Nerd City: How To Get Real Followers for Fake Fitness!
46 replies, posted
I must give props to this guy, I've never seen anybody whore their own girlfriend out for the internet in such a professional way.
I can't believe the fancy parties though.
That's just ludicrous!
I also can't believe that dress. Christ thats good.
I really hope these guys can continue making A+ quality like their last two videos. They're topical without riding on the YouTube drama train like some of their others (albeit still high quality videos).
I can't wait to see the third video.
[editline]15th September 2017[/editline]
I also much prefer his regular voice rather then the fake raspy one he creates for the "doctor" character.
[QUOTE=Annoyed Grunt;52685049]I must give props to this guy, I've never seen anybody whore their own girlfriend out for the internet in such a professional way.[/QUOTE]
I am 100% okay with this (and apparently she is too, shwing).
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;52683413]You realize iso and exposure are the same, yes? Exposure is not post process in editing. You cannot get more exposure to photons once the camera is off.[/QUOTE]
ISO and exposure are not the same at all. ISO is a component of exposure but two photos can have the same exposure but different ISOs.
so i dont have to bother writing a bunch:
[img]http://cdn.cambridgeincolour.com/images/tutorials/exposure_triangle.png[/img]
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;52686151]ISO and exposure are not the same at all. ISO is a component of exposure but two photos can have the same exposure but different ISOs.
so i dont have to bother writing a bunch:
[img]http://cdn.cambridgeincolour.com/images/tutorials/exposure_triangle.png[/img][/QUOTE]
Considering you want everything to be in focus and you're shooting at an acceptable framerate the only option left is ISO. Or better physical lighting. But considering it seems he has a bright light on the camera itself that barely registers I'm going to go with it's his camera settings being crap.
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;52686264]Considering you want everything to be in focus and you're shooting at an acceptable framerate the only option left is ISO. Or better physical lighting. But considering it seems he has a bright light on the camera itself that barely registers I'm going to go with it's his camera settings being crap.[/QUOTE]
Mate just say you were wrong to say they're equivocal and leave it. I never said anything about what options are available to work with to up exposure in his particular case and don't care.
I mean if you want to lose weight you can cut off your legs that doesn't make it a viable option though or what people mean by losing weight
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;52686331]I mean if you want to lose weight you can cut off your legs that doesn't make it a viable option though or what people mean by losing weight[/QUOTE]
Your followup isn't what you said originally. If you want to talk realistic options your point is valid. All I pointed out is that ISO is an aspect of exposure, but is not exposure, which is what you originally said.
Have some chill.
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;52686331]I mean if you want to lose weight you can cut off your legs that doesn't make it a viable option though or what people mean by losing weight[/QUOTE]
I just want to point out that functionally it works exactly like the exposure triangle posted.
Think of it this way: If I wanna shoot a whole scene in f/1.4, I need [I]two[/I] places I can adjust exposure to have maximum control over my scene. If something starts moving fast, I'll need a faster shutter speed for that. If I'm keeping locked at f/1.4, I need some way to make my image darker so that I can crank my shutter speed. Unless you keep a polarizing filter on hand:
[img_thumb]https://i.imgur.com/O64bWOS.png[/img_thumb]
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;52683413]You realize iso and exposure are the same, yes? Exposure is not post process in editing. You cannot get more exposure to photons once the camera is off.[/QUOTE]
Exposure on camera is the combination of ISO, Aperture and Shutter Speed which makes part of the overall camera exposure, but it's a foolish thing to think the ISO is the same as exposure, as modern cameras resort for shutter speed for incoming light from the lens (duration of the exposure), aperture settings for how much light can lens capture and the sensitivity and the ISO which is the camera's sensor sensitivity towards the given light.
I mentioned that not only he can't increase the exposure on his camera, as the ISO was pretty high already (where it should be anyway, you're recording in a very dark room and holding your camera), he can't up the exposure thro post-process as it'll introduce more noise, a visible contrast (in which you can see already) and artifacts. Essentially the only good option here is getting better lighting conditions, you can't "up" the exposure more than it already is, after all he is already using the low light exposure mode on his camera, which bumps the exposure all the way to it's maximum values and uses the camera's flash :buddy:
now this is a social experiment
[QUOTE=Flubbman;52687210]now this is a social experiment[/QUOTE]
her instagram certainly is socialing my experiment
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;52686264]Considering you want everything to be in focus and you're shooting at an acceptable framerate the only option left is ISO. Or better physical lighting. But considering it seems he has a bright light on the camera itself that barely registers I'm going to go with it's his camera settings being crap.[/QUOTE]
It's gonna be difficult to bullshit your way through this if you can barely grasp photography 101
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.