Rate the Photo Above you

[Zodiark1593]

On 8/19/2021 at 3:54 PM, Bombastinator said:

It was a godsend for al lot of people.  My Dad had a 1/2 110 camera.  Looked like a squared off flying saucer.  Horrible resolution. When digital hit it was too slow for me though.  Came in about the same time as autofocus or just after. I liked candid portraiture at the time which lived in fraction seconds of just the right behavior by the subject.  Didn’t have time for autofocus or digita cameras to get their house in order and actually take a photo.  The opportunity would be gone and you’d have a picture of someone’s ear or something.   I waited for digital to get itself together but lost interest and ability in the interim.  Digital may be good enough to do that with but I’m not anymore.

Another thing with digital I like is how easy it is to archive and store. With film, you only have the one negative. With a digital RAW, you can copy that over however many times it takes until you can sleep at night. 
 

I’d recently uncovered a trove of photos on an old drive from more than a decade ago taken at my old school. Were we still on the film days, I’d likely never have found them. 

[The Blackhat]

Seeing as much of the previous posts are discussion, I’ll just drop another image.

 

This is truly my favorite camera of all time. I love this Nikon FE. 

Old server, old camera.

[adarw]

6 hours ago, The Blackhat said:

Seeing as much of the previous posts are discussion, I’ll just drop another image.

 

This is truly my favorite camera of all time. I love this Nikon FE. 

Old server, old camera.

looks sick but man putting ram would have made it more authentic..... 10/10

more bee pics  sorry for the bad quality its a screenshot of a instagram post. ( i dont have the pic on hand lol)

[sub68]

3 minutes ago, adarw said:

looks sick but man putting ram would have made it more authentic..... 10/10

more bee pics  sorry for the bad quality its a screenshot of a instagram post. ( i dont have the pic on hand lol)

I would love this pic if it was more closer...

Panasonic GX85 ISO800 1/4 sec f/5.6  14-32mm @32mm

 

[adarw]

1 minute ago, sub68 said:

I would love this pic if it was more closer...

 

Panasonic GX85 ISO800 1/4 sec f/5.6  14-32mm @32mm

 

i tried my best even tho i was using a 250mm lense, it was wayyyy to hot that day to even think lol.

 

 

you realy like anime dont you? tbh i dont really like the background. would be nice if there wasnt a monitor there....

 

gonna spam birb pics again.......

[adarw]

taken on a phone.. (couldn't take my camera with me). sunrise a few days ago.

[sub68]

13 minutes ago, adarw said:

tbh i dont really like the background. would be nice if there wasnt a monitor there....

were would the waifu be?

13 minutes ago, adarw said:

you realy like anime dont you?

 

[adarw]

1 minute ago, sub68 said:

were would the waifu be?

 

wait how is the mirror reflecting somthing in the back of it?

[The Blackhat]

12 minutes ago, adarw said:

wait how is the mirror reflecting somthing in the back of it?

Through the finder.

[adarw]

1 minute ago, The Blackhat said:

Through the finder.

whats the finder?

[sub68]

15 minutes ago, adarw said:

wait how is the mirror reflecting somthing in the back of it?

so the view finder is showing my monitor.

1 minute ago, adarw said:

whats the finder?

 

[adarw]

3 minutes ago, sub68 said:

so the view finder is showing my monitor.

 

oh wow i never knew that happens.

[sub68]

6 minutes ago, adarw said:

oh wow i never knew that happens.

So that's why the monitor is in the background.

[adarw]

Just now, sub68 said:

So that's why the monitor is in the background.

yea... lol 

[Zodiark1593]

This was taken in Santa Cruz. Shot with the Sony 85mm F1.8 FE at F8, ISO 100. 

[adarw]

someone post another pic already.............

[The Blackhat]

6 hours ago, adarw said:

someone post another pic already.............

Sure.

Sorry it was 40 MB it’ll be about 20 minutes before I can re render it smaller.

[The Blackhat]

Mutant triple tree.

[Bombastinator]

14 minutes ago, The Blackhat said:

Mutant triple tree.

Kickass  treehouse corner.  Nothing good nearby to attach to though. Neat use of sunset for translucent leaves though.

[sub68]

 

7 hours ago, adarw said:

someone post another pic already.............

I wish, most of my recent photos are subjects that I don't have clearances.

But....

43 minutes ago, The Blackhat said:

Mutant triple tree.

 

Love how the green color isn't overpowering.

 

No edits, I took this at are schools auto tech during a photo class.

[The Blackhat]

1 hour ago, sub68 said:

 

I wish, most of my recent photos are subjects that I don't have clearances.

But....

Love how the green color isn't overpowering.

 

No edits, I took this at are schools auto tech during a photo class.

I'd say you could have framed it better, less empty space under the disc, and not cut off the top of the disc.

I have too many cameras, I need to give one away but it's so difficult

[sub68]

4 minutes ago, The Blackhat said:

I'd say you could have framed it better, less empty space under the disc, and not cut off the top of the disc.

Yeah you can see I didn't think.

[Bombastinator]

7 hours ago, sub68 said:

Yeah you can see I didn't think.

This is the issue with 35mm.  You got to crop in camera to have enough resolution. This is what makes medium format so compelling.  There’s room.  I remember this really famous portrait that started as a rather pedestrian pic but got cropped in at a slight angle to make it amazing. 

[The Blackhat]

4 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

This is the issue with 35mm.  You got to crop in camera to have enough resolution. This is what makes medium format so compelling.  There’s room.  I remember this really famous portrait that started as a rather pedestrian pic but got cropped in at a slight angle to make it amazing. 

First: what? The word choice is genuinely confusing so I don't quite know the meaning of that second sentence.
Second: he isn't even on full frame, he's on APS-C, so even worse.
Third: his framing problem is not due to sensor size, it's due to not having a wider lens to compensate for framing issues.

[Bombastinator]

10 minutes ago, The Blackhat said:

First: what? The word choice is genuinely confusing so I don't quite know the meaning of that second sentence.
Second: he isn't even on full frame, he's on APS-C, so even worse.
Third: his framing problem is not due to sensor size, it's due to not having a wider lens to compensate for framing issues.

Was speaking generally the reason people shoot (shot?) medium or large format is because (more) cropping can be done.  Enough to radically change an image. With 35mm cropping often has to be done while shooting (hence “full frame 35mm”) reducing options when printing.  Variable sensor density changes this of course.  With film grain is determined by film stock so the only thing to do is vary the size of the film.  If one is used to shooting 35mm one may get used to cropping in camera so pics tend to be more zoomed in.  Cropping can do amazing stuff though.  I wish I had the example pic I was talking about to act as a visual aid.  It was a B&W of some misician who played the piano.  The original shot was a fairly generic indoor portrait of man with piano. But when cropped it sort of became man is piano and was really cool.  Thing used maybe a fifth of the original negative.