Looks like it is finally time for sleep. :eek

I sure would.

re-reading the article the author does actually use Vancouverites so I don't know who edited what now.

THAT'S MR. COMBAT VETERAN!

What there a lot of poconoing going on there?

pics?

no poconoing. just race cars and work. i yelled at some people, that part's always nice.

yes where's the va beach pictures? brown water and hypdermic needles hidden in the sand, i'd miss it if i were still in indiana.

You just described Atlantic City, too, although there's a blackish tarry scum all over everything and the water is gray instead of brown.

Were you a japanese flag girl? :eek

Got a can of film back today. 3/24 exposures turned out properly, (I used cheap film.) Most of them are passable, especially for forum postage. These aberrations happen every time I use this film and with no other, so I know it's not really my camera.

At any rate, I'm on my way home tomorrow so I should be able to post something eventually. Might not have internet access when I get home, but I'll go to the library eventually.

who the shit uses film

Hipsters

people who spent a lot of money on quality camera equipment before the whole digital thing started, maybe

so, people in their 50s?

Film has a sort of nostalgic charm to it.

All the wedding photographers we talked to are pure digital. IDK if it's because it's easier on them or if the quality is just as good.

If you spend as much money on a high quality digital it is.





Oh you have to have a high quality printer as well.

Anybody with a degree in photography becomes a wedding photographer. Most photographers, wedding or otherwise, use digital because you can take many pictures in a short span of time. Digital is moderately cheaper, depending on how often you take pictures and whether or not you care about lenses. And I mean moderately, too. Being able to make your own prints with photo paper is fantastically cheap compared to buying similar-sized prints. 8 1/2 x 11 sheets are a dollar per in packs of 25 or 100, and you can cut them into any size you need or use the whole damn sheet. As I recall, prints of that size are quite a bit more.

I like Leicas, but since their digital rangefinders are upwards of several thousand dollars, I'm fucked. I'll take my Soviet knockoff with a Jupiter lens. Also, different emulsions will make for different photos.

And I can't work Photoshop. That shit's complicated. I'd rather play with akaline solutions in large tubs in the dark and screaming FUCK whenever I figure out I screwed up the filters on my enlarger.

But then if you don't like that sort of thing, then you don't like that sort of thing. I don't undeerstand whey protein, but more power to you, Muscles.

This. A couple of classmate brought badass digital ones to a FILM photography class. They were allowed to use them, but they had to make their own prints of the same size as ours. Their prints were considerably more expensive - especially the ones that they paid to have printed. And they looked bad, too. They all applied all sorts of Photoshop filters and shit.

"Why'd you choose this type of filter?"

"I dunno. I think it looks cool the way it just vintage-y."

you could always get it printed elsewhere

which you'd have to do anyway with film

anyway i've taken a photography class and can develop my own shit in a darkroom as well. there isn't any art to the process and any dickhead with a decent camera can take equally good shots to anyone else, provided they aren't retarded. photography is to art as arm wrestling is to a sport.

okay

man good quality dslrs haven't even been around a decade yet, what are you talking about

I think the reality is that digital is just as good and less expensive if you are doing professional work. If you are just dicking around, digital is still cheaper and just as good. If you are trying to be cool, you have to pay more for a vintage camera and special lenseseses and a trucker hat that says I heart Ashton.

My thoughts exactly.

Most of the goodness is in the lenses, and a good one from fifty years ago is just as good as one from today. It all depends on what you want to shoot. And SLRs have been around forever. My Pentax K1000 is the same model that's been made for the past forty years - they still make it today for a reason.

It's all in the glass and, in the case of digital, the firmware. Also, anyone "serious" about photography has way more than one lens. There are at least three very different types, (wide angle, the middle of the road one that likely came with the camera, and a telephoto lens), and a couple other artsy douchebag ones (pinhole and fisheye.)

Yeah, digital work is the best way to go if you're doing professional stuff. It definitely has the quickest turn-around and is best in terms of quantity.

I've been eyeballing some micro four-thirds that're way too rich for my blood, but oh so pretty to look at.

The wedding photographer who did my wedding got arrested a month or so later for taping high school girls in his dressing rooms. :themoreyouknow

His then-girlfriend found the tapes after they had a fight and turned him in. So if you're a perv and you can't hide the evidence, don't fight with your girlfriend.

:pagebrak

Do they come with a Coldplay cd?