acearle

I'm guessing here, but would you happen to have a grip on the F80 Conni? Maybe more juice? (problem with the body would be my initial guess also, but mebbee??).

Well, as one who is blonde all summer (errr, graying more these days), I can attest to....errr, never mind, I'm shooting myself in the foot...

 

...and I didn't mean to pick on him, I hope no offense was taken :-)...

You also might try <a href="http://www.photoexposure.com">Photoexposure</a>.

Darnit, forgot to respond to the observation that his backgrounds are bland and possibly intentionally so. I am SURE they are intentionally so, the question for y'all is to try and figure out why. One project I've had on the back burner for a while (winters are to )@#$@$# cold to shoot nudes in Taiwan and summers are to )@#@#$@$ hot, so I'll prob'ly start it this fall (which means October???/November/December here) is nudes in abandoned structures, with a REAL emphasis on abandoned factories. The backgrounds will be pretty dismal, there are more abandoned factories per square Km around here than you can shake a stick at. Now, the question I have is "why do you think I'm choosing this setting?" Then ask yourself the question "why does Igor choose the settings he does?" Maybe a comment on modern life? Dull and lackluster but oversexed at the same time? The contrasts are fascinating. Does one get to the point with sexuality where the stunning nature of the sex partner no longer is enough to sustain the interest in the act? If Igor's shots seem bland after while and repeatative, what does that say about where you are putting the emphasis...on the body, the physical...if you see them as bland and boring, maybe you oughtta think about what it is that sex and sensuality means to YOU? Is it all physical, or is there another more important component? Maybe THIS is what Igor is trying to get across in his work...I can tell you from experience of working with some of the hottest female singers in Taiwan that after while it becomes "ho hum, another piece of eye candy, great, yippe...how little is she gonna pay THIS time...great body, but STILL a prima dona." I think Igor's models are (naturally) stunning, and we get no sense of who they are...hmmm, now THAT is something I DO like about his shots, they make me wonder about the subjects...that may be why I was surprised by the "but they're mental and emotional wimps" question.

 

...I'm guessing, blowing air, possibly from the wrong orifice, but my point is that Igor is OBVIOUSLY not some hack, there is method and thought behind his work (possibly like some of us, he doesn't think about it when he is doing it, he just does it because it feels right, I dunno)(again, I'm speculating, guessing, assuming, and all the other things that usually get one in trouble)...

Struan, where on EARTH do you get "...but they're mental and emotional wimps?" Is it an assumption that a woman with an exquisite form must, by definintion, be mentally and emotionally blonde????? Is it that only women with their hair in a bun and thick horn-rimmed glasses are intelligent and have emotional depth?

The aperture on the D70 is controlled from the camera body, so aperture rings aren't really necessary. The G series doesn't have aperture rings, you set the aperture from the command dial on the front of the body (same as my F80). I have the 70-300G and am picking up a D70 in a couple of weeks. The D series (ED?) is much more robust and has glass elements. Optically, rumor has it that the D is sharper, but in side by side tests I couldn't tell the difference in prints. The D focuses much more accurately (the G hunts quite a bit, but eventyally finds it and locks on).

 

Dunno much about Sigma, I'm thinking about picking up a couple of Sigma primes and trying them (Taiwan doesn't have a huge selection of lenses). I see a lot of people here with them, so I assume they are cheaper than Nikon or Cannon lenses. When I bought the 70-300G, I asked the pro shop about Sigma (they don't carry them) and Tamron (the G series is made by Tamron). They said the Tamron was about the same price, but that they thought I'd prefer the G series Nikkor. I'm planning on replacing it once I've added the primes and a second film body. I view the G series as a stopgap lens, mainly due to build quality and me having to constantly empty sand out of em, lol (windy beaches)...

I'm curious about this to. I'm moving toward doing a LOT more digital. I haven't had much luck with this, the images always look digitally processed to me. When I want grainy B&W, I shoot high speed black and white film and scan :-(. Is there a way to get a more natural looking grain than just the add noise filter? There HAS to be as all sorts of advertising images have this effect and I don't believe fer a minute that they shot 'em on pushed Delta 3200...

I'm going to pick up a digital body in a couple of weeks and did a LOT of research. I added the Fuji S2 Pro to the mix. After comparing features and quality of images, the D100 was dropped from the running pretty quickly. When I started looking at identical shots taken with an S2 and a D70, the D70 won out with no reservations. It DOES have continuous focus, you just don't set it from the switch on the front of the camera (I know, I know, I also would rather just flip the switch). The results are sharper from the D70, the colors better (S2 has better skin tones, but the difference can be made up in post processing the NEF files)...what blew me away was the metering on the D70, same as the F5 1005ish RGB that works in tandem with the CCD. The D70 shoots RAW (NEF) and JPG Basic at the same time (a big deal for me because clients want their proofs yesterday, so I am planning on immediately burning them a CD of the JPG Basics and handing it to 'em before they walk out the door, final files/prints to be done from the RAW files). One thing I *HATE* about the D70 is its viewfinder, too small and dim, but the advantages outweigh that defect for me. It is also too )@#$@#@$ small (I slap grips on everything I can, I have big hands)....again, I can live with it because the final shots are, to my eye, that much better. Trying to remember differences.....hmmmm.....1/500 flash sync on the 70, 1/180 on the 100...some funky thing for reducing noise in long exposure that the D100 doesn't have (major+ for me)...can use standard batteries when I forget to charge the rechargables on a critical shoot (I R absent minded and will stock a couple sets of the standards in the bag)...Oh, I don't think it has a mirror lock up like the D100 and it won't take a cable release (I'm going to buy the IR remote for it). Personally, I like the size and feel of the D100, I like the viewfinder better, and I like the fact that it will shoot (with a lot of noise) at 3200 & 6400 ASA, but the final test was seeing the results from the two cameras, the D70 won.

Just go shoot. I use anything from a 50mm lens to a 300mm lens for street shots. I try to be unobstrusive, but also try and be obnoxious sometimes (99% the former). Of course, street shooting in Taiwan is different from street shooting in the U.S.. There are, ostensibly, laws against taking someone's picture without first asking...it is a law that ALL street photographer's ignore. It was put in place to try and stop people from shooting up young women's skirts (hard to compose anyway). Some days I don't want the tension of street shooting, so I don't go out shooting on those days. Other days I relish the challenge. In my shots, I don't look for eye contact or any acknowlegement of me as a photographer. Others look for the interaction between subject and photographer, I like those shots, but they aren't the ones I am trying to get now. Follow how you feel, if you want street shots of life as it happens, 300mm lens. If you want to be part of the scene, but unseen, 50mm...hmmm...tired and rambling. As to your original question about invading spaces, in many cases by the time someone has the chance to object, the shot has been taken (in my case), in other cases the initial shot is done and the person, realizing they are being photographed, actually does things that improve the shot (in those cases I approach them afterward and give 'em a business card and tell 'em to call in a few weeks if they want prints, and I assure them that I ain't gonna charge 'em anything for the prints...no one has ever called).

"We ignore "real" women, and flock to the unobtainable surrogate"

 

Tom, interesting point, ans probably valid. However, there are those of us who flat out are not interested in photographing models like Igor's models (I really like his work, by the way...to me it is the contrast between the hypersexualized women and the decrepit surroundings, it seems to be more of a comment on modern reality than anything else, to me at least).

 

Back to my point, I am really only intrested in shooting average women, and in showing that no woman *is* average, and by default no *person* is just average. I do think that men are hardwired to the bluest of the artificial moths, and there are a lot of people photographing them moths. However, at this point in what I R doing with a camera (some people call it camera abuse), originality comes in trying to document people who consider themselves average or less than average in every day situations and life (well, not always on the last one) and show that each person has something desireable. Unfortunately, in Taiwan getting average women to pose nude is nearly impossible (or at least in the middle of the boonies where I am). One of the the things I *am* planning to do is to go talk to the street walkers...most 30-40, most considered far beyond their prime, and try to get THEM to pose, looking for beauty in them (not necessarily nudes, but most likely...depends on the person).

 

This is all coming from someone who doesn't know squat about much of anything (I slept through my college art history class...damned thing was a 8:00am), but Igor's shots are original in what they convey to me. Maybe its just that what he portrays in the environment/sexuality contrast is very close to actual reality (finding purtee pitshures in Taiwan is a challenge, finding pictures of urban decay is easy, problem is Fuji doesn't make enough film to shoot 'em all).

I disagree, there are many bad ones. I will not even both with a lab that doesn't use Frontier. Many of the other labs don't calibrate or calibrate wrong. The place that Craig Fergussen mentioned in your B&W question is probably your best bet. I no longer give my negs to the lab for printing. The process the negs, I scan 'em, then I hand 'em a CD for printing. Taipei labs may be a little more careful than those down south, I dunno, but I became convinced that there were aligators in the Frontier down here.

Most decent labs do it, the question is WHAT they do with it. I gave up with scratched negs and now do my own. I've been meaning to get up to Jazz in Taipei (Craig's suggestion a while back) but haven't had time.

Well, after using the new UI I'd rate it a 4/4 (usability/aesthetics). I understand the intent. The previous one would have gotten a 6/5. I'm a bit torn on my opinion of the new rating system, but on the UP side, I rate photos that I previously would not rate due to ratings retaliation (I will give lower than a 5 now, with explanations for ratings lower than 4.....that usually got retaliatory ratings in the past). I do agree that it would be really nice to have the old design as an alternative. This is a database driven site and I can't imagine that it would http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id2

instad of

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id

would be that hard to implement :-). However, I am not nearly as hostile to the new design as I was...not the best UI design, and not the worst...

Very cool, going to go try it now, thank you! I think the black and white conversion also salvages it, and will salvage some others on that roll. It wasn't entirely the lab's fault, they don't know many films because there aren't that many films available in Taiwan. Taipei has ONE place where I have found non-Superia/Sensia Fuji film...I usually put the odd stuff in a ziploc bag and they send it off to Taipei for pocessing (I'm too far, 1.5-2 hours each way) or I'd use the Taipei labs myself. The good thing about this is I'm learning a LOT more about Photoshop :-).

That's IT! That's VERY close to what I was looking for. How did you do the color changes? They do have full tonal range, so they MAY be salvageable.

Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later. I took a bunch of film

in for processing forgetting I had a roll of Provia in there and

forgot to tell 'em to process it as slides (they usually notice if

there is anything other than Superia/Sensia, which is 99.9999% of what

they process because it is pretty much all that is available in

Taiwan). It went through standard print processing, with disastrous

results. I've tweaked and poked and prodded and Photoshopped for two

hours on what may be the only salvageable shot, which happens to

basically be a snapshot...the long and the short is that I think all

the shots are pretty much useless. This is the result of my prodding

and poking. I don't like it (probably because it is so far from what I

was going for), but someone said they LIKED it.....I'm looking for

other opinions. Did the rescue attempt sort of work?

Stefano, I checked 'em out, there was nothing to check out. When I basically said that there were four payment options, credit card, direct wire transfer, LC (Letter of Credit, very secure), or cashier's check with me waiting for shipment, the "buyer" suddenly disappeared (no response). It turns out that the name used was quite unique, the only results on a web search turned up a Brazillian Miss World. If the money shows up, I will definitely print and ship. A South African I know said it definitely smelled fishy, she's been to Nigeria and has very serious doubts...

Seems like yet another case of "we screwed up two years ago and are now going to stomp on anything that we aren't familiar with." In a way, it makes me glad that I'm shooting in Asia. I tend to ignore the military, the police, and especially the military police in Taiwan (I shoot whatever I want, wherever I want and do exactly what the locals do, ignore all laws that aren't convenient). If it wasn't posted, and you were shooting from a public location, personally I would have just done what I do here: Walked away inviting them to arrest me and end up with a helluva lot more headaches than a single photographer with a couple of frames. I also would have suggested that they not park something so top secret as a humvee in public view, gawd forbid the rooskies or them terrorist photographers know we gots humvees. If that got out in public, awl hell'ud break loose.

 

Three similar situations I've been in in Taiwan in the last three months are as follows:

 

Shooting dragon boat races: I waded out to a breakwater to get a better angle on the start (properly equipped, proper footwear, great traction, and I've grown up on the water, I know what I'm doing). 10 minutes later, a cop shows up and starts squalling for me to get off the breakwater. I made it clear that if he wanted me, he had to wade out and get me. He disappeared, no further problems (my assistant had problems, though...with ME...I wanted to know why she wasn't running interference with the gendarmes like she is supposed to).

 

Shooting a series of nudes on a beach with a small army installation nearby. Military police came and wanted to confiscate the film (public beach, shot all AWAY from the installation). I offered to sell it to them, since I figure their real reason was to come oogle the model and see of they could get the film to make prints for themselves. It got ugly, the model was pissed (at them) and suggested we ignore 'em and keep shooting. We did, they pulled an M16 out to intimidate me, and I asked the question "You are going to SHOOT a foreign photographer on the beach? Yeah right." The model dressed and we walked to the car with them in tow demanding the film. We got in the car and drove away (if it had actually been illegal, they could have run my plates and come looking for me...been two months now).

 

Was on the beach last fall near a DIFFERENT military installation shooting beach debris (again, intentionally avoiding shooting toward the single guard tower that is considered a military installation). Soldiers (not MPs) came and wanted my film. I simply told 'em they couldn't have it because I'd been shooting things ON the sand, not above it. They looked puzzeled and switched from Mandarin to Taiwanese, then walked off. No other problems.

 

When I used to shoot in the U.S., I was pretty aware of what the rules were and if I was breaking them. If I *was* breaking them, I'd surrender the film. If I wasn't, I'd challenge whoever was giving me trouble and suggest that they actually follow through with what they were threatening, making it VERY clear that I'd file lawsuits against anyone present. After 9/11, I suspect they would arrest the terrorist photographer and classify me as an enemy combatant (after all, my camera is an F80, not the non-asault version, the N80).

 

My condolences, if I were you I'd get some software and try and recover the images of the top-secret ever-so-scary humvee (can you tell that I think the pinheads have gone WAY overboard? :-D).

Gotta admit, Grant's one-liners are both amusing and irritating at the same time. I don't think he added anything to the discussion, which makes me wonder why he even bothered to click on the thread.

 

6 months ago, I was 100% anti-retouch for anything except dust and scratches. I didn't want anything getting in the way of the realism, my definition of beauty is realistic beauty, not ABB (Airbrushed Bunny Beauty). However, I do find heavily retouched images quite beautiful. I suppose what I was reacting to is the fact that many women don't see themselves as beautiful because they can't airbrush themselves (errr, clone/dodge/burn themselves) before looking in the mirror in the morning. I wanted to show that beauty occurs as it occurs, complete with scars, moles, and the occasional blemish.

 

I was taken to task by a model, which slowly started changing my views. She said "Fine, next time I'll cancel the shoot until the zit heals." Hmmmm. Hmmmmm. Made me think. What's wrong with taking out temporary blemishes? That was the first step down the slipery slope of retouching. I now oughtta join Retoucher's Anonymous. I still leave most imperfections there, and always ask the question "Where have you seen a perfect body in the wild?" I have seen lotsa bodies, and exactly zero were Madison Avenue perfect. I suppose that I subconciously seek out those imperfections to some extent and shoot them, again asking the question as to why they are considered un-beautiful.

 

It is definitely possible to take a beautiful photo without retouching. It depends on how you define beauty and what you want from the shot. It also happens that many people will not like the shot because it is unretouched, too realistic (maybe photography is like fiction, everyone sees reality day in and day out and wants a dose of seing the world the way they THINK it oughtta be).

 

Did I adress the original post? I dunno...it got me thinking, and that is what I thunked :-).

Hmmm, after a weekend of thinking about it (and talking to my bidness banker), I think I'm just gonna ignore this one. Although there are ways to avoid being scammed, it just isn't worth the time considering the 90% probability that this order is bogus. I was kinda HOPING someone would have had some GOOD experiences with Nigeria, but it looks like there aren't any (talked to a couple of European organizations specializing in the Nigerian 419 scams, they said it looked like it was shaping up to be a variation on the 419 Bank Draft scam).

Lol, yeah...I'm thinking about setting the filters the same way. As far as the wiring the money TO an account, that wouldn't be a real problem. Opening a single account for a single inbound transaction is standard business procedure here, but with the 419 scams...I had an online business way back in the stone age, and at THAT time it was the Eastern European orders you had to watch carefully...had 3 fraudulent ones, but I used TwoEyes fraud detection (my own two eyes and a brain) and cancelled all three before shipping the gold (literally in this case, it was a custom jewelry business).

Hi, has anyone else gotten an email from a buyer in Nigeria with South

African connections? I'm a little concerned about this order for

several reasons, one is the size (240 prints, requested the largest

size) for a country with a per-capita GDP of 1/2 of Haiti's (Haiti

US$1600, Nigeria US$800). I did some research as I've gotten dozens of

the Nigeria Scam emails (where you are purportedly to help them

launder lost plunder from a dead king or president) and discovered

that Nigeria is a hotbed for credit card fraud and forged cashier's

checks. I'm suddenly (for some odd reason ;-) ) less than enthusiastic

about this order. Did anyone else get this email? Has anyone actually

done BUSINESS with Nigeria--successfully?

Low batteries was causing the problem. Simple solution :-D. Thanks!

David, thanks. That makes sense. My battery indicator has been showing 1/2 for the last 20 rolls (I use the grip with NiMH AAs). I took the "fresh" batteries out of the charger two weeks ago thinking that the ones in there were dying...and lo and behold, they are still relatively well charged. In the intervening two weeks, the "fresh" set had lost enough charge (one o' them wondrous things about NiMH) to also register 1/2. I'm gonna go home and drop BOTH sets in the charger...it makes sense that in a low power situation that the meter would not stay on, I think that is most likely the problem (had not occurred to me...logic...I recognize it when I see it, but try my DARNDEST not to use it :-D). Will post the results tomorrow (my time...probably also yours).

Hi, at some point a few weeks ago, I must have done something wrong in

my CSM settings. It USED to be that the viewfinder data would remain

for a few seconds (5-6 seems about right) after I'd autofocused a

shot. That would allow me to do the usual shutter speed/aperture

settings without having to hold down the shutter release. However,

after my explorations of custom settings, I seem to have disabled this

incredibly useful feature and for the life of me can NOT figure out

where I changed it. If anyone could point me in the right direction, I

would REALLY appreciate it :-).