  6. Annika1980

    THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60 GETS THE SPIRIT!

    Annika1980, Jan 8, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    659
  7. Annika1980

    INFRARED STEREOGRAMS LOVE THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60!

    Annika1980, Apr 12, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    718
    Stewy
    Apr 13, 2008
  8. Annika1980

    LOOKOUT, IT'S THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60!

    Annika1980, Apr 28, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    936
    John Turco
    May 4, 2008
Loading...