|
Good shots anti
|
not a fan of the tv/moniter shots, but i love the others.
|
Thats not anti
|
LOL seriously. On the internet's peoples have names spelled out for ya.
Nice shots Jackal. |
Oooooh my bad those just look exactly like anti's style. Good shots..
|
ok so im planning on getting a d40 - but im still on the fench of weather i would use such a expensive camera to its full advantage.
with the design work i do for print and web work i suppose its a good thing and i like photography at the moment even though i seldom use my dodgy kodak 3mega pixel lol. is it really worth it? gah i cant decide |
d12 is better
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
|
watermark makes me angry.
and does that last pic look like it's CGI to anyone else? good shots though, I like them. |
the last one just has a bunch of adjustments made to it
|
i dig the last one
|
Quote:
im sure i will work wonders with it but its just weird having such a large expensive camera, not something i can just stick in my pocket and go snowboarding with |
second is my fav, nice man
|
Quote:
However, there are enough lens choices out there where if you got the D40 you will not be lacking in glass. |
hey guys its been a long time since I got on these forums.
I've gotten a great deal. My friend found a Nikon d40 with the lens, in an abandon building and its been a year now and I asked him if I can take it off his hands for $200.00 I checked out the camera. But I was thinking would it be worth it just to buy a new one with a warranty just in case something were to happen to it. What do you think? |
check the camera out, if it works then take the deal. i doubt something will happen.
|
found it in an abandoned building lol?
|
D40 for 200 is a fine deal. Incredible actually, especially if it is your first DSLR.
|
Quote:
|
He told me its a place where people go smoke pot and have parties and shit. But it is a run down building.
|
whoa, old people
|
here few of the older cameras my dad has in his collection and thought it might interest.
http://jesusburger.net/upload/camera1.jpghttp://jesusburger.net/upload/camera2.jpg http://jesusburger.net/upload/camera3.jpghttp://jesusburger.net/upload/camera4.jpg |
top left looks pretty sweet. i see a lot of those i think land cameras they call them whippersnappers; where the lens moves in and out.
|
i just bought a polaroid super colorpack land camera. it looks amazing and the shutter works, but the film was horridly coroded, and i have no idea what kind it uses, or how to develope it or whatever, anyone know anything about this camera or a website with info on it? google has failed me, or i just suck at the interweb
|
I got the it. But I still need to pay him little by little. I started my new job on an off week. I don't get paid till the 28th. (No gifts for my family yet or friends). I think 50 bucks when I get paid and maybe the rest later since I need the money.
But I must say, Its a fine SLR. I need some tips though, I love everyone's work here. I need to learn from the masters :) |
any good sites or books i should look into for more like complicated tips than the beginners type guide that came with this d40?
|
Omg Your Tree Is Melting!!!!111
|
|
Looks a little underexposed - if you dont mind, my edit of it correcting for exposure:
http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/9056/tgbeditxm7.jpg As for books on techniques; if you're fairly new with one of those in your hands, I would suggest Understanding Exposure, by Bryan Peterson. You'll be amazed at how clearer things become when you understand just how thee three camera mains - iso, aperture and shutter speed - combine together to make a great photo. |
to me though that looks over exposed now and just shouts saturation/contrast
|
Some shots from atop Rumney rattlesnake in NH this fall. All were kinda dull so they have been adjusted
1 http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/8216/dsc4489by5.jpg 2 http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/3000/dsc4485cs7.jpg 3 http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/874/dsc4484bo6.jpg 4 http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/7173/dsc4524gy8.jpg 5 http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/6263/dsc4523lt2.jpg |
ease up on the shadow/highlights tool.
elstat, ed pretty much nailed it. look around on the net and understand aperture (it's affect on depth of field), iso (it's affect on grain) and shutter (effect on motion) and you'll be good. |
i understand in some sense, maybe if the photo was exposed better towards what ed did but im just getting at is that that looks like obvious after editing in photoshop where the sides look choppy and such from such bright contrast/saturation
|
The reason I suggested it was underexposed was from looking at the histogram. A lot of people will say "oh thats over/underexposed" and be going off person preference instead of what the numbers say. In the histogram of the original theres alot of information in the darks, but theres nothing past maybe 180 (on a grey scale of 0-255), which means you lost information in the light section of the photograph.
As for the noise (the choppiness you see) - you can see that evidenced in the original photograph as well; I'm guessing that the auto-iso setting chose something a little high, maybe 400 or 800 - not too familiar on how well the D40 handles noise at higher isos, but bringing out the highlights in a photograph will do that. |
wait, i fucked up earlier. my ease up comment was towards sniper101.
i would like a medium between your original elstat and ed's edit. to me, yeah, his is a bit overexposed and crazy. definitely a good shot though. i never look at my histogram, never unless i want to make sure i have information in certain areas. to me; i play it by eye. for the most part it's subjective. |
|
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.12 by ScriptzBin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1998 - 2007 by Rudedog Productions | All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners. All rights reserved.