Halloween Pics, Anyone?

Shaw said:
Sorry, I'm honestly not following you here. :) I certainly mean no offense and I never did address the legal aspect of the issue.
Click to expand...

The only argument for mandating things like that that people can ever come up with is "But if you hurt yourself, it costs everybody more because we have to pay higher insurance premiums and..." and blah blah blah. Which may very well be true. But there is no reason in the world why an insurance company can't have their policy state "no seatbelt = no payout", so it's a non-starter.
 
This was our pumpkin this year:


jcko1ox.jpg
 
Come on Shaw, you post regularly on DVXUSER... is there a question as to brain damage
Click to expand...

Hahaha! The man speaks the truth! I suspect doing something stupid must be the usual initiation right to post on DVXuser (who hasn't done something stupid like hurting oneself, asking "what's that click" or "wondered "what's a DVX?). Maybe not for Barry Green though... :huh:

Just pookin' fun, no offense.
Click to expand...

Oh, hey, no worries! I'm a very hard guy to offend. I think I've only been offended over the internet once and that had nothing to do with DVXuser. :thumbsup:

GenJerDan: My sincere apologies if I ended up offending you. It certainly wasn't my intent. I see your point with regard to laws (though I wasn't ever meaning to address that aspect of the issue).
 
Halloween party from 2 years ago....

me.....no costume that year....but i didnt get any pics this year cuz i have to get my lazy ass to the CVS to develop them..

me....reallly partied hard...really messed up...:thumbsup:
fakerussian7mm.png


....I'm still trying to remember wat happened that night....all i kno is that i woke up at my friends house the next morning..next to his dog....ahh!
 
NBC... I've always enjoyed your pictures VERY much. I'm addicted to them. It's pretty easy to see you are the human lens.

Is that the D70 still? I'm also wondering about the settings and picture details... the one above that says "favorite NBC soundguy and girlfriend". Is there any photoshop applied there? I mean anything. CC or otherwise? Also would you please comment on the lens?

I've got a Canon G6 (yeah not pro I know) and I was happy with the pics I got with that until I first saw the original "pics" thread. Before digital I shot with a Canon Elan II and Yashica manual with some high-end glass. The Yashica did so good that I thought I'd never go digital... I had a crappy-snappy digi just for manipulation, but I never considered it a serious cam.

So please gimme' some details on that shot! Aside from personal skills and composition what does it take to get a picture like that!?
 
MattinSTL said:
Is that the D70 still?
Click to expand...

Yes it is. I would tell you more detail as F-stop, shutter speed, ISO, and others, but I am not sure he would want that.

And I agree, great pics. I use a D70 from tim to time and for only a 6.1 megapixel, the results are incredible.
 
I've been shooting stills 5x longer then I've been shooting video. If I put a 70-200L on an Elan I could take the same picture. I was just wondering about the current state of digital and the quality of the stock lens you get on a D70. (I've got a 1.2 glass which could get that much blur in half that distance actually... for the manual Yash.)

This post is mainly to bump this thread... so hopefully NBC will help a bro out! All I want to know is glass/photoshop so I know if it's time to go DSLR or not... financially.
 
Well, thanks for the kind words, guys! Yes, that's all shot with my D70. I have my Nikon SB-800 flash with some HMI-to-Tungsten correction gel taped to the front, connected to my Nikon SC-29 remote TTL cable (the TTL sensor sits in the hot shoe). This enables off-camera, TTL-controlled flash exposure. The shot is taken with one hand, while I hold the flash in my left hand, pointing at a white wall. The TTL takes care of the SB-800 exposure. There is absolutely no Photoshop or color correction work in either shot, except resizing for web publication (changed dpi to 72 and saved as .JPGs at a quality of '9').

Shot 1:

Nikon D70 @ ISO 200, 20mm f/2.8 Nikkor AF-D, f/2.8 @ 1/60th, matrix-metering, Tungsten white balance, off-camera flash (corrected to Tungsten) w/SB-800/SC-29 remote TTL cable.

Shot 2:

Nikon D70 @ ISO 200, 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor AF-D, f/1.4 @ 1/60th, matrix-metering, Tungsten white balance, off-camera flash (corrected to Tungsten) w/SB-800/SC-29 remote TTL cable.
 
Rapier_100a said:
Yes it is. I would tell you more detail as F-stop, shutter speed . . .
Click to expand...
Is the metadata still viewable somehow in that file? How do you do that? I actually just guessed at the shutter speed in my above post and would like to know what it actually was. By the way, I always shoot in aperture priority, but USUALLY shoot in spot meter mode, not matrix metering. I only use matrix metering if I'm doing a daylight exterior fill-flash or a bounce flash interior.
 
MattinSTL said:
I was just wondering about the current state of digital and the quality of the stock lens you get on a D70.
Click to expand...
I think the stock lens is excellent--it's a Nikkor 18-70mm AF-S f/3.5-4.5. Being an AF-S lens, it focuses very fast. But I NEVER shoot with it. I only shoot with my fast fixed lenses so I can narrow my depth of field, or shoot with available light. Anything slower than f/2.8, I never seem to mount on my camera.
 
NBCshooter said:
Is the metadata still viewable somehow in that file? How do you do that? I actually just guessed at the shutter speed in my above post and would like to know what it actually was. By the way, I always shoot in aperture priority, but USUALLY shoot in spot meter mode, not matrix metering. I only use matrix metering if I'm doing a daylight exterior fill-flash or a bounce flash interior.
Click to expand...


Check your PM.
 
Yeah I'm not a big fan of slow glass either. I'm glad you cleared that up for me. So the answer (at least for me) is to wait because I'd be dissappointed in the stock glass and I can't afford much more this season. (I went nuts on sound already.)

You're a HUGE plus to the forum NBC. We're lucky to have you. Thanks for helping me out on the photo info.

I've bought textbooks on photography when I was going to community college for computers... just to learn as much as I could. That's at least 8 years ago now, and I'm telling you that if you compiled a book of all your best shots it would sell. They're always excellent in color, comp, and interesting subject matter... plus technically excellent. Call the book, "Through the eyes of an NBC cameraman". I'd buy it.

In the second shot... was that luck? The expression on your GF's face I mean... or was she already clowning around? Or was there any posing at all?

When I first looked at the picture the far-far background makes it appear like her hair is flying out to the left (from our perspective) which creates a perfect story image with the creepy expression on jack the ripper and the cute girl looking all frivelous and throwing her hair around while she smirks in the background. Like I said it is just simply technically excellent. If anything I only wish her hair really was flying out to the side like that. It would say that she was dancing or something as jack is so still and ominous in our faces.

Sorry if I'm over-analyzing. I just like your shots dude.
 
Rapier_100a said:
Check your PM.
Click to expand...
Oh, thanks. Yup, it's all there! Didn't know that if you re-saved as .JPG out of Photoshop, all that data was still there. By the way, the settings I remembered are correct!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top