December 18, 2012
— Pixy Misa . . . to the average person when they first undertake to practice it; it certainly was for me. Fortunately, I developed an interest in it in an era where the process of learning it is relatively cost-free compared to the days when you had to actually buy film and pay to have it processed before finding out that you really suck at it. Had I started in the age of Kodachrome, I have absolutely no doubt that I would have taken up something far less expensive as a hobby, like yacht racing or polo.
But, thanks to the advent of digital photography, if you stick your finger in front of the lens or cut off a person's head in a shot you may never have a chance to take again, you can see the results instantly, make the necessary adjustments right there on the spot and call do-over. Long gone are the days when photography was limited to a few people with endless patience, perseverance, talent and money. Virtually anyone can now afford to experiment, fail and experiment again now that "film" is essentially free and disposable.
There is a downside to the near-complete democratization of photography, of course. It's called Instagram -- the web app all the kids are crazy about these days that allows you to upload and manipulate photos of teenagers making duck-faces, adding a warm sepia tone to give them some real, retro-artistic pizzazz.
Still, the fact that photography is vastly more accessible now than it's ever been is a thing to be embraced for the simple fact that it removes a financial barrier that would otherwise discourage talented people from taking it up as a pursuit. That's not to say that photography has become cheap, by any means. Once taken up, it can become an all-consuming obsession -- the newest DSLR body, that must-have lens, lighting rigs, flashes, a good tripod, etc. When you take up photography and plunk down several hundred dollars for a camera body and two-lens kit, you'll soon discover that even though it's useful for just about any kind of photography you might need it for, it's never enough. But, the mistake most people make is in believing that you must have the latest, greatest equipment in order to take great pictures. And that just isn't so. Great photos can be taken with a relatively cheap point-and-shoot when used within the parameters around which it was designed. The only thing you get from more expensive DSLR cameras is a larger image sensor that allows for large, poster-sized prints and a set of features that give you the control needed to be more creative. But, the average shutter bug rarely prints anything larger than 8X10, and just about any modern point-and-shoot is capable of that.
The key to becoming a good photographer, though, is a willingness to get away from the fully-automated mode that most people tend to rely on and use the various priority modes available: Aperture priority (Av), Shutter priority (Tv), Sensitivity priority (Sv) and, in some cases, Shutter/Aperture (TAv). (The somewhat counter-intuitive "T" in Shutter priority mode stands for "time", and the "v" in all modes stands for "value". I'll get more in-depth in discussing these modes a little later in the post.)
One mistake beginning photographers tend to make in choosing a camera is in assuming that the higher the number of pixels, the better the camera. For several years, camera makers have chased after more megapixels as a selling point. And, to be sure, it's nice to have lots and lots of pixels available when making large prints. Having all that image resolution makes for nice detail. But, unless you're planning to exhibit massive, art-gallery sized prints, just about any DSLR body is capable of producing wonderfully detailed photos up to 8X10 -- certainly any camera produced today is capable of that and more.
But, the crucial factor in producing better images (aside from good technique and aesthetic sensibility, of course) rests in the size of the sensor and not he number of megapixels that have been crammed into it. That's why my 6.1 megapixel Pentax K100D Super produces smoother, more detailed photos than just about any 12 megapixel point-and-shoot camera. In fact, very first DSLR camera was a 5 megapixel Olympus E20n I bought used on eBay for $130 after I discovered that the 10 megapixel Nikon point-and-shoot just wasn't capable of reliably producing the kinds of images I was trying to shoot at the time (frozen-action drag racing shots).
While the Nikon offered a setting that allowed for frozen-action photos (an "Action" or "Sports" mode indicated by a depiction of a running human figure on the mode dial), it's shortcoming -- as is the case with most point-and-shoot cameras -- was in its slow reaction time, known as shutter lag. It's damn near impossible to capture a drag racer launching at the starting line when there's half a second between the time you press the shutter button and the time the shutter actually trips. By then, the car is typically well down the track and has settled back onto all four wheels after its initial wheel-stand, and there's no interesting detail like the wrinkled sidewalls on the rear tires that occurs when accelerating off the starting line, so you end up with nothing more than a picture of a car on a drag strip. And that's not too compelling.
With DSLR cameras, you have near-instantaneous shutter response so that the only real challenge is to accurately time the launch. That's not easy to do at first, but with some practice, you tend to develop a pretty good sense for it and can nail the shot just about every time. And this is where the Shutter priority (Tv) mode is useful, as that's the best way to ensure that you freeze the action. In Tv mode, you set the desired shutter speed (I usually go with 1/500th of a second or higher for drag racing) and the camera automatically adjusts the aperture setting and light sensitivity to get the proper exposure for the light conditions. A faster shutter speed will freeze faster action (and also help to eliminate the blur caused from camera-shake).
You can also use shutter priority to create other effects in action shots. For example, if you're pretty good at panning (following the subject and locking focus on it), you can capture the sense of action by having the subject in sharp focus while the background exhibits motion blur. That, to me at least, is considerably more challenging than simply freezing the action. Other photographers have much better panning technique than I have, but with some practice, I've been able to achieve it on occasion.
Now, if you're mostly interested in still photography, you can use the Aperture priority mode to create effects to help you isolate the subject from the background, or alternatively capture the entire scene in sharp focus by manipulating the size of the lens's aperture -- or the size of the opening through which light passes to the sensor. Aperture priority photography can be confusing at first as the settings would seem to be the exact opposite of what you'd expect; the higher the number on the aperture setting (commonly referred to as f-stops), the smaller the aperture.
For example, my favorite lens at the moment is my Pentax SMC FA 50mm f/1.4 auto-focus prime lens. The "f/1.4" indicates the maximum aperture setting for the lens is 1.4 -- meaning that the aperture is wide-open. Alternatively, the minimum aperture setting f/22 -- which is the smallest possible opening the aperture can be set to. The purpose of manipulating the aperture is to control the amount of light that passes through the lens to the camera's image sensor.
Also, by manipulating the camera's aperture setting, you can control the depth of field in your images. That's just photography jargon for the size of the area in the image that is in focus as opposed to the area that is blurred -- often referred to as the focal plane. The key thing to remember in that regard is that the wider the aperture setting (i.e., the lower the f-stop number), the shallower the depth of field. For example, a shot of a flower taken with an aperture value of f/1.4 will have have the flower itself (or a small area of it) in sharp focus while the rest is blurred and extremely soft. On the other hand, if you photograph a flower with a higher aperture value, more of the total area of the image will be in focus and the entire image will be more detailed. Landscapes typically have greater depth of field than portraits and closeups.
That can be useful for a number of reasons -- for instance, it can be used to isolate a subject from a cluttered or bland background, or alternatively, to lend a sort of dreamy quality to the shot. Some photographers refer to that dreamy quality of a blurred background as "bokeh" while others consider the term pretentious twaddle and refer to it simply as "blurred background". I actually like the term, myself, because I'm pretentious and I like the notion of having a word to describe the aesthetic quality of the blur. It's a quality that makes some lenses preferable to others as some lenses render a clunky or "busy" kind of blur while others lend a more smooth, creamy-looking appearance to the background.
When shooting in Aperture priority mode (again, Av), you choose the aperture value -- in the case of the lens I'm currently using most frequently, anywhere from f/1.4 to f/22 -- and the camera will adjust the shutter speed and the light sensitivity to ensure proper exposure. As you've no doubt begun to put together by now, the three different values (Aperture, Shutter and Sensitivity) are all interlinked in producing proper exposures. Essentially, they are all means by which you control the amount of light that passes through to the image sensor.
The final common priority mode available on DSLR cameras (and some point-and-shoots) is Sensitivity, which as the nomenclature suggests, determines the light sensitivity of the image sensor. The value of the sensitivity is referred to as the ISO setting; the lower the ISO setting, the lower the light sensitivity. On a clear, bright, sunny day you typically want to shoot at a low ISO setting to avoid overexposing the image: ISO 100, or so. Though, you may want to bump it up just a bit in order to allow the camera to adjust the shutter speed higher in order to capture and freeze objects in motion.
Higher ISO settings, however, will allow you to capture images in low-light and nighttime conditions without using flash. But, while the ability to capture images in extremely low light is awfully handy at times (especially if you're like me and hate using flash unless it's absolutely necessary), it does have its drawbacks. As is the case in film photography, using a higher sensitivity setting has a tendency to obscure detail in images with digital noise -- the functional equivalent of "graininess" in highly sensitive film. Unfortunately, though, where film grain can often lend a nice effect to photographs, digital noise tends to be a lot less aesthetically pleasing.
On the other hand, you can bump up the camera's ISO setting in low light situations so as to ensure that the camera gets the proper exposure while the camera adjusts its shutter speed high enough to avoid the blur caused by camera shake -- a very common problem in photos shot hand-held in low light. Unless you're using a camera with a good shake-reduction system, it's difficult to take sharp photos with a shutter speed of less than 1/50th of a second. That may sound like a very short amount of time, but unless you have rock-steady hands or use a tripod, trying to capture a sharp image with a any slower a shutter value will likely result in blurred and/or streaked images as a result of almost imperceptible movement in your hands upon triggering the shutter button. That's just how it is.
The great thing about the pace of innovation in digital photography is that you can get a used DSLR with all of the above capabilities (some better than others, obviously) for a song. The Pentax K100D Super I mentioned above cost me a paltry $100 -- albeit in very used condition. While it's not exactly a world-beater in low-light conditions, in good light it produces some absolutely wonderful images. The same can be said of my current favorite, the Pentax K20D, which I got in beautiful condition for a whopping $250. Not too shabby for a camera that listed at over $1300 when it was released just a few years ago.
So, if you're on a budget and would like to have a nice DSLR as a starter camera, there are some wonderful bargains to be found that will enable you to learn without sending you deep into hock. If you don't quite trust eBay or any of the other auction sites, you can always keep an eye on your local Craigslist or online classifieds for deals on cameras that you can actually hold in your hands and examine before taking the plunge.
Fair warning: Once you've purchased a camera body and a kit lens, if you find that you're taking a shine to photography, you've only just begun spending your hard-earned cash. Suddenly, you'll find yourself coveting lenses, lenses and still more lenses. My first new DSLR purchase was the Pentax K-x two-lens kit with 18-55mm and 50-200mm zooms. It took about a week before I decided that I needed a longer zoom lens, at which point I went out and purchased a 70-300mm zoom in order to get better shots of birds on the wing.
And if you think camera bodies can be expensive, you'll want to be sure you're sitting down when you start pricing lenses, which often sell for multiple thousands of dollars. The good news, though, is that you don't really have to spend a lot of money to get a lens that produces good photos. The 70-300mm zoom I bought set me back a little over $200, tax-included, and I've managed to capture some wonderful, detailed images with it. The key is in knowing the lens's limitations and operating within them.
Also, the availability of cheap, high-quality glass is one of the reasons I decided to make my first new DSLR purchase a Pentax. While it's a very small fry in the imaging industry, Pentax carries the benefit of being compatible with every lens ever made to fit Pentax cameras, going back to its early film days. So there are literally millions of second-hand lenses on the market that can be had insanely cheap. And we're not talking about flimsy plastic junk, but high quality, well-constructed lenses with absolutely wonderful optics.
For example, you can buy an SMC (super multi-coated) Pentax 50mm f/2 prime lens on eBay for well under $50 at any time. And if you don't mind the lack of auto-focus and electronic aperture control contacts, you can use it to make some of the sharpest images you'll ever see with a wonderful, dreamy quality to the "bokeh". And, if you're like me, once you get a taste of using a nice prime lens (that is, a non-zoom, fixed focal-length lens), you'll fall in love.
If you should give photography a try and decide that you enjoy it enough to pursue it seriously, you'll soon learn that there's nothing quite like shooting with a good, high-quality prime lens. And the fact is, there's no better way to learn photography than using an old, manual-focus prime lens. You'll discover that it's better to get closer to the subject you're shooting than zooming in on it from a couple-hundred feet away, or more. As one photographer whose name I can't recall once put it, "If your photos aren't good enough, you're not standing close enough." And, as others have said, it's always best to "zoom with your feet."
As I mentioned above, there is a ridiculous amount of K-mount (Pentax) lenses available on the market to be had dirt cheap. Just a few weeks ago, I picked up four Sears-brand K-mount lenses (a 50mm f/2, a 135mm f/2.8, an 80-200mm f/4 manual zoom and a 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 zoom) for a total of $50 -- including the camera. They're not the greatest lenses ever made, to be sure. But, they are capable of producing stellar images in practiced hands.
Of course, you'll want to bear in mind that I'm far from what anyone would call a great photographer. I've only been at it for a few years, starting in the spring of 2009 with a Canon Power Shot point-and-shoot I borrowed from my father to take photos at a drag strip in Sikeston, MO. But, in that short period of time, I've learned a great deal -- albeit nowhere near everything I need to know. And in that time, I've discovered how therapeutic it is to have an outlet that takes me away from all the crap I tend to dwell on when writing for my own blog, as well as the personal challenges that arise in day-to-day life.
In fact, I have an entire series of photos called "Front Porch Photography" that I started when I was taking care of my mother in her final days and wasn't able to stray more than a few hundred feet from the house in the event of an emergency, or to simply be on hand to give her meds to keep her comfortable. Having some kind of outlet to take my mind off the sadness was absolutely essential to my own mental health.
And, as the Chief Ewok has been keen to point out, conservatives have been terribly absent in the area of cultural pursuits for decades now, to the point where we have all but conceded that crucial part of the American scene to the left. Maybe photography isn't exactly what he's talking about; it's certainly less influential that movies, television and literature. Still, it is an avocation that contributes to the overall culture in a small but significant way, and it doesn't hurt to engage that culture wherever you can. I have established friendships with liberals who come to my blog because they appreciate my photography. And, while I'm hesitant to claim the mantle myself, others have referred to me as an artist -- which is truly flattering, and certainly can't hurt when it comes to being a conservative voice actively engaged in cultural pursuits.
Finally, I'd like to thank Ace and the cobs for giving me yet another opportunity to showcase my talents (for lack of a better term) on the single best conservative blog on the internet. And I hope I haven't irretrievably bored the 'Rons & 'Ettes with this well-nigh interminable post/tutorial. If any of you have found this useful in any way and would like to contact me for whatever reason, you can do so at one of the email addresses listed in the sidebar over at my blog, The Damn Dirty RINO.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
03:03 PM
| Comments (392)
Post contains 3230 words, total size 22 kb.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at December 18, 2012 03:09 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at December 18, 2012 03:09 PM (QKKT0)
Did I click on some alternative world version of Instapundit?
You know, where he still is a photo geek, but is way, WAAAY more wordy?
Posted by: imp at December 18, 2012 03:10 PM (UaxA0)
"There is a downside to the near-complete democratization of photography, of course. It's called Instagram -- the web app all the kids are crazy about these days..."
Instagram?
Is that the site that announced today that any photos that are downloaded there...are considered their property?
And that they are free to sell them.
Posted by: wheatie at December 18, 2012 03:12 PM (K4wCe)
Posted by: Xander Crews at December 18, 2012 03:12 PM (24UOj)
You can get pretty good quality with a digital point 'n' shoot.
I have made the leap to 'boat owner', as it were.
Posted by: fluffy at December 18, 2012 03:12 PM (4pSIn)
Posted by: Traditionalist at December 18, 2012 03:12 PM (xocZy)
What is this blog coming to?
Posted by: Waterhouse at December 18, 2012 03:13 PM (35f4K)
Posted by: Sarahw at December 18, 2012 03:14 PM (LYwCh)
Posted by: soothsayer at December 18, 2012 03:15 PM (FC8Yl)
Posted by: Dr. Varno at December 18, 2012 03:15 PM (YgF3N)
That's supposed to be a joke, right?
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at December 18, 2012 03:15 PM (QKKT0)
Posted by: BCochran1981 at December 18, 2012 03:15 PM (GEICT)
A RINO is a Republican who does not support school prayer.
As long as the prayer was written by Martin Luther or Jan Hus.
Posted by: fluffy at December 18, 2012 03:16 PM (4pSIn)
Posted by: CAC at December 18, 2012 03:17 PM (kH1+r)
Posted by: Fred Flintstone at December 18, 2012 03:17 PM (YgF3N)
Posted by: Robin Banks at December 18, 2012 03:18 PM (EjsOc)
Posted by: Eaton Cox at December 18, 2012 03:20 PM (q177U)
Posted by: BCochran1981 at December 18, 2012 03:21 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: CAC at December 18, 2012 03:22 PM (kH1+r)
Posted by: L'il Burney at December 18, 2012 03:23 PM (4pSIn)
but it's so easy to use the programmed settings that I've never leaned to use it properly. One glitch, however is in the size of the sensor. http://bit.ly/XGG5lz
I've taken some cool photos, and LOVE to take photos, but don't know how to use the instrument properly.
I really do need to sign up for a course. I think I would enjoy it so much more.
BTW, that landscape photo is spectacular.Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 03:24 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: beach imagery at December 18, 2012 03:26 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 03:26 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Hairy Reed at December 18, 2012 03:26 PM (QKKT0)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at December 18, 2012 03:27 PM (0q2P7)
Can we use our cameras to take pics of the burning? I'm in for that.
That's why you need to read this article. Otherwise, the glare from the flames will overwhelm the sensor and everything else will be under exposed.
Posted by: fluffy, LiB at December 18, 2012 03:28 PM (4pSIn)
Posted by: Walkers! at December 18, 2012 03:29 PM (jWwDJ)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at December 18, 2012 03:29 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: dissent555 at December 18, 2012 03:29 PM (yR6A1)
Posted by: JDTAY at December 18, 2012 03:29 PM (a0nis)
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at December 18, 2012 03:30 PM (C8mVl)
Posted by: BCochran1981 at December 18, 2012 03:30 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: John the Libertarian at December 18, 2012 03:32 PM (oshol)
Unfortunately, the camera had the video button right next to the zoom button, so over half of my pictures were videos! AAARGH!
I really haven't practiced with my camera since I got home and your post inspired me to get busy and do that. I would love to take good pictures, but the ones which I do take are accidental.
I would recommend using the zoom for one thing: taking pictures of pets who are bad about avoiding the camera when they see you shooting. I did get a good shot of my dog by going way out in the back yard and then using the zoom to take a full-front portrait. I would never have been able to do that close to her.
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 03:35 PM (GoIUi)
Posted by: Chris M at December 18, 2012 03:35 PM (4lyMJ)
Posted by: Slytherin at December 18, 2012 03:36 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: Johnny I at December 18, 2012 03:37 PM (WPA+a)
Posted by: sTevo at December 18, 2012 03:37 PM (VMcEw)
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 03:38 PM (ay6+/)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 03:39 PM (piMMO)
One of my favourite american writers, Thomas Sowell, is also a fantastic photographer.
If you're a Sowell fan, check out his artistic side, his photos are truly stunning.
URL:
http://picasaweb.google.com/sowell.hoover/PhotographsByThomasSowell#
Posted by: fb at December 18, 2012 03:39 PM (JVEmw)
Posted by: Kate Upton at December 18, 2012 03:40 PM (/jHWN)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 03:40 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at December 18, 2012 03:41 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Walkers! at December 18, 2012 03:41 PM (jWwDJ)
Posted by: Kevin in ABQ at December 18, 2012 03:41 PM (BvTwT)
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 03:41 PM (ay6+/)
Nice work...and good article, DamnDirtyRino.
Thanks.
I especially liked the low-light shot of the two smoke stacks at the lumber yard.
But they are all really good.
Posted by: wheatie at December 18, 2012 03:42 PM (K4wCe)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 03:42 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Chris M at December 18, 2012 03:42 PM (4lyMJ)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 03:43 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Jean at December 18, 2012 03:43 PM (EBBBm)
It turns out to be a super-macro with about a one micron depth of field. I took a picture of a lady bug and we discovered that it captured the image of a mite on the false eye of the lady bug.
We call the broken camera the bug camera.
Posted by: sTevo at December 18, 2012 03:44 PM (VMcEw)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 03:46 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Xander Crews at December 18, 2012 03:47 PM (24UOj)
****
Yes you do. You know why. ------------ Worcestershire sauce as embalming fluid again?
Posted by: Citizen Anachronda at December 18, 2012 03:47 PM (NmR1a)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 03:47 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Bosk at December 18, 2012 03:50 PM (n2K+4)
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 03:50 PM (GoIUi)
Posted by: Xander Crews at December 18, 2012 03:50 PM (24UOj)
Posted by: toby928© for TB at December 18, 2012 03:50 PM (QupBk)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 03:50 PM (piMMO)
I actually take photos professionally, and have been in the biz to some degree since the early 80's, as a hobby even longer. Folks who grew up digital have no idea. I had a company with an E6 processor and a studio with guys who could really take photos (I'm still learning), and kodak was literally down the street for other film types. Now you just fake it.
As you too, on vacation I show folks how to get off of the little green square when taking shots, almost instant improvement from the first shot on.
It's hard to believe that these little P&S cameras pack the kind of processing power they do, and amazing shots can be achieved with any of them.
My current kick is I resurrected my old Nikkor lenses on my Canon using an adapter - that old glass was pretty nice, and an f1.4 lens today ain't cheap! Seriously, it ain't that hard to focus the old fashioned way.
Even better, you can get a friggin' $50 bubble jet printer that makes incredible prints! Of course mine cost a lot more and can print large format. My old firm we spent like $20k on a kodak dye sub printer with a fraction of the quality of today's printers.
And the love/hate relationship with technology marches on.
Posted by: Clutch Cargo at December 18, 2012 03:51 PM (Qxdfp)
Posted by: Ace's unofficial editor at December 18, 2012 03:52 PM (0PiQ4)
Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at December 18, 2012 03:52 PM (Y5I9o)
Posted by: Johnny I at December 18, 2012 03:52 PM (WPA+a)
Posted by: zombie bob crane at December 18, 2012 03:53 PM (jPVBi)
I asked him is he had a GPS to navigate with. He said yes. I called him a hypocrite for not using paper maps.
He then said, you don't even know me, get off my case. I couldn't stop laughing.
Posted by: sTevo at December 18, 2012 03:53 PM (VMcEw)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 03:53 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at December 18, 2012 03:54 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 03:54 PM (piMMO)
Please to post link to mite-on-bug-lash photo.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at December 18, 2012 03:54 PM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Jmel at December 18, 2012 03:56 PM (9tSXa)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at December 18, 2012 03:56 PM (GsoHv)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 03:56 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 03:57 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: beach hawk at December 18, 2012 03:57 PM (LpQbZ)
Please to post link to mite-on-bug-lash photo.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo
I will dig it up and put it on my beer blog. It might take a few.
Posted by: sTevo at December 18, 2012 03:58 PM (VMcEw)
Posted by: t-bird at December 18, 2012 03:58 PM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Walkers! at December 18, 2012 03:59 PM (jWwDJ)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 04:00 PM (HDgX3)
If its to smooth out someone's complexion no problem. Deliberate manipulation so it looks like you have Kate Upton's body, big problem. One is clean-up while the other is a lie.
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 04:01 PM (QdVWw)
How do you photogs feel about photoshopping?
To me, it feels like cheating.
Are you trying to cheat? Or just give it a little enhancement?
I post-process with iPhoto. I want to make my photos look better, not look like something they are not. Tone down glare, make the blue sky a little bluer, make the colors of a butterfly 'pop'
Posted by: fluffy at December 18, 2012 04:01 PM (4pSIn)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at December 18, 2012 04:03 PM (JDIKC)
http://tinyurl.com/bmz6hst
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 04:04 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at December 18, 2012 04:07 PM (PMGbu)
Posted by: USS Diversity at December 18, 2012 04:09 PM (MPjT8)
In photography, the Sunny 16 rule is a method of estimating correct daylight exposures without a light meter. Apart from the obvious advantage of independence from a light meter, the Sunny 16 rule can also aid in achieving correct exposure of difficult subjects.
As the rule is based on incident light, rather than reflected light as with most camera light meters, very bright or very dark subjects are compensated for. The rule serves as a mnemonic for the camera settings obtained on a sunny day using the exposure value (EV) system.
The basic rule is, "On a sunny day set aperture to f/16 and shutter speed to the [reciprocal of the] ISO film speed [or ISO setting] for a subject in direct sunlight.
Posted by: 13times at December 18, 2012 04:09 PM (h6XiD)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 07:56 PM (m0h0I)
Lotta good stuff you RINO,
Thanks
Bookmarked it
Posted by: ontherocks at December 18, 2012 04:10 PM (aZ6ew)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 04:10 PM (4Mv1T)
Hulu now has all forty episodes of Sledge Hammer. I'm going to start watching all of them, I don't think it will take as much time as reading this post.
Posted by: lowandslow at December 18, 2012 04:11 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: beach at December 18, 2012 04:14 PM (LpQbZ)
One last thing--digital SLR bodies are basically the equivalent of computer towers, just chips & bits.
Buy a used body from two generations back--CHEAP. Three--CHEAPER.
Spend the money on the glass. Lenses make the difference.
Canon L glass on my 30d is better than a kit lens on a 1DX ($8k).
Posted by: Johnny I at December 18, 2012 07:52 PM (WPA+a)
Totally true, but you also need to keep in mind that "three generations back" is the equivalent of a 486 in terms of speed.
Just bought a new Panasonic "cross over" camera. It will take 12 flawless frames/second, do "panoramic" shots, has a glass Leica 18 - 300 zoom lens, and the wife loves it.
The whole rig was less than the lens we were considering for the Nikon we bought 4 years ago, and it's about 5 times faster.
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at December 18, 2012 04:17 PM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: Johnny I at December 18, 2012 04:17 PM (WPA+a)
Posted by: Tonic Dog at December 18, 2012 04:17 PM (X/+QT)
Posted by: Walkers! at December 18, 2012 04:18 PM (jWwDJ)
Posted by: beach at December 18, 2012 04:19 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: jazz & cocktails at December 18, 2012 04:20 PM (jSHRL)
One nice thing about digital versus the old film. Don't like a picture, just delete. When I had a 35mm SLR I took far fewer pictures.
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 04:21 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 04:23 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: beach at December 18, 2012 04:23 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 04:27 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 04:28 PM (V70Uh)
Posted by: Anna Puma
That, or it's mister lady bug with a fly on its face. You know, like TFG.
Posted by: sTevo at December 18, 2012 04:28 PM (VMcEw)
Posted by: D. Hopper at December 18, 2012 04:28 PM (AVfT8)
Not much love for digital here. I much prefer the primitive camera and hard film. But, I know it depends what sort of thing you're going for, as subject matter,with shooting. Digital is handy and I do use it sometimes, but, there's just something about it that doesn't look right. You can get a higher ratio of satisfactory pics with digital, but, when you get it right with film, nothing comes close. I reduce the overall costs involved in taking film shots by using bog standard cheap, disposable cameras and working hard at light conditions, shadow and framing to get results. It's a challenge, but worth it.
Posted by: otho at December 18, 2012 04:28 PM (yBF/9)
Posted by: Internet Dave Bowman at December 18, 2012 04:29 PM (OZPoa)
Posted by: Johnny I at December 18, 2012 04:30 PM (WPA+a)
Posted by: D. Hopper at December 18, 2012 04:30 PM (AVfT8)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 04:31 PM (79ueO)
Posted by: DC in Towson at December 18, 2012 04:33 PM (Ai+tZ)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 04:34 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: sTevo at December 18, 2012 04:34 PM (VMcEw)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 04:35 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at December 18, 2012 04:39 PM (+inzX)
http://is.gd/mYQQpg
Immediately after I got the shot, it took the water droplet and rubbed it over its antennae.
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 04:39 PM (m0h0I)
Just for shits and giggles, I tried to find my earliest post here, and was sad to see that the old comments appear to be gone.
ace cited me at the end of this old post, but the comments are broken
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/033066.php
Some of these old posts are still funny, though. go check out the archives
cough cough
Posted by: imp at December 18, 2012 04:40 PM (UaxA0)
Posted by: Truman North (D) at December 18, 2012 04:40 PM (I2LwF)
Posted by: beach at December 18, 2012 04:41 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: Thorvald at December 18, 2012 04:41 PM (1V6Pv)
I am reading a book written 20 years ago that says that we were screwed 20 years before that. So. Between my parents and my grandparents, they fucked me, figuratively. In a literal sense, they robbed me.
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 04:41 PM (V70Uh)
Posted by: beach at December 18, 2012 04:42 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at December 18, 2012 04:43 PM (+inzX)
I hate shutter lag. So much so that if I want to shoot the action photo's you were mentioning I will get down my Nikon F and load up a roll. My digital pocket camera is just a point and shoot 12 Mp. I get decent shoots with my cell phone but they are never used for action shots because the instant is long past by the time it takes the picture.
I got into B&W back in the early 70's and have a complete darkroom to dable in the 'dark arts' when I have a project. No digital camera can reproduce the way film captures a subject, I don't care how good your resolution is, how many megapixels or what camera body/lens setup you have. There is no substitute for intuition and good film. The only drawback is there's no 'instant gratification' of seeing what you just shot. I liked to say that digital photography gave the blind the ability to take excelent pictures just by pointing at noises they heard. Seeing some of the pictures from my own collection I can safely say my film shots are still better.
Bottom line, digital is fun because it is instant gratification and it does take a good picture, but film trumps digital, period.
Posted by: Gmac at December 18, 2012 04:43 PM (IanLz)
Posted by: beach at December 18, 2012 04:44 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: 13times at December 18, 2012 04:45 PM (h6XiD)
Posted by: Whatev at December 18, 2012 04:46 PM (2t6Gz)
@ 156 -- I'm way out on the far-western end of Kentucky in a town of about 350 people.
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 04:46 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 04:48 PM (79ueO)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 04:48 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: beach at December 18, 2012 04:49 PM (LpQbZ)
I've owned a lot of camera equipment over the years and I'm mostly a Nikon guy. My biggest regret was trading in my N90 for a DSLR. Now I have a D90 and a few Nikkor lenses, a Canon PowerShot A490 and a GoPro HERO2. I was quite the shutterbug for a while and even got some photos published in Equus Magazine, but mostly I used it for taking nekkid pictures of girlfriends
here's an example
http://tinypic.com/r/2dryj9i/6
Posted by: Jones in CO at December 18, 2012 04:50 PM (8sCoq)
Then, and only then, can you achieve calendar fame
Posted by: Cahrsel Jhonsno at December 18, 2012 04:50 PM (wwsoB)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 04:51 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: Gordon undead Ramsay at December 18, 2012 04:51 PM (9HhTH)
Come on, people! I used to have to read 20-30 pages of stuff like this every night when I was in college. You can do it!
He even gave you links so you could go look at an actual picture and then come back!
Make an effort to learn something! Good grief!
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 04:52 PM (GoIUi)
No digital camera can reproduce the way film captures a subject, I don't care how good your resolution is, how many megapixels or what camera body/lens setup you have. There is no substitute for intuition and good film.
Posted by: Gmac at December 18, 2012 08:43 PM
Amen.
Posted by: otho at December 18, 2012 04:52 PM (yBF/9)
Digital is my only option.
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 04:53 PM (GoIUi)
Posted by: I lurk, therefore I am at December 18, 2012 04:53 PM (Mt4hP)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 04:54 PM (79ueO)
Posted by: Gordon undead Ramsay at December 18, 2012 04:55 PM (9HhTH)
Hopefully posted by Maet or CDRM...
...or are we going to get an education on needle point or baking muffins???
Crafting your own panties???
Posted by: Portnoy at December 18, 2012 04:56 PM (A5Abh)
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 08:52 PM (GoIUi)
Effort is bad.
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Helping it burn. at December 18, 2012 04:56 PM (Gk3SS)
http://is.gd/mYQQpg
Immediately after I got the shot, it took the water droplet and rubbed it over its antennae.
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 08:39 PM (m0h0I)
Wow! That is fantastic!
Thanks for sharing it.
Posted by: Tami at December 18, 2012 04:57 PM (X6akg)
You really don't know my grandmother. She was FDR Democrat, Big Labor, Social Justice Catholic. Between Social Security and Medicare, she "fucked me".
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 04:58 PM (V70Uh)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 04:59 PM (79ueO)
http://tinypic.com/r/2dryj9i/6
Posted by: Jones in CO at December 18, 2012 08:50 PM
--------
Which one is your girlfriend? I mean, they're both lovely and all, but...
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 04:59 PM (ay6+/)
http://tinyurl.com/d8uglya
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 05:00 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 05:00 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 08:52 PM (GoIUi)
Seriously?? With the entire interwebs at my beck and call..I'm going to come to AOS to learn photography???
Really??
Posted by: Portnoy at December 18, 2012 05:01 PM (A5Abh)
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 08:59 PM (ay6+/)
ahhh ha ha
Posted by: Jones in CO at December 18, 2012 05:01 PM (8sCoq)
You really don't know my grandmother. She was FDR Democrat, Big Labor, Social Justice Catholic. Between Social Security and Medicare, she "fucked me".
That's hot.
Posted by: Oedipus at December 18, 2012 05:01 PM (4pSIn)
Posted by: Ronster at December 18, 2012 05:01 PM (JgkPs)
Yes and no. I think a lot of folks are confusing what the sensor is capable of, and what its limitations are. For instance (and I might have missed it as I left for a bit) nobody has gotten into the differences of sensors, sizes etc. micro 4/3, crop sensors or full frame to throw some out there. Or Bayer vs. Foveon.
While I miss film, each type had a particular color - the closest analog correlation would be analog audio tubes vs. solid state or digital. And that particular film, velvia, ektachrome, kodachrome etc. all had a certain look, some quite romantic. Accurate, no. Same with digital. Depending on brand of sensor - each has a particular color palette. Some prefer Canon, some Nikon, others Sony.
Film was also sensitive to light (no duh), but you needed things like UV filters. Today, you don't, but they'll try to sell 'em to you anyway.
The biggest advantage to digital is that you can post process the photos, which was nearly impossible to do in typical color photography days of old. Hence "airbrush" skills. In B&W you could do things like dodge and burn.
I'll say that analog LP's blow away CD's, but would pit digital against film, as much as I miss certain aspects of it. Of course, I'm talking about "consumer level" stuff, 35mm ratio. While a good full frame DSLR can take pics that can be blown up quite large (megapixels are a misnomer), nothing can compare to the resolution gained in a 4x5 piece of film.
Posted by: Clutch Cargo at December 18, 2012 05:02 PM (Qxdfp)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 05:02 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 05:02 PM (V70Uh)
Damnit.
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 09:00 PM (4Mv1T)
yeah that comment was written in a way to make you expect a different result at the link. we regret the inconvenience
Posted by: Jones in CO at December 18, 2012 05:03 PM (8sCoq)
Seriously?? With the entire interwebs at my beck and call..I'm going to come to AOS to learn photography???
Quit yer feckin whinin'
Posted by: fluffy at December 18, 2012 05:03 PM (4pSIn)
My mother was 42 when I was born.
Mercifully, I NEVER had any fantasies involving her.
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 05:04 PM (V70Uh)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 05:04 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: Tequila at December 18, 2012 05:04 PM (+KDIM)
Posted by: CDR M at December 18, 2012 05:05 PM (dKV5k)
Digital is my only option.
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 08:53 PM
Having nowhere to develop sucks. Film can be a pain. Digital does have it's own advantages.
Posted by: otho at December 18, 2012 05:06 PM (yBF/9)
Posted by: Jane D'oh, Life Coach at December 18, 2012 05:07 PM (UOM48)
Way O/T, but this, over at legalinsurrection is worth the read:
Does the cultural War on Young Men contribute to mass murders?
http://tinyurl.com/cvsdydy
Many of us have felt this, but here it is, again, reiterated.
Posted by: beach at December 18, 2012 08:44 PM (LpQbZ)
______________________________________________
I grew up in the 80s. Every day after school I played sports. Not organized sports, just pick up games with kids from schools or from the neighborhood. In summer/spring it was baseball. In fall it was football or soccer. In winter we went an outdoor skating rink and layed hokey. And (GHASP!!!) we didn't have pads or helmets, we just had fun.
And the other thing I remember was fighting. It happened all the time. Bloody noses at recess were common. Today? Jesus fucking christ, give a kid a bloody nose and you're suspended for a week.
And surprise surprise, 20 year olds lash out and kill 20 kids. I wonder why?
Oh and nobody was autistic either.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:07 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Jane D'oh, Life Coach at December 18, 2012 09:07 PM (UOM4
Jane you can get a scanner that accepts slides (I have a Nikon Coolscan IV) or you can get a photolab to scan them to CD
either way will cost you some $$
Posted by: Jones in CO at December 18, 2012 05:08 PM (8sCoq)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 05:09 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 05:10 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:10 PM (XDC0v)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 09:09 PM (4Mv1T)
_________________________
But his grandma indirectly fucked him by voting for that communist fuck 4 times. Well maybe not his grandma, but a hell of a lot of grandmas and grandpas.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:10 PM (HDgX3)
*adds to mental list of a zillion things I'll get around to some day*
Posted by: Jane D'oh, Life Coach at December 18, 2012 05:12 PM (UOM48)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 05:13 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:13 PM (XDC0v)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 05:14 PM (79ueO)
Every time I see a "DO YOU KNOW YOUR FARMER" bumper sticker on a Subaru I feel like keying it. Who gives a fuck if I know my farmer? I don't know the guy in China building my iPad. I don't know the guy in California maintaining the Google servers I use every day. I don't know the chemist that makes the medication I take. I don't know 99% of the people that make the shit I use every day. So what's so damn special about a farmer that I have to know him on a personal basis?
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:15 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Tequila at December 18, 2012 05:15 PM (+KDIM)
Did I tell you that mom's birthday is December 21st? She is what the Mayans were trying to warn us about.
Posted by: Gordon undead Ramsay at December 18, 2012 05:15 PM (9HhTH)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 09:13 PM (XDC0v)
_______________
Bullshit. FDR was no different than Obama. He was selling free stuff to the masses. And they voted for it. The Free Shit Army of the 30s was no better than the Free Shit Army of the 2010s.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:16 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Whatev at December 18, 2012 05:16 PM (2t6Gz)
Posted by: Tequila at December 18, 2012 05:17 PM (+KDIM)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at December 18, 2012 05:17 PM (+inzX)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 09:15 PM
-----------------
Hell, I barely know my proctologist.
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 05:18 PM (ay6+/)
Get ready to chew up some serious hard drive space because each pic is 12+mb.
I use IrfanView to view image files and they have a plugin to view raw images.
I have to remind my daughter to turn on raw data when taking serious shots and to turn it off while goofing around.
Posted by: sTevo at December 18, 2012 05:18 PM (VMcEw)
and shoot digital camera, but dSLR's are another matter. My gadget
bag is a honking backpack with 2 bodies, 8 lenses, flash, macro ring flash,
filters, etc.....
It weighs near 70 pounds. I became a compulsive collector of photographic
equipment. I spent nearly a grand on a 200-500mm zoom, only to find out
that it needed a 500 dollar tripod to keep such a lens steady.
All this to take family photos on Thanksgiving and Christmas for the most
part. Apart from the USS Iowa, the Fort MacArthur museum and the
Long Beach Aquarium, I have done little else.
My advice: Do not go overboard. Buy a decent high end point and shoot
camera. Learn to use your photo editing software and purchase a decent
photo printer.
Posted by: Leonard Jones at December 18, 2012 05:19 PM (Hfmdr)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 05:19 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:19 PM (XDC0v)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:21 PM (XDC0v)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 05:21 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Tequila at December 18, 2012 09:17 PM (+KDIM)
__________________
Google - one of the most liberal companies ever - has its data centers in GA, SC, NC, IA and, OK. What do all of these have in common? They are all Right To Work States.
Hypocrites as usual.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:22 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 09:21 PM
------------
Yes.
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 05:23 PM (ay6+/)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 09:19 PM (XDC0v)
______________________
What does that have to do with anything? People in the 30s voted for free shit from the govt. Doesn't matter if they were Beaver Cleaver or not.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:23 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 05:23 PM (4Mv1T)
A thousand cases of Scotch never erase the neglect of the one grandparent that was alive and showed no affection.
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 05:24 PM (V70Uh)
As for view RAW images, aside from Adobe Lightroom (which costs actual money) I like Picasa. From what I gather, it supports just about every image format. And it's a pretty handy image library organizer as well.
http://picasa.google.com/
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 05:24 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:25 PM (XDC0v)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 09:21 PM
--------------
...but seriously, the Corsair. Always the Corsair. Please post links!
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 05:25 PM (ay6+/)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 05:26 PM (uis79)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 05:27 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 05:27 PM (79ueO)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 05:27 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:28 PM (XDC0v)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 09:26 PM (uis79)
__________________-
I disagree. The population knows exactly what it's voting for. The choice is
a) work and buy your own shit
b) don't work and get everything for free
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. We talk about how Democrats are stupid all the time. They're not stupid. They're lazy. And actually they're kinda smart since they figured out they can have everything we have without having to lift a finger for it. And the same was true in the 1930s.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:28 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 05:29 PM (V70Uh)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:30 PM (XDC0v)
A thousand cases of Scotch never erase the neglect of the one grandparent that was alive and showed no affection.
Someone needs a hug.
I'll go look for a volunteer.
Posted by: fluffy at December 18, 2012 05:30 PM (4pSIn)
In photographic terms, you really need to expand your depth of field.
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 09:27 PM (4Mv1T)
_______________________
I've studies plenty of history including the Great Depression. Here's a little history lesson for you. Prior to the GD, there was no such thing as a recession. An economic contraction was called a depression. The GD was called the GREAT Depression simply because it went on as long as it did (thanks to FDR's policies). Prior to the 30s there had been several other depressions. And they self-corrected. And fast, usually within 2-3 years. It was only in the 1930s when Americans decided to give communism a try. So spare me the bullshit about it was a depression, people had no choice. They did have a choice. And they chose the easy way out.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:31 PM (HDgX3)
Yeah! The "grandmother" didn't love me. But hey, The wife still loves me after 35 years. I am not a complete failure.
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 05:32 PM (V70Uh)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:32 PM (XDC0v)
So what's so damn special about a farmer that I have to know him on a personal basis?
=====
What are you, an anti-farmite? Next you'll be saying they should have their own special land.
Posted by: USS Diversity at December 18, 2012 05:32 PM (MPjT8)
Posted by: Obama at December 18, 2012 05:33 PM (2t6Gz)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 05:34 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:35 PM (XDC0v)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 05:35 PM (79ueO)
Posted by: DAve at December 18, 2012 05:37 PM (XDC0v)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 05:37 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 05:38 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 09:27 PM
------
Not a damn clue. I love the Corsair, though. I didn't know you were talking about what I know as an F4U until I googled the pics already. I'll go back and read now.
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 05:38 PM (ay6+/)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 05:38 PM (uis79)
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 05:39 PM (V70Uh)
The difference is like watching porn and f**king.
Would that analogy work better if you had lived through the depression?
I think it closer to the difference between watching porn and peeping on your neighbors fucking.
Posted by: fluffy at December 18, 2012 05:40 PM (4pSIn)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 05:40 PM (uis79)
THERE WAS NO WORK IN THE DEPRESSION. That is why people went to work in the WPA or the CCC! NO WORK. My grandfather was a pressman for our local paper and was put on half pay, and it is why my father couldn't go to college and instead enlisted in the Army and got paid a pittance and was glad to be fed!
Are you unfamiliar with the Dust Bowl? Bread Lines? Malnutrition? People living in lean-to's? Hoovervilles? People putting newspaper in their shoes with holes? The mother of one of my best friends in high school lived in a damn CHICKEN HOUSE! And people had no TV, no internet, no air-conditioning, few telephones, and no way to get to another state if they were too poor to buy a car (which most were). My husband's family were sharecroppers and his grandfather lost his farm in the Dust Bowl.
So get over yourself. You have no understanding of what the Depression was like.
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 05:41 PM (GoIUi)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 05:41 PM (79ueO)
Tend to disagree, the demographic shift has been to create a large segment of the population that are willing to sit on their asses and get enough stuff for free without working.
With our entitlement society in high gear, the level of today's free enough is beyond the expectations of Louis XIV!
With our disastrous educational system coupled with our deliberate demographic shift, the percentage of the population that are totally incapable of understanding fiscal collapse is high enough that of course they would opt for free stuff. Hell, most of them have never seen anybody that earned the money to pay for anything!
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at December 18, 2012 05:42 PM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 05:42 PM (4Mv1T)
Wasn't there a chapter that involved someone leaving livestock on the back porch in payment for legal services?
Posted by: Al at December 18, 2012 05:42 PM (V70Uh)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 05:43 PM (piMMO)
FG-1D : F for Fighter [First contract so the 1 is omitted] G is manufacturer designation, in this case Goodyear. - 1 First variant. D sub-variant in this case this Corsair, like the F4U-1D, has a center line rack for a bomb or drop tank.
Goodyear later made the Super Corsairs. They were intended to deal with the kamikaze threat. These Corsairs had an R-4360 28 cylinder corn-cob motor. They were called F2G Corsairs.
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 05:45 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 05:45 PM (uis79)
Posted by: Jones in CO at December 18, 2012 05:46 PM (8sCoq)
-----
Awesome. Thanks! This really IS a smart military blog!
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 05:46 PM (ay6+/)
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 05:46 PM (GoIUi)
OK that's an easy one. How about between watching porn and watching your college roommate have sex with is girlfriend in the next bed?
Are they ok with me watching, or do I have to pretend I am asleep?
Posted by: fluffy at December 18, 2012 05:47 PM (4pSIn)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 09:45 PM
-----
Dude, wadn't me.
Posted by: Bill at December 18, 2012 05:47 PM (ay6+/)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 05:47 PM (79ueO)
Posted by: Northern Lurker at December 18, 2012 05:47 PM (Q2kbX)
Its kind of like electing a guy with no fucking experience at anything except running his mouth, smoking a joint and jerking his dick to be president.
Unheard of in a sane world.
Posted by: jeremiah God Damn Barack Obama the Mother Fucking SCoaMF wright at December 18, 2012 05:47 PM (ovpNn)
Posted by: Captain Whitebread at December 18, 2012 05:48 PM (5J54Q)
Posted by: sTevo at December 18, 2012 05:48 PM (VMcEw)
How many really believe Hillary fainted and has a concussion?
=====
She may have fainted but her cankles would hold her up, preventing a concussion.
Posted by: USS Diversity at December 18, 2012 05:48 PM (MPjT8)
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 09:46 PM (GoIUi)
She will be unable to recall anything.
Also, Anna Puma should explain that "UH" designates rotary-winged aircraft.
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at December 18, 2012 05:48 PM (Qxe/p)
I posted 2 linx to 6 photos
Posted by: Jones in CO at December 18, 2012 05:49 PM (8sCoq)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 05:49 PM (79ueO)
Well, you didn't think they were going to blame me, did you? Come on.
Posted by: Teflon Obama at December 18, 2012 05:49 PM (2IW5Q)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 05:49 PM (uis79)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 05:49 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 05:50 PM (uis79)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 09:45 PM
fainted? sure.
fell and got a concussion?
Physically impossible.
She has cankles that are 46 inches in diameter. That type of wide base stabilization precludes any possibility of her losing her balance and falling down.
Posted by: jeremiah God Damn Barack Obama the Mother Fucking SCoaMF wright at December 18, 2012 05:50 PM (ovpNn)
Does she really strike anyone as the fainting type? Whalebone corset too tight? Bolton is right, as usual.
Posted by: Splunge at December 18, 2012 05:50 PM (2IW5Q)
Posted by: CDR M at December 18, 2012 05:51 PM (dKV5k)
From what I have seen, all AoS threads eventually become NSFSC!
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at December 18, 2012 05:51 PM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Thorvald at December 18, 2012 05:51 PM (1V6Pv)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 05:51 PM (79ueO)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 05:52 PM (QdVWw)
Although good taste and manners does prevent cheering and cat calling.
Rare commodities in this joint.
Posted by: fluffy at December 18, 2012 05:52 PM (4pSIn)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:53 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: CDR M at December 18, 2012 05:53 PM (dKV5k)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 09:51 PM (79ueO)
Pocket change compared to what Obama's paying the FSA for their votes!
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at December 18, 2012 05:53 PM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Zakn at December 18, 2012 05:54 PM (zyaZ1)
Posted by: Vince Foster at December 18, 2012 09:49 PM
----------------
"Oh, look at me. I have a great alibi!". Asshole. Some guys get all the luck.
Posted by: Bill at December 18, 2012 05:54 PM (ay6+/)
Tax rates for those making up to $4000 those making $1000000
1932-33
4
4,000
63
1,000,000
1934-35
3 4
4,000
63
1,000,000
1936-39
3 4
4,000
79
5,000,000
1940
3 4.4
4,000
81.1
5,000,000
Posted by: harleycowboy at December 18, 2012 05:55 PM (+9AX9)
Posted by: Hrothgar
I know. I am as guilty as anyone for R-rated comments.
Unrelated...
Wifey just asked "what's with the bug?"
Posted by: sTevo at December 18, 2012 05:55 PM (VMcEw)
Posted by: Granite at December 18, 2012 05:55 PM (INNvP)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 05:56 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Vince Foster at December 18, 2012 09:49 PM
----------------
"Oh, look at me. I have a great alibi!". Asshole. Some guys get all the luck.
Posted by: Bill at December 18, 2012 09:54 PM (ay6+/)
My alibi is really unimpeachable!
Posted by: Vince Foster at December 18, 2012 05:56 PM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 05:56 PM (uis79)
The average American in the 1930's didn't even have a high school diploma. They didn't know what communism was. Most people of that era only knew Stalin when he was FDR's ally.
No internet. No television. No tie to read many books because you were trying to survive.
Get off your superior attitude about my grandparents' generation. They worked hard and did the best they could. Plus, the only information they had was from newspapers and radio.
I think you need to go talk to some people in their 80's and find out what it was like back in the 1930's.
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 05:56 PM (GoIUi)
Posted by: Ronald Reagan at December 18, 2012 05:57 PM (INNvP)
Maybe it is just me, but your formatting is so bad I can't understand your point!
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at December 18, 2012 05:58 PM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 05:58 PM (QdVWw)
____________________
Hey man times were tough dontcha know. It was perfectly fine for Comrade Roosevelt to impose an 81% tax rate. But don't you dare call the people who voted from him moochers!! On the other hand anyone who voted for Obama and his 39.6% tax rate needs to be shot.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:58 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Thorvald at December 18, 2012 05:58 PM (1V6Pv)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 09:49 PM
---------
Jeez, I couldn't to save my life without google/bing. I know what 109s are but was never much fascinated despite its technical niftiness. As a kid I used to drool for hours over pictures of F4Us and P51s. Two sexy-ass planes, dammit.
I never did know about that steroided-up big 'ole motor version of the Corsair. Cool stuff.
Posted by: Lurking Flaneur at December 18, 2012 05:59 PM (ay6+/)
Posted by: David Duke at December 18, 2012 05:59 PM (m50qE)
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at December 18, 2012 09:58 PM (Cnqmv)
___________
His point is the tax rate under FDR was 81% for evil rich people.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 05:59 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 09:56 PM (uis79)
_________________
It's not hard to understand what happens when you steal from some people to give to other people using the govt as a means of perpetrating the theft.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 06:00 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 09:56 PM (QdVWw)
Having once been a plane captain in VF-24 (merged into VF-211), I'm guessing the V stands for "fixed wing", and the F stands for "fighter". If it would have been VA-214 or whatever, that would be "fixed wing attack".
Am I close?
(My rate was AQF, by the way)
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at December 18, 2012 06:00 PM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 06:00 PM (uis79)
Posted by: Ronster at December 18, 2012 06:01 PM (JgkPs)
There was no concept of the welfare state as it exists now back then. Not even close.
FDR raised taxes on the poorest by about 250% during his term in office.
Posted by: @PurpAv at December 18, 2012 06:01 PM (INNvP)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 06:02 PM (piMMO)
No internet. No television. No tie to read many books because you were trying to survive.
Get off your superior attitude about my grandparents' generation. They worked hard and did the best they could. Plus, the only information they had was from newspapers and radio.
I think you need to go talk to some people in their 80's and find out what it was like back in the 1930's.
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 18, 2012 09:56 PM (GoIUi)
_____________________
LOL. So voting for a guy who promises to steal from the rich and give to the poor was OK because they didn't have TV or the internet. Your argument is basically people in the 1930s were too stupid to understand what was happening. Please!
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 06:03 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: jeremiah God Damn Barack Obama the Mother Fucking SCoaMF wright at December 18, 2012 06:03 PM (ovpNn)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 06:04 PM (4Mv1T)
And, also, whining is fun to read.
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 06:04 PM (m0h0I)
Its okay Flanuer. Only reason I even know is because of Hans Joachim Marseilles aka the Star of Africa. Even now thinking about it makes me cross-eyed. If you really want to know I can try and rattle it off.
http://annapuna.blogspot.com/2011/07/star-of-africa.html
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 06:04 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Captain Whitebread at December 18, 2012 09:48 PM
Dammit, man. Instamatics are fucking great!
Posted by: otho at December 18, 2012 06:05 PM (yBF/9)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 06:05 PM (piMMO)
#1.) Those are the marginal rates not the effective rates
#2.) Tax Loopholes were extensive
#3.) The number of people in the upper bracket were very small relative to today, hence the consequences to the economy were very much diminished compared to today.
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 10:00 PM (uis79)
+++++++
So 81% marginal tax rates are OK as long as not too many people are affected. I'll remember that next time you freak out over a 39.6% tax rate applied to 1-2% of the population.
Don't you see the hypocrisy? We get all agitaed over a 39.6% tax rate and yet we're supposed to excuse an 81% tax rate from FDR because....well it was the 30s and times were tough.
Bullshit
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 06:05 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 06:06 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 06:06 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 06:08 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 06:08 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: D. Hopper at December 18, 2012 06:09 PM (AVfT8)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 06:09 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 06:09 PM (uis79)
Posted by: David Duke at December 18, 2012 06:09 PM (m50qE)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 10:06 PM (4Mv1T)
______________
I may be an idiot. But I'm not a hypocrite like you.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 06:09 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at December 18, 2012 06:09 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 06:10 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: Capt. Backfire at December 18, 2012 06:10 PM (mkb9H)
I've heard somewheres that a Freshette will remove sand from the vaginal orifii so you could recommend that also.
Grow your own oysters!
Posted by: fluffy at December 18, 2012 06:10 PM (4pSIn)
Posted by: D. Hopper at December 18, 2012 06:10 PM (AVfT8)
Posted by: RalphT5 at December 18, 2012 06:10 PM (qoD83)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 06:13 PM (QdVWw)
Government wasn't something that affected most people back then as obviously as it does today.
News of arcane things like Federal economic policy traveled slow if it traveled at all in the hinterlands, and trust in the government and media was higher.
I'd use "naive" rather than "stupid" to describe a rural nation that didn't have indoor plumbing or electricity in many areas. Its a grave mistake to conflate rural and uneducated with stupid.
Posted by: @PurpAv at December 18, 2012 06:13 PM (INNvP)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at December 18, 2012 06:13 PM (4Mv1T)
I received a call from one of my renters. A guy I let live at my warehouse was passed out on the floor, inside the door. He said he looked like he was beat up. I went to the warehouse and Larry was still on the floor with a blanket. He had blood on his face. He came around a bit and I asked what happened. Woozy, he answered he didn't know. He said he had vomited and crapped blood the night before. I looked in the bathroom and there was a pool of blood on the floor. He tried to stand but quickly sank back to the floor. He seemed to have a temperature and was shaking violently. I called 911 and they took him to the emergency. They rehydrated him and he is currently in ICU. Tests will begin tomorrow to see where the GI bleed is and why. I may have saved a mans life today.
Posted by: Ohio (Must a been on crack) Dan at December 18, 2012 06:14 PM (JKNDp)
Posted by: D. Hopper at December 18, 2012 06:14 PM (AVfT8)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 18, 2012 06:15 PM (79ueO)
Obama is the devil himself for wanting a top rate of 39.6%
But FDR was just doing what he could to help the country when he imposed a top rate of 81%. Cuz you know, it was like tough living in the 30s and stuff.
I need some of that scotch.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 06:15 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: @PurpAv at December 18, 2012 06:15 PM (INNvP)
Those are some gorgeous hummingbird shots at 354. Looking forward to running through the rest!
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 06:15 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: Ostral B Heretic at December 18, 2012 06:16 PM (79AXR)
Theron is quite attractive, but Grace Kelly was stunningly beautiful....one of the most magnificent women in history.
Marlyn was no porker either.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at December 18, 2012 06:17 PM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 06:17 PM (QdVWw)
I still like the dog and feet photo from the porch series.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at December 18, 2012 06:18 PM (GsoHv)
This was even longer than something Ace would post.
Posted by: Dogbert at December 18, 2012 06:18 PM (jWMIO)
News of arcane things like Federal economic policy traveled slow if it traveled at all in the hinterlands, and trust in the government and media was higher.
I'd use "naive" rather than "stupid" to describe a rural nation that didn't have indoor plumbing or electricity in many areas. Its a grave mistake to conflate rural and uneducated with stupid.
Posted by: @PurpAv at December 18, 2012 10:13 PM (INNvP)
________________
I'd maybe buy this argument for the 1932 election when people didn't really understand what FDR was all about. But in 1936 they re-elected him with 65% of the vote. And re-elected him again in 1940. It didn't take news 8 years to travel to the hinterlands in the 30s. They knew exactly what they were voting for in 1936 and 1940. FDR promised (and to his credit delivered) a whole bunch of freebies. And the people liked the freebies and voted for more.
** And yes I know he was re-elected in 1944 as well but that had more to do with the war than economics.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 18, 2012 06:19 PM (HDgX3)
There are "a bunch" of designations for aircraft carriers.
http://tinyurl.com/br5dsd2
(I was on CVA-19 -- which I believe was the first one to be fitted with an angle deck after damage in the Battle of Leyte Gulf). It still (in 196
had a bent prop shaft, which made the cruise between Hawaii and the Philippines seem like sitting on a vibrating cell phone for 10 days. VF-24 at the time flew the F8-J Crusader.
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at December 18, 2012 06:19 PM (Qxe/p)
Soaking the rich is a play ever populist makes. Every single time. In any country. In any era. Whenever there's problems.
Its a universal constant, like the speed of light. If you're rich you can, move or ride it out. Whining gets you either reviled (as in the US), or more drastic measures as in France with the Jacobins. The Nazis weren't to gentle with pissy German aristocracy either.
Posted by: @PurpAv at December 18, 2012 06:20 PM (INNvP)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at December 18, 2012 06:22 PM (Rhie+)
While this post is interesting and informative, it doesn't help me take photos that make my junk look bigger.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at December 18, 2012 10:22 PM (Rhie+)
That's a depth of field issue. Use a low F-stop.
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at December 18, 2012 06:23 PM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 06:23 PM (m0h0I)
F-8 Crusader, when you are out of Crusaders out of gunslingers. VF-24 the Red Rippers right?
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 06:23 PM (QdVWw)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at December 18, 2012 10:22 PM (Rhie+)
Try mine.
Posted by: Anthony Wiener at December 18, 2012 06:25 PM (GsoHv)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 06:25 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 18, 2012 10:23 PM (QdVWw)
Fighting Renegades.
We did have a red checkerboard tail designation.
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at December 18, 2012 06:27 PM (Qxe/p)
Staying out of the European "unpleasantness". That's what they thought they were voting for.
Landon got 7 EV. He was a joke candidate. Even McGovern picked up 17.
Willkie in 1940 won 8 more states than Landon, so the grumbling was starting.
Posted by: @PurpAv at December 18, 2012 06:30 PM (INNvP)
Posted by: Walter Sobchak at December 18, 2012 06:30 PM (uis79)
Posted by: LaughingOutLoud! at December 18, 2012 06:36 PM (keqxh)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 06:40 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: and irresolute at December 18, 2012 06:47 PM (DBH1h)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 18, 2012 06:50 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: Anon at December 19, 2012 04:34 AM (fh3lh)
This post rocks, DDRINO. Wealth of knowledge.
I guess some of this applies to my point and shoot that has the ASPM settings and the running dude... so I'll start there.
Posted by: SnowSun at December 19, 2012 06:19 AM (UAUr6)
Thanks to everyone for all the comments. And if I overlooked anyone's comment, I apologize. I tried to keep up the best I could, but I'm just not used to actually having people respond.
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 19, 2012 08:41 AM (m0h0I)
Posted by: Trubador at December 19, 2012 09:27 AM (MlrAE)
Also, one review I read stated that it was pretty impressive in the shutter lag. So, of the three, I'd say that's the one to go with. I can't overstate the importance of being able to shoot in RAW format. That's not to say you'd want to do it all the time, because the files are pretty big. So, it may not be particularly useful for casual snapshots and candids. But, if you want the best image quality for landscapes, macros, etc., it's a huge benefit.
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 19, 2012 10:55 AM (m0h0I)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at December 19, 2012 11:10 AM (m0h0I)
Posted by: The inexplicable Dr. Julius Strangepork at December 20, 2012 02:17 PM (mw5ai)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.331 seconds, 520 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Considering waiting until after March Madness. at December 18, 2012 03:06 PM (Gk3SS)