[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;40587881]how cheap is relatively cheap?
[editline]10th May 2013[/editline]
i got a slik 340dx recently, you can find them for about £70 or so; it's not the tallest tripod ever (comes up to about chest height or thereabouts) but pretty damn sturdy and can hold up a heavy camera, also folds up real small for how much weight it can hold
£70 isn't cheap in terms of things in general, but it's cheap in terms of decent tripods[/QUOTE]
How heavy of a camera are we talking?
mine's just over 2kg, but the tripod is rated for 4kg max
[editline]10th May 2013[/editline]
also when i say chest height, that's more like where the camera ends up being :x
[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;40588396]mine's just over 2kg, but the tripod is rated for 4kg max
[editline]10th May 2013[/editline]
also when i say chest height, that's more like where the camera ends up being :x[/QUOTE]
Awesome. I ask because I'm in need of a tripod, and Mamiya TLR's are heavy; and I'm also toying with the idea (if I have the money for materials) of building my own 4x5 field camera this summer (have a lens & shutter already, plus a cousin and friend with tool shops).
yeah, the exact reason i got this one is because the half-plastic 12 pound tripod i used before couldn't hold a mamiya tlr without bending :v:
[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;40587881]how cheap is relatively cheap?
[editline]10th May 2013[/editline]
i got a slik 340dx recently, you can find them for about £70 or so; it's not the tallest tripod ever (comes up to about chest height or thereabouts) but pretty damn sturdy and can hold up a heavy camera, also folds up real small for how much weight it can hold
£70 isn't cheap in terms of things in general, but it's cheap in terms of decent tripods[/QUOTE]
Ideally, around $50 USD, but I'd be willing to spend more if the extra money spent is worth it (and if I actually have more :v:)
[QUOTE=Chaotic Lord;40590061]Ideally, around $50 USD, but I'd be willing to spend more if the extra money spent is worth it (and if I actually have more :v:)[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.amazon.com/Dolica-AX620B100-62-Inch-Proline-Tripod/dp/B001D60LG8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1368175866&sr=8-1&keywords=dolica+ax620b100"]http://www.amazon.com/Dolica-AX620B100-62-Inch-Proline-Tripod/dp/B001D60LG8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1368175866&sr=8-1&keywords=dolica+ax620b100[/URL]
I use this tripod and have had no problems.
Does anybody here use tumblr for uploading photos?
If yes I have a few questions.
Can you change the name of your blog?
Can you rearrange your uploads or are they all sorted by date?
Is it better to upload photos in 10er batches or post each one on it's own?
Is it possible to make the resized photos link to the full sized image?
Is it better to use your main or side blog for just dumping photos?
You can changed the name of your blog.
They're all sorted by date.
I post them on their own.
I just link them directly to Flickr.
I'd say you should use a side blog just for photos if you are doing it.
Speaking of Tumblr
[img]http://i.imgur.com/krU4xGL.png[/img]
:wtc:
I've had a tumblr account for a while now. I still don't get it.
I would advise you use Flickr to host and just share from there to Tumblr.
so my bar opened up.
so it was a fucking mad house the first night.
i make 8.25/hr and get tipped by bartenders at the end of the night for being a barback.
i was tipped $180 last night, on top of that, the wages i make.
if i were to be tipped that every night for the three days a week i work there, in 13 days, i would have enough money to buy the camera body i want with just tip money.
Damn that's awesome! I'm thinking about getting a bar job (I'm 21 so I can serve weee). I realized I need money to fix my computer, it would be more beneficial to my photography than any new gear. Need like $800 ;(
[QUOTE=Trogdon;40610064]Damn that's awesome! I'm thinking about getting a bar job (I'm 21 so I can serve weee). I realized I need money to fix my computer, it would be more beneficial to my photography than any new gear. Need like $800 ;([/QUOTE]
I saw a guy in there that looked JUST like you. I was washing dishes, and I looked up, and saw the guy. Thought it was you visiting because you just finished with Uni or something. Anyhow, he walked away from the bar, he got into a fight with someone, then was kicked out for being underage.
thought u came to visit me trog wtf :'(
I was gonna say hi then I got in a fight with someone and got kicked out ;(
[t]http://distilleryimage2.ak.instagram.com/7b1ff6e6bb1a11e2a42922000a9e51c4_7.jpg[/t]
Getting my stuff ready to pack it up for my trip.
I'm going to take my d5100 with a tamron 17-50. I will copy the sd card contents via my tablet to two hard drives. Good idea?
Also the orange and blue bags in the back are said camera and tablet in (hopefully) watertight bags.
Had my liveview recording while snapping pics during class, threw together a shit video clip of some stuff [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Gamboa,_Jr.]Harry Gamboa[/url] was talkin bout. We just follow him around while he points out stuff about LA. Ended up at the Santa Monica Pier.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Bn9b4hMBXY[/media]
[url=http://www.naturalnews.com/036204_Fukushima_radiation_California.html]It's kind of old news, but the radiation shit is sus.[/url] "Radiation believed to be five times normal levels along parts of West Coast."
[quote]"Southern California is still getting hit by Fukushima radiation at alarmingly high levels that will inevitably increase as the main bulk of polluted Pacific Ocean water reaches North America over the next two years."
Collins said he began monitoring for increased levels of radiation within four days after a devastating earthquake-caused tsunami struck the Fukushima complex, heavily damaging at least three of the site's nuclear reactors. Today, he says, radiation levels at both the [b]Los Angeles and Santa Monica sites are about 5.3 times the norm.[/b] The Santa Monica site transmits radiation readings to the L.A. Basin area 24/7, Collins said.[/quote]
Throwing on my tinfoil hat here to say my next purchase will be a Geiger counter.
[editline]12th May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=kaizari;40619999]Getting my stuff ready to pack it up for my trip.[/QUOTE]
Where you headed cuh?
apparently ken rockwell lives in the middle of the ocean, wtf
[QUOTE=bopie;40620001]Throwing on my tinfoil hat here to say my next purchase will be a Geiger counter.[/QUOTE]
Good ones are fairly expensive but I think its a fun thing to have to freak out your friends when you point it at their food and it begins to tick from the natural background radiation.
[QUOTE=bopie;40620001]Where you headed cuh?[/QUOTE]
Europe. I get an Interrail ticket for a month.
[editline]afdsa[/editline]
Cool, since when are the flags back?
[QUOTE=bopie;40620001]Had my liveview recording while snapping pics during class, threw together a shit video clip of some stuff [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Gamboa,_Jr.]Harry Gamboa[/url] was talkin bout. We just follow him around while he points out stuff about LA. Ended up at the Santa Monica Pier.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Bn9b4hMBXY[/media]
[url=http://www.naturalnews.com/036204_Fukushima_radiation_California.html]It's kind of old news, but the radiation shit is sus.[/url] "Radiation believed to be five times normal levels along parts of West Coast."
[/QUOTE]
wow 33.072 microsevierts! a whole 2 chest ct scans
[QUOTE=bopie;40620001]Had my liveview recording while snapping pics during class, threw together a shit video clip of some stuff [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Gamboa,_Jr."]Harry Gamboa[/URL] was talkin bout. We just follow him around while he points out stuff about LA. Ended up at the Santa Monica Pier.
[URL="http://www.naturalnews.com/036204_Fukushima_radiation_California.html"]It's kind of old news, but the radiation shit is sus.[/URL] "Radiation believed to be five times normal levels along parts of West Coast."
Throwing on my tinfoil hat here to say my next purchase will be a Geiger counter.
[editline]12th May 2013[/editline]
Where you headed cuh?[/QUOTE]
Sounds like a nice class.
Also
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/yHAryDq.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Eltro102;40620097]apparently ken rockwell lives in the middle of the ocean, wtf[/QUOTE]
that somehow makes a lot of sense
[QUOTE=Eltro102;40621605][url]http://kenrockwell.com/ri/WhereDoBabiesComeFrom.htm[/url][/QUOTE]
it worries me this man makes money
For anyone else on here who runs their own photography business, this article is a really great read:
[url]http://fstoppers.com/how-to-go-pro-without-going-crazy[/url]
It has a lot of great tips and good resources.
[QUOTE=cueballv2themax;40622099]it worries me this man makes money[/QUOTE]
And he just made a few cent more.
[QUOTE=Desuh;40641429]And he just made a few cent more.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://f.cl.ly/items/0s0r3h3i2T1P2m3g1R0U/Screen%20shot%202013-05-14%20at%2017.51.55.png[/IMG]
So I had some prints made through snapfish and the blacks came out horribly dark, much more constrast than in the images viewed on my monitor.
My monitor isn't calibrated, but it seems like they shouldn't be this dark regardless.
[QUOTE=Adius Shadow;40642811]So I had some prints made through snapfish and the blacks came out horribly dark, much more constrast than in the images viewed on my monitor.
My monitor isn't calibrated, but it seems like they shouldn't be this dark regardless.[/QUOTE]
you might want to check that they don't do any color correction
I use [url]http://www.nationsphotolab.com/[/url] and get great prints, though I always opt-out of color correction
ds colour labs get my vote for the UK
[QUOTE=Adius Shadow;40642811]So I had some prints made through snapfish and the blacks came out horribly dark, much more constrast than in the images viewed on my monitor.
My monitor isn't calibrated, but it seems like they shouldn't be this dark regardless.[/QUOTE]
yeah i've made prints through a lot of places (costco, walmart, target, walgreens, cvs, pro printer at my uni, but nowhere online), and i've never had one come out to look like my monitor. regardless of color calibration of the monitor, checked boxes to not mess with my photos, or anything else. i don't think they will ever look exactly the same. only prints i'm generally happy with are my 35mm ones, because i see the print before the digital version!
so just edit a new set of your photos to be "print" versions, which are a little less sharp, a little less contrasty, and a little less vibrant. that way whenever the labs decide to mildly "doctor" your photos, they come out looking not too exaggerated in any way.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
