marcofrancardi

Thank you.

I had to log in from may laptop. It isn't very "straight forward" from my Samsung cell phone.

 

Good morning, 

I have recently logged in after a long time and in the "member albums" section I'm currently seeing pics that are not mine.

As "recent activity", i am retriving just one 2020 picture I posted. Any idea?

Thanks.

my 2c:

got my first digital D70 in 2004(coming from a 1991 F801 which I was in love with). Never completely satisfied.

got my D200 in 2006 and thought was suiting fine. I elected it my next 10 years camera....

forget about. The D300 is a step already too short to be the next one. in a couple of year I'll go for full frame for a devalued D3/D700. Compared to film, changes are simply too great to ignore them.

Can I tell you something? this thread just confused my already weak knoledge on the subject. Now I have to go back and study my manual again... thank you all! :)

 

I thought:

 

active mode: camera and/or subject moving;

 

normal mode: camera and subject still, hand held or monopod;

 

no VR: tripod (maybe).

 

Now, as for the "mirror slap" in critical lighting contition, my D200 has a shutter delay funcion of some tenths of a second starting from the moment the mirror is lifted. I tested it on my 300/f4 with noticeable results.

 

Now I have to go back to my manual for another very boring non-VR reading session. :(

good mornig people. Sticking to the power of the image and if it is worth using it, I cannot avoid to notice that what "the silent majority" sees on TV, newspaper and so on, is only the censored "quota" of the real thing, and this quota is always carefully chosen by the "few" who can, not to shock the public, nor to attract too much attention. Maybe that's why it (the majority) remains silent.

 

Have you ever watched, on TV, a death penalty execution's footage longer than a couple of second? no matter if it's from WWII, Stalin's USSR, Mao's China, Viet Nam or US today. you are allowed just a glimpse of it, not enough to follow the man's terror in his eyes before, nor he agonizing later.

 

Have you ever whatched disturbing pictures of half bodies in the nigth news report? Not half of it, not a single third of the real thing.

 

Now, I can understand children need to be sheltered from such a miserable show, but don't tell me we have seen it all since WWII. It is simply not true. When average people see those images, I can see jaws dropping, not "tsk,tsk,tsk".

 

I think that, from time to time, we, the rich western countries, need disturbing pictures. Disturbing our lazy, modern, plastic life with some "shots" of real world life. We need to be "shoouted" at.

 

Once again, I'm not saying it's possible, but I'm hoping that if it were, it would make a little difference.

 

So, to conclude, in a line of principles, I would want to take "that" picture (religion, local social custom or culture not withstanding, or the subject being noticibly uncomfortable with it), and show it to my friends, for it might make a little difference.

my little contribution:

to me, final target of a picture is to create a "reaction" into the person who is looking at it. doesn't matter if he/she/me is looking at a print or into a monitor. the "thing" becomes real and "Phisical" in the Smile/frown/tears of the person that is looking at it.

I used to shoot slides 95% of my time. And people were looking at "Light in the screen" now they are looking at "light in the monitor" can't see much difference. the important and physical thing are their reactions.

John, I think there is a big difference in reactions between watching a movie and pictures of a real event. I lately had the misfortune to find myself in Lebanon right after the latest war. I saw an uncensored reportage of what happened there and, let me tell you, you would not want to see, ever, those pictures. There are no words good eonugh to explain or let you figure. When you see that, it takes you to your stomach, it really doesn't matter anymore who is wrong or right. It makes you want to stop that, in any possible way. I'm not saying it's possible to stop violence around the world just upon wishing, I'm not that naif, but those pictures of limbs torn apart, half bodies.... really make you wish it were possible.

Please, let's stop the debate about truth/not truth. this is not the point here. I would cut the long story short this way: today, what we are buying or not buying, using, consuming, has an effect on somebody else living on the other side of the world. So, I find it fair enough we should all know, by any extent, what this effect is. Even through pictures. Famine is famine, by any standard, personal or not.

So keep "shoouting".

Furthermore, at the moment of shooting, it's up to your sensibility not to interfere, offend nor insult the subject of your photographic attention. But if you can do it, do it. The more we know (even in the harsh way) the better we'll behave

well, if I may contribute to the discussion, and i can surely tell you I'm not an expert, I've been observing, since a few years, that sequences are getting shorter and shorter. "Artistic" videos, be it a clip or an ad, are made more and more of a cospiquous number of sequences very seldom longer than two or three seconds, with very little motion, some carefully chosen panning and thouthfully studied perspectives. Lately, even colour has become scarce. This seems to be the case in Winehouse's clip.

in the end, it looks to me that video is "approching" photography, not the contrary. just my 2c...

I use a 18-200VR and a 300/f4 with a TC1.4.

Of course, they need two different kind of management, but I think it is a good compromise to cover most of my humble needs for casual nature's photography. Slower long zooms would be really useless, cause I already have aberration issues on my D200.

mine is doing it too. But I sort of expected this lens to be a compromise on many levels.... and this is one of them. It's still a fairly acceptable all-rounder to me for the price I paid.

yes, if you don't have "mobility" problems, get a fast, prime lens

do you use more than one CF? if not, it's safer to download pics from the camera, through USB connection, for one simple reason: you avoid the risk of bending camera's pins when inserting the CF back in the camera after downloading. More than one CF? than use a Card reader only for the CF you have alreay unplugged, and live the last one in the camera. in the end, the least CF plug/unplug, lesser the risk of pins bending/breaking. as long as formatting is concerned, once you downloaded the images, formatting is faster and safer for the next session.

it's ok Karl, nobody's perfect. :)

if you use Nikon Capture,

BEFORE you clean your dirty filter (that's what 99% probably is), take a "dust reference" picture (should be on your manual "how to").

 

It is a "mapping" picture of all the particles as they are presently situated on your sensor and il will automatically "overlap" all over your shots taken with the dirty sensor situation, compensating the black spot effect. As previously mentioned, you can do amazing thing with PS as well. Digital Era!

What H.P. said.

 

Moreover, I feel talent is instinct. Success is hard work, with a bit of (optional) talent.

Pico,

I think you give to nowaday's camera software too many credits.

to use the same metaphore you used, I would rather say that it would be like writing a book with a computer word processor with automatic typing corrector. It helps, but it cannot make sure that your sentences make sense. Let alone being aestethically viable.

DOF, composition, lighting or saturation are to be considered with digital as well as with film cameras.

 

Really, to the "photographic literacy" point of view, digital has changed very little, IMHO.

 

One more thing: I don't think there are many "photographer" who are ready to spend plenty of money on a, say, 20d or d200 and letting it do all the fun work... it's more a case for P&S cameras. But that's another story.

"I could take, write, make, sketch... that". To me, it's just genuine ignorance applied to the pelculiar art, mixed with a little bit of arrogance. it's not worth responding nor querreling.

"You have a good camera". Again, not worth a polemic answer.

Of course I have a good camera, I love this bloody hobby so much to spend over 5000 of my very scarce bucks and all my spare time to practice it.

And if you liked the picture, it's enough to me.

If the particular comment came from an "illiterate", it's not worth commenting.

If it came from a pro, it's a compliment.

So, why worry?

Photographic literacy exists.

 

Photography IS a universal language. Anyone (chinese, british or bolivian) can recognise a dog in a picture of a dog.

Not so with the conventions we refer to as "spoken languages". You need to know the terms of the conventions. words.

 

But that's where universalism ends.

 

If you want to "see" and interpret what's behind the lines and shades representing that particular dog, what the person who took the shot "wished" to "say" by the means of it, then you need literacy.

A common ground of notions, social, cultural, life experiences with the photographer. his history, preparation. His backgroud. A "common language" to share sensations and feelings.

When I read a book, I could read it in it's original (english, french, portugese) version. I would understand it's grammar and meanings with no problems. But if I want to "feel" its emotions and fully appreciate every aspects, I read it in my own language's traslation.

 

to simplify a lot a complex issue, I would say that the more people the photographer wants to graphically relate to, the more literacy he needs.

 

Now, digital era has simplified the "grammar" of that "language".

But that's it.

The style, rethoric, poetry and exposition skills are still the same: to be achieved.

Thanks Kiem. Silly me... I'm ashamed. I had it in continuous servo-focus mode... Sorry guys.

sometime ago, when I was still learning my new D200, I switched the

autofocus assist lamp off, to save it from unnecessary use.

After that, I never needed it because of camera's ability to

autofocus even in relatively low light conditions.

For the first time,in very low light conditions(almost pitch dark),

yesterday I tried to switch it on. I couldn't. with or without my SB-

800 on.

Could it be burnt, after almost no use at all?

has anyone of you had the same problem?

I went through all the menus items, to no avail.

Redemption? Oh, please. She would lose all the appeal if she looked "redempted". does she look redempted to you?

Fact is that "bad boys" (girls in this case) sell better than nerds.

Shun: you were a kid 30 years ago, like me. My 15 years old kid, today, LOOOOKs at her, I'm telling you.

p.s.: my shutter release button /control lock isn't loose at all, on the contrary...

Are you shure the two grips are identical, anyway? don't know about the D100, but the MB 200 has a good bunch of contacts at its end, which shows for a lot of funtions. included power management. I'm going to check it out on the manual...

what Michael said. different ends, differend coatings.