Page 273 of 273
#10882
took this a few weeks ago

https://www.instagram.com/95dank/?hl=en


Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
There shall be a stop to this madness. The battle is not over. My tasty licks aren't going anywhere.

Quote by The_Blode
^ I've just realised if you say Simple Plan's 2011 effort "Get Your Heart On!" really fast in a Southern American accent, it sounds gross. . .like sexual gross!

Quote by Necroheadbanger
Hello.
I'm looking for professional bongo-ists and triangle-ists to make a Progressive Technical Brutal Death Metal band
(will be called AxOxJxLxAxIxVxXxUxWxZxQxUxRxWxGxJxSxAxLxKxMxNxHxUxGxAxAxWxVxCxBxZxVx)
(Don't even ask what it means)


https://soundcloud.com/95dank



#10883
Quote by Dreadnought
33db are these your pictures?

If not, please read the first post.

Yeah they are mine, I believe I sized them to 640, etc.
#10884
k.lainad That's a pretty good city shot dude, the colors are great and I like the framing. I think it would have turned out even better with a black/night sky, but the cloudy gray works as well.
My God, it's full of stars!
#10885
Last edited by 33db at Jun 12, 2017,
#10887
Quote by Dreadnought
33db Where's that one from?

The shopping cart? I was walking over the bridge and I saw it down in the water, if you mean geographically California.
#10888
k.lainad 

That reflection you were going for reminds me of a photo I took during a hike, going for the same effect

My God, it's full of stars!
#10890
some of your pics make me think of joel peter witkin you might dig him. he mostly did still lives but the same unease is there

I got some colour film back here's some of my twee bullshit




I think I prefer black and white but I'm ok with these.
they're coming to take me away
ha-haaa
#10895
33db  you took those? That's pretty good. 


Posted these in the car thread already but watevs. Really liked how these turned out, though I feel like there's an X factor missing in the photos. Any suggestions?







...modes and scales are still useless.


Quote by PhoenixGRM
Hey guys could you spare a minute to Vote for my band. Go to the site Search our band Listana with CTRL+F for quick and vote Thank you .
Quote by sam b
Voted for Patron Çıldırdı.

Thanks
Quote by PhoenixGRM
But our Band is Listana
#10897
When I was heavy into it I tended to go in single ideas, hands, heads, structure. I also tend to avoid filters with my "photo" photos, in other words pic that should be pics and not layers of abstraction with Photoshop.
I do use "actions" though to remove color and add depth to the blacks, in some cases there is bloom in the photos, but these are strictly actions.

#10899

This is Ha Ling peak on Mount Lawrence Grassi. Photo was taken from the summit of the East End of Mount Rundle
e-married to Jack (bladez)
#10900
Quote by Xiaoxi
33db  you took those? That's pretty good. 


Posted these in the car thread already but watevs. Really liked how these turned out, though I feel like there's an X factor missing in the photos. Any suggestions?







the main problem you've got is that the midday sun is boring and not a great light source.

see how the black cars just kind of melt into each other? That's because the sun is over your shoulder in the first two images and you've got no backlighting to define the edges of the cars to separate them from one another.

the other problem with the sun is you've only got one light source to reflect off the car. Most pro car shots you'll see are very deliberate in the way they create specular highlights on the car to create definition and just to just look cool and pop.

of course it's probably unfair to assume you have a bunch of speed lights and studio strobes to take out on your next shoot so here's what I would suggest: shoot at a different time of day.

sunrise, sunset and an hour or two before sunset will each give you more interesting light to work with. You could also shoot at a well-lit parking lot at night, which is even better if the asphalt is wet.

the other thing I would suggest is to try shooting one car at a time to work out what direction you like the sun coming in on. That's one of the big keys to natural light photography and even if you have your wits about you it's easy for that to fall by the wayside when you're trying to position 5 cars at once.
#10901
Diamond Dave that's some great advice, I will stick to sunsets next time.

...modes and scales are still useless.


Quote by PhoenixGRM
Hey guys could you spare a minute to Vote for my band. Go to the site Search our band Listana with CTRL+F for quick and vote Thank you .
Quote by sam b
Voted for Patron Çıldırdı.

Thanks
Quote by PhoenixGRM
But our Band is Listana
#10902
Quote by Xiaoxi
Diamond Dave that's some great advice, I will stick to sunsets next time.

no problem man, I thought these examples might help too, I just pulled them off flickr:



all of those are in softer/less direct light so the reflection of the sky is emphasized and the shadows are reduced - so you get that really nice shaded look in the cutout of the Lambo's door rather than a big black triangle, and you can see the white highlights on the Porches really accentuating the shape of the bodywork.

its basically riffing off of fundamental lighting principles, and if you're interested in a pretty easy demonstration of those this is a good video:

#10903
Diamond Dave Watching the video now.

I inadvertently have some better lighting shots of my Miata from last year, but the time of day was sheer coincidence after I finished detailing lol






No wonder these are some of my favorites.

...modes and scales are still useless.


Quote by PhoenixGRM
Hey guys could you spare a minute to Vote for my band. Go to the site Search our band Listana with CTRL+F for quick and vote Thank you .
Quote by sam b
Voted for Patron Çıldırdı.

Thanks
Quote by PhoenixGRM
But our Band is Listana
Last edited by Xiaoxi at Jun 14, 2017,
#10904
Went to try out a bunch of lenses at Best Buy today. Mostly went there to try out 50mm primes since I've been wanting one ever since I bought my A6000, and decided to do another comparison/experiment. 

All of these photos were taken at f8, with an exposure time of 1/100, and an ISO of 3200. One is a full-frame $250 Sony 50mm f1.8, one is a crop-sensor $300 Sony 50mm f1.8 with stabilization that the online consensus says is sharper than the $250, one is the kit lens set to 50mm, and one is the old Pentax f2 I got from my dad's old film gear. The only alterations were shrinking them down so I could actually post the image online, labeling them, and in the second comparison image, cropping them. Otherwise, they're exactly as they came out of the camera.






Obviously there's compression and pixelation since all four of these had to be scaled down to be uploaded in the first place, but looking at the full-size comparisons in photoshop, it's still fairly accurate. I was surprised how little difference there was between the $250 50mm and the $300 50mm, given how many websites had said over and over that the extra $50 got you a much sharper lens. The more expensive one had a nicer, creamier bokeh blur, but I actually preferred the cheaper 50mm, since it felt like it did a nicer job with darker colors. The AF on the cheaper one was much louder and slower, and if you do a lot of low-light shooting the stabilization is probably worth it alone, but I honestly didn't see much difference in terms of quality, so unless I were to use it in low-light on a regular basis, with video where the noise could be a problem, or for sports or something else fast-paced with a tracking focus, I'd take the cheaper one in a heartbeat.

Manual focusing with the Pentax wasn't as convenient as just tapping the shutter to autofocus, but in terms of image quality, I felt like that old 50mm held up just fine. A little less contrast, but it makes up for that with what I think is the prettiest bokeh from any of the four. Overall, it holds up pretty well for a kit lens that's nearing 40 years old. The biggest surprise though is that I didn't notice a night-and-day difference from the kit lens. Don't get me wrong, there is a noticeable difference, especially in the darker colors, but I wouldn't call it a difference worth hundreds of dollars for a hobbyist, especially since I didn't edit any of these at all. If I actually played with them a little bit, I'm pretty sure I could get the photos from the kit lens to look good enough that you wouldn't notice the difference without actively looking for it.

So, yeah, with the kit lens for general purpose 50mm shots, and the Pentax for more controlled settings where I can take my time and manually focus, I'm pretty sure I won't be getting a 50mm prime any time soon. I did try out a $280 30mm macro lens that I really liked though. 30mm on an APS-C camera is 45mm, so it's roughly around 50mm on an old film camera, and the macro capability was a ton of fun. A minimum focusing distance under a centimeter lets you get some really cool shots.


50mm goals are gone, and now I'm aiming for that macro lens. Shame it doesn't come in black, but I can live with a lens that doesn't match.
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 46-49
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 0-0
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 0-0
Last edited by necrosis1193 at Jul 18, 2017,
#10905
i think i'm gonna mess around with my 35mm film camera a bit and maybe buy my own darkroom shit and try developing at home. if i can figure out a feasible spot to do it, that is.

i'll post up this one i did back in high school sometime soon. kinda cool accidental sort of thing.
mugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmug
#10906
Quote by jakesmellspoo
i think i'm gonna mess around with my 35mm film camera a bit and maybe buy my own darkroom shit and try developing at home. if i can figure out a feasible spot to do it, that is.

i'll post up this one i did back in high school sometime soon. kinda cool accidental sort of thing.

just a quick point you may already know, developing (B&W) film at home is suuuper easy and doesn't really require a dedicated darkroom or anything. All the gear you need basically fits inside a shoebox.

you can get a film changing bag to get film off the spool and into the developing tank.
#10907
Quote by Diamond Dave
just a quick point you may already know, developing (B&W) film at home is suuuper easy and doesn't really require a dedicated darkroom or anything. All the gear you need basically fits inside a shoebox.

you can get a film changing bag to get film off the spool and into the developing tank.
i just want to make sure i have a decent space to do it in before i spend the extra money on all the stuff.

i'd rather not keep chemicals in my bedroom even if they're relatively innocuous (idk it's been about 6 years since i did this) and i have two cats so...

plus i want to make sure the camera itself is still ok. just gonna take a few test reels and get them developed at a store somewhere.

i kinda wanna do it all as cheap as possible for now, too. at least until i get the hang of it all again. gonna read up on the process again before i go and buy anything more than film.
mugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmug
#10908
Quote by Diamond Dave
just a quick point you may already know, developing (B&W) film at home is suuuper easy and doesn't really require a dedicated darkroom or anything. All the gear you need basically fits inside a shoebox.

you can get a film changing bag to get film off the spool and into the developing tank.

Any chance you could elaborate on this? I did film photography as part of a class in college, so I know the process, but a big point of emphasis was to never expose the film to normal light until it was developed. I'd love to dig out my dad's Pentax now and then, so I'm curious how to do it without a dark room.
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 46-49
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 0-0
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 0-0
#10909
Quote by jakesmellspoo
i just want to make sure i have a decent space to do it in before i spend the extra money on all the stuff.

i'd rather not keep chemicals in my bedroom even if they're relatively innocuous (idk it's been about 6 years since i did this) and i have two cats so...

plus i want to make sure the camera itself is still ok. just gonna take a few test reels and get them developed at a store somewhere.

i kinda wanna do it all as cheap as possible for now, too. at least until i get the hang of it all again. gonna read up on the process again before i go and buy anything more than film.

fair enough, you might be pleased to know that the film itself is by far the most expensive part of the process.

Quote by necrosis1193
Any chance you could elaborate on this? I did film photography as part of a class in college, so I know the process, but a big point of emphasis was to never expose the film to normal light until it was developed. I'd love to dig out my dad's Pentax now and then, so I'm curious how to do it without a dark room.

well assuming you did 35mm photography and you've used a standard developing tank the process is exactly the same: You shoot your photos, rewind the film, remove the canister, transfer the film from the canister to the reel for the developing tank, load the reel, put the lid on, turn the lights back on, and start pouring chemicals in.

only difference is instead of doing the bold bit in a pitch black room you do it in a special light-proof film changing bag. Literally just a big bag with holes to stick your hands in.
#10910
Quote by Diamond Dave
well assuming you did 35mm photography and you've used a standard developing tank the process is exactly the same: You shoot your photos, rewind the film, remove the canister, transfer the film from the canister to the reel for the developing tank, load the reel, put the lid on, turn the lights back on, and start pouring chemicals in.

only difference is instead of doing the bold bit in a pitch black room you do it in a special light-proof film changing bag. Literally just a big bag with holes to stick your hands in.

I'll see if I can find a decent bag on Amazon  
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 46-49
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 0-0
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 0-0
#10914
Quote by K'Nuckles
Thanks pal, I bought a cheap set of ND filters that look like ass, but it was dark enough that I could get 2 second exposures without. How much did it set you back?

mine wasn't toooo much because its only a 49mm thread to go on my Fuji, think it was about $30.

10 stops can get you out to about 30 seconds in the evening light - I lied a little bit before, I have at least tested it out lol.
#10915
#10916
Whoever won this is lucky as fuck.


Dance in the moonlight my old friend twilight


Quote by metal4eva_22
What's this about ****ing corpses? My UG senses were tingling.