Post Your Photos
Created 17 years ago2007-08-06 23:50:34 UTC by
Archie
Created 17 years ago2007-08-06 23:50:34 UTC by
Archie
Posted 14 years ago2010-06-20 01:12:09 UTC
Post #282098
Why do you have a wig in a ca--- wait, I think I see an eye there.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-12 17:41:34 UTC
Post #282955
New knife, new photos:
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-12 17:51:26 UTC
Post #282957
dude that's reallly cool and i'm not even a knife guy! =) Are those illegal to carry in your state? In NY i would go to jail for carrying that i think (monocle are also illeg)
Sweet lighter and stoli as well. (you smoke?) kudos on the pics they very nice.
Sweet lighter and stoli as well. (you smoke?) kudos on the pics they very nice.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-12 18:04:11 UTC
Post #282958
They're legal where I live unless they're carried concealed. IIRC, butterflies are illegal in NY if the blade is over 2 inches, but don't quote me on that.
I enjoy hooka maybe once a week with friends, but I don't smoke otherwise and that's not why I have the lighter. It's just another piece of fandom.
Monocles illegal in NY? That doesn't even make sense
I enjoy hooka maybe once a week with friends, but I don't smoke otherwise and that's not why I have the lighter. It's just another piece of fandom.
Monocles illegal in NY? That doesn't even make sense
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-12 18:07:52 UTC
Post #282959
you didn't really for 1 second think that monocles were illegal, did you?!
)
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-12 18:09:55 UTC
Post #282960
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...
...
No
...
No
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-12 18:50:49 UTC
Post #282962
Knife to meet you!
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-12 19:12:15 UTC
Post #282964
Meh, I like how one of those looked before the shopping, too.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-12 20:02:58 UTC
Post #282965
The reflected light in the blade is such a sick effect.
You have a good eye, soup.
You have a good eye, soup.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-12 23:50:13 UTC
Post #282976
Nice photos there. The lighter and reflected flame gives it a warm effect.
Can't say much about the knife though, I tend to find them boring. But I have a Swiss Army knife (the red one you can see EVERYWHERE).
Can't say much about the knife though, I tend to find them boring. But I have a Swiss Army knife (the red one you can see EVERYWHERE).
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-13 06:31:27 UTC
Post #282989
Nice shots, I fucking fell in love with that lighter, too bad that I can't seem to find any near my location D:
I mean come on, Austria is next fucking door for me, I can't grasp why webshops aren't flooded with this stuff :/
I mean come on, Austria is next fucking door for me, I can't grasp why webshops aren't flooded with this stuff :/
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-13 08:26:19 UTC
Post #282996
Although taking pics of your knife along with some vodka is incredibly high on the Internet Tough Guy scale, I'm captivated by the amazing lighting in the original photo. Very nice. Plus, the pocket watch earns you some Gentleman of Stature points (a direct counter to Internet Tough Guy-syndrome, as we all know).
Also, Stolichnaya has a special place in my heart.
Also, Stolichnaya has a special place in my heart.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-13 13:47:47 UTC
Post #283008
Tough guy? I thought a nice vodka like Stoli would make it look more classy 
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-22 17:33:11 UTC
Post #283331
Taken tonight from our hotel room in Lausanne, Switzerland.
Sorry if it's a little dark, no editing was done and increasing the exposure time any further created an unnatural bloom effect.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-22 17:45:37 UTC
Post #283332
I can proudly post here now too!
Note that a lot of the original file quality is lost due to resizing and recompression. Original photos are 10mp set at "Normal" quality in my Nikon(there is also "Fine" which is a bit better).
I'll post a couple of them here, I'll link you to the rest.
A lot of other ones here: Link
Note that a lot of the original file quality is lost due to resizing and recompression. Original photos are 10mp set at "Normal" quality in my Nikon(there is also "Fine" which is a bit better).
I'll post a couple of them here, I'll link you to the rest.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-22 19:01:37 UTC
Post #283334
@Srry: Don't worry - it's still great. And that's a beautiful Swiss sky.
@Striker: Great pictures! And the moon looks great, the camera has a mad zoom even for a compact camera. A bit noisy though, as a side effect of that.
I still owe myself a day out to take some photos.
@Striker: Great pictures! And the moon looks great, the camera has a mad zoom even for a compact camera. A bit noisy though, as a side effect of that.
I still owe myself a day out to take some photos.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-23 12:59:40 UTC
Post #283358
New pictures. Wow, I love taking pictures!
My dog while it's running towards me(obvious after-the-photo-was-taken moment =)) )
A hen.
Badass sheep:
Another picture of my dog:
Solar Cell close-up:
A bee:
Pine forest:
My dog while it's running towards me(obvious after-the-photo-was-taken moment =)) )
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-23 15:03:21 UTC
Post #283362
Look, a Dacia!
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-24 07:08:20 UTC
Post #283390
"Awesome" Happy Nectarine
It wasn't expecting this...
The Nectarine has been murdered.
Apricots and Nectarines:
The Nectarine has been murdered.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-24 18:08:10 UTC
Post #283401
What's the maximum aperture (f-number) you get with that lens?
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-24 18:35:21 UTC
Post #283403
f/2.8 and the minimum is f/8.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-24 18:46:33 UTC
Post #283404
f/2.8 is very good. But I suppose it's not 2.8 all the way from wide to tele. What's the maximum in the long end?
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-24 19:07:11 UTC
Post #283405
f/5 unfortunately...
I haven't really experimented yet with the aperture priority, I mostly played with the exposure time because I really didn't understand the concept :D. But I read about it today, so I will start experimenting in aperture priority too. Those apricots and nectarine pictures could have been shot better if I knew about this :D.
You know, a thing that I observed is that it has (I don't think this is correct but you can understand me) very visible barrel distortion in some cases, like macro shots of some text. Is that normal ?
[EDIT] Oh, and one thing I haven't found about is this: why does the maximum aperture gets smaller as the zoom increases ?
I haven't really experimented yet with the aperture priority, I mostly played with the exposure time because I really didn't understand the concept :D. But I read about it today, so I will start experimenting in aperture priority too. Those apricots and nectarine pictures could have been shot better if I knew about this :D.
You know, a thing that I observed is that it has (I don't think this is correct but you can understand me) very visible barrel distortion in some cases, like macro shots of some text. Is that normal ?
[EDIT] Oh, and one thing I haven't found about is this: why does the maximum aperture gets smaller as the zoom increases ?
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-24 19:13:42 UTC
Post #283406
I always shoot in manual mode (now that I can). The effects of the aperture aren't too complicated to learn. With a large aperture (low f number) the depth of field is shallower than with a small aperture.
Also, obviously, with a large aperture more light will hit the image sensor (and vice versa) and you will need to adjust exposure time (or ISO speed) accordingly.
Barrel and pinchusion distortion are inevitable side effects of long range lenses. It is perfectly normal in lenses that vary their focal length, and there's nothing you can do other than correcting it with your computer later. Hence the most expensive zoom lenses have a limited focal length range - such as 16-35mm, 35-80mm, etc. You won't find a quality lens with a zoom range similar to yours (I read in a review online it is 26-678mm, something you won't find in, say, a Canon L-series lens)
Also, obviously, with a large aperture more light will hit the image sensor (and vice versa) and you will need to adjust exposure time (or ISO speed) accordingly.
Barrel and pinchusion distortion are inevitable side effects of long range lenses. It is perfectly normal in lenses that vary their focal length, and there's nothing you can do other than correcting it with your computer later. Hence the most expensive zoom lenses have a limited focal length range - such as 16-35mm, 35-80mm, etc. You won't find a quality lens with a zoom range similar to yours (I read in a review online it is 26-678mm, something you won't find in, say, a Canon L-series lens)
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-24 20:03:42 UTC
Post #283407
26-678mmOK, that corresponds to 26x optical zoom, but my lens are actually 4.6-120 mm.
Found out that my Nikon includes in-camera barrel distortion reduction.
Well, I made Panoramio account. There are almost no pictures of my area. There are though spammed-like photos near a cave. I will try to get my pictures posted in Google Earth.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-25 01:56:26 UTC
Post #283411
Of course it's not 4.6-120mm. 26-678mm is the 35mm equivalent focal length for that. That takes into account sensor size. Your camera has a small image sensor, hence it has such a focal length range.
No 35mm lens will ever span 26-678mm, that's insane. You'd have to use several separate lenses - e.g 24-70, 70-300, then a x2 adapter for that (only prime lenses are longer than 300mm), and it'd still be a bit short.
Slightly off-topic-but-also-related: While accuracy-checking my knowledge of lenses, I came across the longest lens ever made by Canon: the EF 1200mm f/5.6 USM. Discontinued now, it was only manufactured on order, with an annual production volume of 2 lenses. It only cost 89,579 USD. Being discontinued, of course, being such a rare item, it now costs nearly twice that. Look at that baby:
I'm only $119,995 short. Anyone willing to spend a few bucks for my birthday? 
No 35mm lens will ever span 26-678mm, that's insane. You'd have to use several separate lenses - e.g 24-70, 70-300, then a x2 adapter for that (only prime lenses are longer than 300mm), and it'd still be a bit short.
Slightly off-topic-but-also-related: While accuracy-checking my knowledge of lenses, I came across the longest lens ever made by Canon: the EF 1200mm f/5.6 USM. Discontinued now, it was only manufactured on order, with an annual production volume of 2 lenses. It only cost 89,579 USD. Being discontinued, of course, being such a rare item, it now costs nearly twice that. Look at that baby:
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-25 05:39:13 UTC
Post #283412
Of course it's not 4.6-120mm. 26-678mm is the 35mm equivalent focal length for that. That takes into account sensor size. Your camera has a small image sensor, hence it has such a focal length range.But that's what it says on the lens :\. 4.6-120 mm. I'm confused.
Also, those lens are insane :|. How are you supposed to even take a photo with that? Don't you need a tripod or something ?
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-25 11:22:17 UTC
Post #283419
Mount it on a jeep I'm guessing... srsly
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-25 13:41:33 UTC
Post #283426
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-25 17:30:40 UTC
Post #283454
Sorry, I that writed badly.
What I meant is that, your lens actually IS 4.6-120mm, which in conjunction with the sensor size of your camera, produces the 26x zoom you know. 26-678mm is only the 35mm equivalent - meaning that you would need a lens with that focal length to produce the same 26x zoom in a camera with a 35mm sized sensor. It is a crazy number and there are no lenses big enough to cover that zoom range, it is only a comparison.
More on that here.
And no, you don't hand hold the 1200mm. Look at the link above - you mount it on a tripod. Not only because of its weight (16kg) or its inconvenient point of balance, but also because at that magnification (and without IS) the tiniest movement you make is magnified as much as what you're looking at.
What I meant is that, your lens actually IS 4.6-120mm, which in conjunction with the sensor size of your camera, produces the 26x zoom you know. 26-678mm is only the 35mm equivalent - meaning that you would need a lens with that focal length to produce the same 26x zoom in a camera with a 35mm sized sensor. It is a crazy number and there are no lenses big enough to cover that zoom range, it is only a comparison.
More on that here.
And no, you don't hand hold the 1200mm. Look at the link above - you mount it on a tripod. Not only because of its weight (16kg) or its inconvenient point of balance, but also because at that magnification (and without IS) the tiniest movement you make is magnified as much as what you're looking at.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-28 08:42:23 UTC
Post #283555
First pictures from Iasi.
More to come, I uploaded this on imageshack for a fast preview, but I have about 180-190 pictures to upload to some kind of image hosting. Yes, I have flickr, but it's crap with its 100mb stupid limit and the fact that I can't organize sets in sets.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-28 12:30:08 UTC
Post #283561
I like the storm cloud picture.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-30 22:37:45 UTC
Post #283648
I've ordered a P100 that should be arriving on monday or tuesday. Hopefully I can contribute to this thread by then.
On a side note, I tried making a HDR image using three versions of the same image with different exposure, and it worked out alright.
Disclamer: The image below was taken with my phone so naturally the quality isn't super, and I had to change the exposure after it was taken so it's not true HDR.
On a side note, I tried making a HDR image using three versions of the same image with different exposure, and it worked out alright.
Disclamer: The image below was taken with my phone so naturally the quality isn't super, and I had to change the exposure after it was taken so it's not true HDR.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-31 03:55:28 UTC
Post #283654
That is a creepy picture.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-31 12:29:54 UTC
Post #283659
CStriker, I like the crow one.
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-31 12:45:30 UTC
Post #283660
Thanks. Unfortunately, it was out of focus (you can see a pine tree is actually in focus, not the crow).
(you can see a pine tree is actually in focus, not the crow).
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-31 13:21:51 UTC
Post #283661
the cat has no eyes...
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-31 15:27:57 UTC
Post #283663
@Striker: Also, pictures of animals that are at or below their eye level can have great results (I'm talking about the dog one). Such a small detail can turn a boring photo into a great photo (see what you did with the crow two pictures below it).
Posted 14 years ago2010-07-31 18:15:44 UTC
Post #283667
I'm confused. You mean that's a great photo or the opposite?
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-01 01:56:00 UTC
Post #283684
The dog one? I find it more like a boring photo, no offense. I'd have taken it with the camera closer to the ground. I'll check if I have a good picture of my own dog to show you.
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-01 05:55:24 UTC
Post #283693
Smile for the camera!
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-01 14:06:42 UTC
Post #283704
Sometimes I wish I had a macro lens. But that's at least another $400 to spend.
And these are for Striker.
Yeah, I owe you nice outdoor shots, these were just to show how different it can be from a lower height.
And these are for Striker.
Yeah, I owe you nice outdoor shots, these were just to show how different it can be from a lower height.
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-02 12:10:00 UTC
Post #283784
I've got some photos of Mauritius, however the only camera I had was my phone one. I might upload some from my dad's camera when he comes home.
A sunset from the beach at the hotel
I tried to take a picture showing the big buildings in Port Louis that the rich live and work in, and also showing the poor selling stuff to tourists at street level, but I couldn't fit them in one photo, so I took two.
I found an interesting and rather delicate shell while I was Scuba diving, but my brother thought it would be funny to break it. I saw a photo of the same type of shell in a store display, so I took a photo.
A sunset from the balcony of my room at the hotel.
The same, after the sun fell past the horizon.
An unusual butterfly I saw this morning while walking my dog.
A sunset from the beach at the hotel
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-02 13:40:26 UTC
Post #283787
Yeah, I owe you nice outdoor shots, these were just to show how different it can be from a lower height.You'd better upload those photos if you want to impress me. Honestly, I think my photo looks better than yours(probably because of the subject, not the way the picture was taken)
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-02 15:59:19 UTC
Post #283789
Yeah it does. Gotta go out and get some better ones. 
@TJB: Nice! Those are pretty good pictures for a phone.
I really hope we change pages soon. This page takes like a minute to load.
@TJB: Nice! Those are pretty good pictures for a phone.
I really hope we change pages soon. This page takes like a minute to load.
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-04 14:29:57 UTC
Post #283903
Ah, I got to express my "not-impressed" feeling about your photo through a photo of my dog I took today:
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-05 19:07:50 UTC
Post #283907
What does that mean? You don't like your photo either? Glad you tried at least, it's always good to try new points of view!
Edit:
Here are some old photos, taken with my old camera.
Here I was playing NFSHP2.
This one was accidental, but I like how it turned out:
This is one of my favourites, I don't know why:
Edit:
Here are some old photos, taken with my old camera.
Here I was playing NFSHP2.
This one was accidental, but I like how it turned out:
This is one of my favourites, I don't know why:
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-10 14:57:37 UTC
Post #284068
This is my adorable little cat with blue eyes from my grandmother:
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-10 15:35:12 UTC
Post #284070
Check out some pics I took here: http://skals.deviantart.com/
Posted 14 years ago2010-08-13 10:03:58 UTC
Post #284190
You must be logged in to post a response.