[Pics] Fountain in park | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 269 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614130
Today 2
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
[Pics] Fountain in park
 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 15:32 [#01340780]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



earth, you are retarded. stop posting in this thread


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:25 [#01340849]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



Seriously, I haven't met many people who when they are
obviously UNINFORMED on a topic to a professional level,
that they sit here and instead of asking questions as to WHY
I feel this way, instead they pounce on offensive remarks
and comments.



 

offline earthleakage from tell the world you're winning on 2004-09-20 17:27 [#01340851]
Points: 27795 Status: Regular



which is probably why you enjoy it so much you stupid
fucking elitist cocksucking muthfucka excuse for a human
being


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:31 [#01340853]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



Earth,

"so far as i can ascertain, to you the most important
aspect
of your hobby is not the enjoyment of taking the picture,
not the enjoyment of looking at your own art, but that
people giving you recognition for something which looks good

just because you used a camera that is, to you expensive,
whatever that means. expensive is a relative term and thus
in this circumstance is meaningless."


Simple referring to the fact that I am not willing to afford
many of my savings towards lenses that are of a rediculous
value, does not in any way make my current photos and how I
deal with my current equipment; do not in any way make them
better simply because the eq. cost more.

Sheesh. And I bet you are saying you can get these shots
with a simple point-and-shoot camera. Ok, please back it.


There is a reason why you have to spend money on QUALITY
glass. There is a reason why you spend money for certain
features on a camera. And there is reason why certain
"fast" lenses cost more. I am doing this for a hobby,
yes...but like msot hobbies, things (equipment, gear) can
get expensive. Like climbing, hiking, etc....and soon I
would like to start selling some of my artwork.

I get quite a bit of it blown up on 20x30" posters now. I
need the sharpness of an expensive lens to look nice when it
is blown up to that size.

You also need a fast lens (lower # aperature) when doing
shooting in dim or low lighting.

Also, certain cameras perform better at higher ISOs, and
produce a less noisy picture.

There are many things ... and photography is not an easy
hobby or profession.

I hope you can understand this, and understand my
frustration when you make comments like that.

It's like someone saying "you bought Reason, or this _______
sound equipment" only to make tracks and post them on XLR
for people to listen to.

: /



 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:32 [#01340855]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



Ahh, so now I'm an elitest...exactely..
Sigh, good day sir....


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:34 [#01340857]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



I'm not bragging about the equipment i have, I am bragging
about the equipment I _don't_ have. I hope you can see
that.


 

offline hobbes from age on 2004-09-20 17:35 [#01340858]
Points: 8168 Status: Lurker



yeah, exactely.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:36 [#01340860]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



Weatherd Stoner,

"For starters, who the hell wants to take 5 8MP in a
second.
Absolutely frivilous.

Maybe you can tell a difference in detail, but because the
amount would be so insignificant that it doesnt matter
because no one would even care.

I dont need different lenses anyways, my camera has options

to customize depending on the setting anyways. "


Ok, tell this to any professsional or just amatuer
photographer.....FPS matters. Write time matters ...

Please, describe to me the features your camera can do that
outweigh the need or fact for switching between lenses.



 

offline thecurbcreeper from United States on 2004-09-20 17:40 [#01340862]
Points: 6045 Status: Lurker



hey if phobia was here he could get technical on cameras
then ban some people.


 

offline virginpusher from County Clare on 2004-09-20 17:41 [#01340864]
Points: 27325 Status: Lurker



Well i have questions.

You are talking about glass lenses. What is the norm and
what is the difference with what you have now.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:42 [#01340865]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



weathered,

"whatever, you dont need all that shit to take decent
digital
photos."


This I can agree with. You don't need $$$ to take a good
photo. But when it comes to stepping up to the next level,
and looking to get a shot...there are certain lenses and
equipment you need to get that certain "shot" that you
picture in your head. Thanks for reading.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:45 [#01340867]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



When it comes to SLR cameras, you don't have a single lens
to work with. Lenses are interchangable....

For example, you are shooting buildings or architechure
downtown in a city. .... you can't exactly "step way back"
to fit the shot in your viewfinder....the focal length of
your lens might not be short enough. instead, you can get a
wide or ultra wide lens to handle that.

Then, each lens works at a different speed .... aperature
... which determines the amount of light that is let in, and
in turn the depth of field.

If you can open the lens wide open, so to 1.8 or 1.4 f-stop,
you can SEVERELY limit the depth of field. You can get
extremely dreamy bokeh to really bring your object to focus.


 

offline hobbes from age on 2004-09-20 17:46 [#01340868]
Points: 8168 Status: Lurker



to say that detail is not an important factor in photography
is a bit weird i think weatheredstoner....


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:47 [#01340870]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



"hey if phobia was here he could get technical on cameras

then ban some people. "


I'm not saying I know everything about photography, only
enough to know that there are certain equipment for each
type of application and or shot (lighting, landscape etc)
that you are looking to take.

instead of just saying "oh this point and shoot camera does
everything anyone could ever need"

: /


 

offline hobbes from age on 2004-09-20 17:49 [#01340873]
Points: 8168 Status: Lurker



i mean gursky doesn't use a disposable, sheesh.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:52 [#01340875]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



Paco,

I just received my 16mm and with the 1.6x it's really not as
much as I hoped for.

Now I really want that 1.3 because the 1.6 is starting to
become a slight hassel.

But it is def. nice on the long end :)


 

offline Mertens from Motor City (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:52 [#01340877]
Points: 2064 Status: Lurker



Hi everybody!


 

offline virginpusher from County Clare on 2004-09-20 17:54 [#01340878]
Points: 27325 Status: Lurker | Followup to elusive: #01340870



are all lenses glass or does the material vary?


 

offline zaphod from the metaverse on 2004-09-20 17:59 [#01340882]
Points: 4428 Status: Addict



jesus fucking god. elusive is totally correct here.
photography is a very expensive hobby, and, especially in
the digital market, the more money you spend = the better
equipment you get, the better pictures you'll ultimately be
able to take.
the cheapest digital slr is 1000 dollars. thats quite
expensive, but you need an SLR camera in order to have any
control over what you're doing.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 17:59 [#01340883]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



virgin, sorry.

by glass...it's like slang for a lens....



 

offline hobbes from age on 2004-09-20 18:09 [#01340891]
Points: 8168 Status: Lurker



yes i would like a "phase one h25" , but then again i could
buy a small island instead.


 

offline virginpusher from County Clare on 2004-09-20 18:14 [#01340892]
Points: 27325 Status: Lurker | Followup to elusive: #01340883



oh ok gotcha! Sorry i dont really know anything about this
stuff.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 18:17 [#01340893]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



Thanks for asking....it usually gets your question answered
quite a fair bit quicker than if you would have taken the
offense.


 

offline virginpusher from County Clare on 2004-09-20 18:19 [#01340895]
Points: 27325 Status: Lurker



You should take some evening pics. I stood on an overpass
and shot the cars. It looks cool but i cant find the pic.
Evening shots can be nice! :)


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 18:35 [#01340903]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



Yeah I do that quite a bit. I live close to a few nice
highways and overpasses so when the temp is right, me and a
buddy try to get out shootin'.



 

offline weatheredstoner from same shit babes. (United States) on 2004-09-20 18:49 [#01340909]
Points: 12585 Status: Lurker



"to say that detail is not an important factor in
photography
is a bit weird i think weatheredstoner...."

I didn't say that.



 

offline weatheredstoner from same shit babes. (United States) on 2004-09-20 18:51 [#01340910]
Points: 12585 Status: Lurker



For starters, lemme state that I'm no expert and that I just
rely on my eyes to judge things of this sort of nature.

My point is this: If someone wants to spend thousands of
dollars on something they want because they think it'll give
them better results, then thats fine. But if I create
something on par with that person without spending that much
money then thats what I'll do. To me it just seems like
overkill.


 

offline hobbes from age on 2004-09-20 18:59 [#01340922]
Points: 8168 Status: Lurker | Followup to weatheredstoner: #01340909



ok that's that sorted then.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 19:07 [#01340925]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



That's fine, weathered, and you sure as hell create great
pics with a point and shoot camera...ive been doing it for
years.

But now that i've experienced SLR and different types of
lenses...it's a whole new world I never really knew about.

I'm just trying to open you up to that idea....once yuo
start using professional eq. and different types of lenses,
you will be blown away by the difference....and never be
able to go back.



 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2004-09-20 19:08 [#01340927]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



""to say that detail is not an important factor in
photography
is a bit weird i think weatheredstoner...."

I didn't say that."


from above ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"For starters, who the hell wants to take 5 8MP in a
second.
Absolutely frivilous.

Maybe you can tell a difference in detail, but because the
amount would be so insignificant that it doesnt matter
because no one would even care.

I dont need different lenses anyways, my camera has options

to customize depending on the setting anyways. "



 


Messageboard index