laheist

I think the reason is simple: there's no place to rate a photo when you make a comment, and there's no place to comment on a photo when you rate it, except when you want to do the photos 1 by 1, which is not nearly as interesting as just looking at the top ones for the last 3 days.

 

Anyway, until they categorize them into "top landscapes" or "top portraits" and "top photo art/photoshop work" there will be a lot of disagreement. Also, regarding rating, you must remember that these are <b><i>other photographers</i></b> who are rating, and their view will be drastically different than your family, friends, etc, because the <i>other photographer's</i> opinion is based on a knowledge of technique and having seen a lot of photos to base an informed opinion on, not just the normal "oooh, pretty picture" that the general public gives.

I think that you took it all a little to personally. I thought that some very funny stuff was posted there, and you got the question answered, too. Don't take it too personally.

I think you'd do better by loading scotch tape in your camera. If you want quality pictures, use quality film. Kodak for red things and portraits, Fuji for blue and green things. Maybe that's oversimplifying it, but Konika I used for a while because it came free with my processing, and I was never happy.

I think a better solution to the macro with the A-1 is an extension tube set. It's just a spacer between the lens and the camera, so the image is much brighter and less bulky than a reversed lens. In the set you get a several different sizes depending on the magnification desired. These are pretty easy to find depending where you are; I got mine in Panama for $10, but out here in Japan where A-1's are common they're generally about $60 a set, and still easy to find.

It's funny, when you say that you don't have a photographic eye- the first step is the recognition of bad pictures, and it sounds like you have that down! With that skill alone you can do what so many say and just take a lot of pictures and by the sheer percentage come out with a few good ones, but that doesn't doesn't sound like what you want.

 

I think that the key to getting the shots that you want- those that show ordinary things in an extraordinary way- is to find a new perspective. Get low to the ground, stand on top of something, back up and zoom in, take some macros, film it at night, siluette the sun behind it, take a long time exposure of it, put it on a mirror, put a sheet over it, etc, etc.

 

Also get another set of eyes on things. I learned a lot about learning to see the different photographic opportunities by travelling with other photographers. It's amazing, any two photographers can go to the same spot, at the same time of day, and come back with completely different photos. The different perspectives make interesting photos.

 

And as for those who say not to look at photo.net or listen to its contributors, I think it's a great tool, because you can see the variety of different photos and perspectives, and ask questions about the ones that you like. When you do get advice, you can look at his or her portfolio, if you like what you see, listen to them, if you don't, ignore them.

The second trick is to move your finger in a circular motion in front of the dragonfly. You will see its head follow the tip of your finger, and it will become dizzy. Then you can get as close as you like!<div></div>

I know this comes about a month after the last posts, but I want to say that my Japanese girlfriend is a country girl, and showed me a few dragonfly tricks. First, dragonflies will perch on the highest thing they can, so if you provide your finger as that, they will move over, as demonstrated with the attached photo.<div></div>

Simply put, take a look at the book at http://www.canonfd.com/newf1world/f1worldind1.html

The second part of the book tells of all of the advancements made from the A1 to the new F1. The biggie for me is that it works in the extreme cold (I've had my A1 fail a lot in the winter doing nature photography) and that it's moisture proofed out the wazoo.

I've always been told, and I think I read somewhere once, that linear polarizers degrade a cameras ability to auto-focus, so for auto-focus cameras you need to have a circular polarizer.

I had a sig 28mm, it was durable, but it vingnetted the corners, so it's value was limited.