F-Stop In The Name Of Love [PHOTO THREAD]

MildQuixotic

I need a fisheye..

well--actually what I need is a nice polarizer

Mr.Brick

saltiness wrote: »

The photo you didn't take is pretty good. The other one is only interesting because it's fisheye.

Your post is intresting because its only words.

Seriously though- I actually ment to post this one,

Spoiler:

but the links were right next to each other.

MildQuixotic

So whats up with the Kit lens on the Rebel XTI? Is that gonna be alright to start me off until I can move onto one of the bad boys? (Its an 18-55) It doesn't have that automatic stablilizer thing which is kindof a bummer

Virum

Fuck automatic stablizer, get a goddamn tripod.

saltiness

The kit lens is a perfectly good lens for a beginner. You should use it for at least a few months before deciding you need something else. IS (image stabilization) is hot shit right now for gear whores but it's not something you need. I don't use any IS lenses and I have no problems with camera shake, knowing how to use your camera properly to reduce shake is much more effective than IS.

MildQuixotic

speaking of tripods, which one should I get (for under 100$) ?

saltiness

Bogen/Manfrotto are awesome tripods but they're more than $100 for the most part. Probably $150 or so for a proper one.

MildQuixotic

Im' just going to get a manfrotto..

A tripod doesn't seem like the thing to skimp on--not after you buy an 800$ DSLR

erisian pope

If you haven't bought the XTi yet, there is a better kit lens offered (17-85) according to my local photo store.

MildQuixotic

Too late : /

I heard about that lense--but I thought it was UK only?

edit- Also are UV filters pretty much mandatory? (I live in Florida)
I figured it couldn't hurt at 20 bucks

Virum

It's not a bad idea to have one.

saltiness

the 17-85 is a $450 lens so you're going to be paying significantly more if you want to get that as your kit lens.

Horus

MildQuixotic

If you live in Los Angeles area, theres a hobby rummage once a month. I got my tripod new for 15 bucks had pretty good features that would cost 60 bucks at Frys when I compared it. Height it reaches is 70in give or take, since it can come up to my eye level. They sell awesome camera stuff, they had this desk/tripod thing totally awesome. Also have 1900s tripods and even antique cameras.

the 17-85 is a $450 lens so you're going to be paying significantly more if you want to get that as your kit lens.

I heard that is a good starter lens, I did not believe the seller when he told me.

saltiness

It's a pretty good lens but it's not worth $450. If it were $250-300 it might be.

Gafoto

go prime or go home

Sheri

JAmp5 wrote: »

Rad as hell.

Mr.Brick wrote: »

*last photo by my buddy zaiden

Also rad as hell, but you didn't take it, so f u

Gafoto

Someone wanted to know if I took any pictures from the top of the Duke chapel while I was up there. I finally got up a picture of the interior and the view. Just your average tourist photos:

It is very worth going to if you ever get a chance though.

Jonis

I took these on a garage roof. I know their not the best but I could use some pointers.

benz0rs

Just got back from China.
I took too many pictures, but here's one I really liked and is my background.


That's where Chinese clouds are made.

More to come on a later date.

ImDrawingABlank

Diggin the last one Benz, I love smokestacks. Though it wouldn't hurt to brighten it up a tiny bit

Virum

I like it dark, especially with the current global warming pollution stuff going around.

saltiness

Nice, Benz.

bread of wonder

I like it dark too, but I think it's too much so. Lighten it up just a little and it'll be perfect.

benz0rs

I was going for the dark look because of the global warming issues. I did realize once I posted it that the top and bottom were a bit too dark. I may fix it up when I finish unpacking and getting over jet lag.

It was a nuclear power plant in the middle of some country area.

Gafoto

benz0rs wrote: »

I was going for the dark look because of the global warming issues. I did realize once I posted it that the top and bottom were a bit too dark. I may fix it up when I finish unpacking and getting over jet lag.

It was a nuclear power plant in the middle of some country area.

How do you know it was a nuclear power plant?

saltiness

Experimenting with bouncing flash.

ImDrawingABlank

I think it worked out pretty well salter, but personally I'd like a bit more detail in her eyes if you could manage it somehow.

foursquareman

Jonis- I like your photos. I guess my only comment is that in the fourth photo, the shadow you cast is a bit distracting. Otherwise I like a lot of those.


I went out this afternoon and took some photos to experiment. For this first one, I tried to edit the raw file to get a polaroid look to it.



The next two I really like.





Crits welcome.

Gafoto

With both of those foursquare, the subjects aren't all that interesting (to me) but mainly the photos have distracting elements. Power lines and fences are usually not a pleasant sight (in the first one) and the trailer home backdrop muddies up the second one (which is just your average security fence?).

foursquareman

Gafoto wrote: »

With both of those foursquare, the subjects aren't all that interesting (to me) but mainly the photos have distracting elements. Power lines and fences are usually not a pleasant sight (in the first one) and the trailer home backdrop muddies up the second one (which is just your average security fence?).

What do you mean average?! It's painted green!

ImDrawingABlank

hahaha, touche

benz0rs

Gafoto wrote: »

benz0rs wrote: »

I was going for the dark look because of the global warming issues. I did realize once I posted it that the top and bottom were a bit too dark. I may fix it up when I finish unpacking and getting over jet lag.

It was a nuclear power plant in the middle of some country area.

How do you know it was a nuclear power plant?

Honestly, I don't know if that answers the question, but to me, that equals nuclear power plant just because it reminds me of the one from Simpsons.

Should someone make a new thread soon?

bread of wonder

Aren't nuclear power plants supposed to be comparably environmentally-friendly? I mean, they don't burn fossil fuels.

saltiness

Technically, yes. Besides the spent fuel rods, the only waste produced by a nuclear power plant is water in the form of steam.

Gafoto

benz0rs wrote: »

Gafoto wrote: »

benz0rs wrote: »

I was going for the dark look because of the global warming issues. I did realize once I posted it that the top and bottom were a bit too dark. I may fix it up when I finish unpacking and getting over jet lag.

It was a nuclear power plant in the middle of some country area.

How do you know it was a nuclear power plant?

Honestly, I don't know if that answers the question, but to me, that equals nuclear power plant just because it reminds me of the one from Simpsons.

Should someone make a new thread soon?

Those are just cooling towers, they don't necessarily mean nuclear power.

Michael Kenna did a book on Ratcliffe-on-soar, a coal-fired plant with those same kind of cooling towers:

altmann

Saltiness: Not a bad shot. I like how deep the blacks are. Experiment more often!

saltiness

Thanks, altmann. I'll definitely be messing around with my flash more now that I've got a ton of batteries to waste in it.

Gafoto

This thread needed more boobies. Nice photo saltiness.

ImDrawingABlank

Gafoto wrote: »

This thread needed more boobies. Nice photo saltiness.

I was going to say that... but you know...

Gafoto

Boobies are art.

I mean nude shots.

Yes, nude shots. Of women.