[QUOTE=bopie;29708750]That's because it's photojournalism. You can't apply that to all photography. Photography isn't a genre of art, it's a medium.[/QUOTE]
Who cares. If an image is thought provoking or interesting enough, does it matter what the purpose of the image is? I'd say anything that I look at for a long time is art to me. We talked about this for a while in my history class, it's a really deep picture on multiple levels.
[QUOTE=Nonikai;29705398]A camera is a camera
look at all the great shots that /B/rother pushes out with his sony
why is that funny[/QUOTE]
Awhie, thanks bro!
[QUOTE=Nonikai;29706504]um sorry but in all honesty I like /b/rother's shots better than yours (but that's just my opinion)
so in a way you're just making a fool of yourself when you do that[/QUOTE]
"You're wrong because I don't like your pictures"
Stop using ad hominem. /b/rother may push amazing shots out of his Sony but think what would happen if he tried to go on a studio or professional level; he would have a restricted choice of lenses and pro-bodies, as-well as poor choice of accessories. Furthermore he would probably get laughed at or out-competed by other professionals. Your camera in no way restricts your creativity, but it does restrict the situations you can apply it to.
Drama all up in this bitch
[QUOTE=Nonikai;29708807]I know I sounded harsh, but that's just my opinion no offense intended
It just really boils my blood to see people who base solely on brand, it's like mac vs pc wars
or don't get a ibanez because gibson and fender obviously do it better[/QUOTE]
Musicman obviously does it better.
But seriously, you aren't helping yourself if you become brand-dependent. If you like your canon/nikon/sony/pentax/whatever, that's great. But don't be afraid to try things out of your comfort zone.
I like Sony's built in stabilizer. I wish my Canon had that. Would mean I could buy cheaper lenses and still get IS.
[QUOTE=Nonikai;29705398]A camera is a camera
look at all the great shots that /B/rother pushes out with his sony
why is that funny[/QUOTE]
it's funny because of the way you say it, as if his sony is some sort of handicap.
sounds kind of like "hey look, i know he's mentally retarded but he's still just as good at math as you"
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;29713955]I like Sony's built in stabilizer. I wish my Canon had that. Would mean I could buy cheaper lenses and still get IS.[/QUOTE]
they do it in the lens to make money money and so you have a stabilised image in the viewfinder.
~spread the love
stop the hate
all DSLR's are great~
Look, I made one of those Japanese kawaiiis or whatever they were called
haha
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;29715388]~spread the love
stop the hate
all DSLR's are great~
Look, I made one of those Japanese kawaiiis or whatever they were called[/QUOTE]
Oh wow :v:
Pretty sure they aren't called "kawaii's" though, because "kawaii" means "cute" in Japanese.
But who knows what these people come up with.
haiku.
[editline]9th May 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jo The Shmo;29710794]Who cares. If an image is thought provoking or interesting enough, does it matter what the purpose of the image is? I'd say anything that I look at for a long time is art to me. We talked about this for a while in my [b]history[/b] class, it's a really deep picture on multiple levels.[/QUOTE]
This is what I'm talking about. People seem to lump all photography together and judge it the same way. Particularly in a historical context. It's this 'general photography is all photography' attitude that really bites me.
Photojournalism is a highly specialized field with professionals that make a career of specifically doing what you have described. A high-fashion photographer in Paris needs a completely different, and also specialized set up to take the type of pictures they take.
Just because a photojournalist can get his job done with a point and shoot, doesn't mean an editorial-fashion photog should get rid of a hasselblad.
I also feel like this is an appropriate time to quote myself.
[QUOTE=bopie;29546015]It goes like this:
- A camera won't take pictures on it's own. -
--------------
An Amazing photographer shits out gold with any camera.
--------------
A good photographer takes amazing photos with best gear.
A good photographer takes good photos with cheap gear.
--------------
An okay photographer takes good photos with best gear.
An okay photographer takes shit photos with bad gear.
--------------
A shit photographer shits out shit with any camera.
--------------
[b]There is a romanticized cliche of the 'underdog' camera making great pictures in the hands of a genius photographer. While it happens, the average photographer needs something that they can learn with and have control over. Yes, a good camera doesn't automatically take good pictures, [i]but it sure as hell won't hurt.[/i][/b]
I'll take it a step further with a car analogy; A racecar driver can drive your mom's minivan better than your dad can drive his porsche, but he probably won't win any races in it.[/QUOTE]
.mov format isn't great for editing, but the results on my first extended test with the D7000 were quite impressive. Difficult to focus though! Uploading now, expect it in 2012.
[QUOTE=MisterM;29716086].mov format isn't great for editing, but the results on my first extended test with the D7000 were quite impressive. Difficult to focus though! Uploading now, expect it in 2012.[/QUOTE]
disagree so much. mov is way easier to edit for me since i can run it through my mac and my pc (final cut does not support wmv or whatever)
I run it fine on my laptop with Avid Media Composer. No hick-ups or whatever.
The compression with DSLR video sucks though
I've made more progress on my site [url]http://jacobhaslehurst.com[/url] Also I'm getting those 46 images printed (shittily) on A3 tomorrow, so i can have a physical portfolio.
I like it, simple and slick to browse. The panoramic type shot isn't done justice though, maybe add a feature to view an enlarged version of every image?
Each photo on their own A3 or cut out and glued on? The interview I was at the guy had done this, was criticised because it was messy. Portfolios should be shorter than 46, maybe get a few done now at high quality and more in the future. It would look better, better for others to view and cost you less?
[QUOTE=H4Z3Y;29718078]I've made more progress on my site [url]http://jacobhaslehurst.com[/url] Also I'm getting those 46 images printed (shittily) on A3 tomorrow, so i can have a physical portfolio.[/QUOTE]
when you click on one of the collections, the clickable area for "contact" goes over the top of prev/next
[editline]9th May 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=MisterM;29718249]I like it, simple and slick to browse. The panoramic type shot isn't done justice though, maybe add a feature to view an enlarged version of every image?[/QUOTE]
also this
[editline]9th May 2011[/editline]
jesus christ the sky outside just suddenly went from sunny to some kind of a rain diarrhea eruption
ahahahahaha comment on a post i made
"PS: Screw you (insert creater of this group here) my phone wouldn't stop taking a fit, about >9000 emails were sent my way."
[editline]9th May 2011[/editline]
i tagged my friend in a post that i made as an admin of a 6500 strong fan page
oh yeah, long exposure + double flash + moving eyes = :gonk:
[URL=http://cubeupload.com/im/JnI7bW.jpg][IMG]http://i.cubeupload.com/JnI7bW.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
excuse the horrendous focus (and the general lack of anything that makes a good photo)
dramallamas
I talk about and mention to look at specific Nikon models and such because that is what I know. I can tell you how awesome my camera is, but I honestly can't go and tell people that X camera is better/worse than Y camera if they're parts of other brands. I never did much hands-on research with Canons because in the beginning phases they were clunky and awkward to me since I started off with a Pentax ist*DL, which has a strikingly similar feeling body and control setup to the Nikons I have today. I latched onto what I found more comfortable as a tool, then researched how far up the ladder I should go and could afford, landing at the D5000 at the time. I upgraded to another Nikon and researched much more of the lineup afterwards because I already had the equipment and could interchange lenses instead of upgrading to new sets all over.
[QUOTE=H4Z3Y;29718078]I've made more progress on my site [url]http://jacobhaslehurst.com[/url] Also I'm getting those 46 images printed (shittily) on A3 tomorrow, so i can have a physical portfolio.[/QUOTE]
Looks great. The only issues I see are (as mentioned above) the images are small, and the font on the left side has some rough edges.
[QUOTE=daijitsu;29726194]dramallamas
I talk about and mention to look at specific Nikon models and such because that is what I know. I can tell you how awesome my camera is, but I honestly can't go and tell people that X camera is better/worse than Y camera if they're parts of other brands. I never did much hands-on research with Canons because in the beginning phases they were clunky and awkward to me since I started off with a Pentax ist*DL, which has a strikingly similar feeling body and control setup to the Nikons I have today. I latched onto what I found more comfortable as a tool, then researched how far up the ladder I should go and could afford, landing at the D5000 at the time. I upgraded to another Nikon and researched much more of the lineup afterwards because I already had the equipment and could interchange lenses instead of upgrading to new sets all over.[/QUOTE]
Same here.
I don't know what other camera makes are really like. I've used Canons before - a couple of different models, and they've always seemed like great cameras.
Just when I got my first dslr, I found the Nikon made "more sense" to me, in terms of its button and function layout. It fitted well in my hand, so I went for that - which for me, is the most important thing.
There will be people out there who found the same feelings with Canons (and other brands), but I think that's the most important thing.
If you're comfortable with what you're shooting on, I don't think many other attributes will make a difference to the quality of your images.
And I certainly feel comfortable with Nikons. They're great cameras.
Going to buy a Sigma 30mm f1.4 + Canon Speedlite 430 EX II in a few days.
Should be great
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;29736734]Going to buy a Sigma 30mm f1.4[/QUOTE]
Been wanting one of these for quite a while!
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;29736734]Going to buy a Sigma 30mm f1.4 + Canon Speedlite 430 EX II in a few days.
Should be great[/QUOTE]
Gorgeous lens. My next purchase.
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1087283-Totally-Enormous-Extinct-Dinosaurs[/url]
erryone check out one of my fave musicians thread
[QUOTE=DoubleDD;29715388]~spread the love
stop the hate
all DSLR's are great~
Look, I made one of those Japanese kawaiiis or whatever they were called[/QUOTE]
Haiku man.
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;29739699]Haiku man.[/QUOTE]
no i'm double d
>That feeling when you take a photo that you get one opportunity at and realise you took the photo and left one of the AF/M switches on M.
Trufax, it looked in focus in the viewfinder :(
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
