j.d._thomas

Ron,

 

Well, the image you mentioned is definitely the best of the bunch. But still, for me, the main point is the mill, and it's just to small in the frame. Moving to a set of rocks closer to the mill would have allowed the mill to be a bolder part of the image. Also, framing to keep out the sky, or shooting when lighting/weather conditions allowed for less contrast between land and sky would make the bright sky less distracting, again, pulling eyes away from the main subject, the mill. This would make the image a keeper for me.

 

Anyway, didn't mean to be disrespectful - just giving a cold, hard businessworld opinion. You took it graciously.

What is so brilliant about these? A pretty subject does not make a pretty photograph. None of these have a strong subject filling the frame, and all of them feature blown highlights or distracting bits of bright sky around the border, pulling the eye away. Basically, inapproriate lighting for the subject, poor framing, and poor use of the chosen focal length. These would be classed as snapshots and tossed by any decent photo editor. You need to think about these points more carefully.

UV filters are silly - just extra cash for the companies. The warming or PL filter that you should be using in most situations outside will also "protect" the lens (from what, by the way?) Inside, filters are usually not necessary.

"Silly Question" - appropriate because UV filters are silly. Really only useful at the beach or in a sandstorm to protect the lens. But likely not even then, because a PL or slight warming filter will also protect the lens, and give you desirable results. UV filters are just extra cash in equipment companies' pockets, and provide no benefit to the photographer.

No.

Yes.

Whew, I know what you mean, Richard. The world's really getting crazy with all these people with a conscience running around...

OK - Gary, what you're doing sounds properly thought out and respectable. But I think it's pretty gallsy to just show up at a game where you have no connection, know none of the kids/parents, start walking the sidelines taking photos of kids right in front of the parents, and then later go up to these people and say, "I've just taken photos of your kid. You can see them on this site, and they are for sale, etc." I'd just look at you like you were a complete lowlife scumbag. Sales? Of course not.

 

Go through the league beforehand - get sanctioning from them. Have any orders beforehand. Know the jersey numbers of the kids you will be shooting, go up to their parents before the game and introduce yourself, etc., etc. You gotta be a numbskull to not be able to work this simple business plan out yourself.

 

By the way, what a vitriolic and off-base lunatic response from the original poster.

Sleazeball. Just using the words "tactics" and "fair game" tells it all. Sleazeball. Have a sleazy day!

Pretty sleazy way to try and make money. I'd rip up your card in your face if I was at my kid's game and you came around pimping your shots. I'd then call the cops and have you removed from the grounds. That's not what little league sports are for - it's for the kids and parents to enjoy themselves.

 

It's pretty easy to think of a legitimate way to do this. If you can't figure it out, then...

I'll put up my blind grandmother's throwaway camera snaps. They should thrill some of the people here. Don't worry - you won't miss them because I'll make a big announcement first.

Sadly, these are the best of the best. It's what we get every day or couple of days from the man - another bunch of boring, meaningless grab shots, taken in bad lighting conditions, with bad composition, etc. And a higher-than-thou comeback for every criticism, along with a lot of poser mumbo-jumbo.

 

I could just not look at them, but I keep checking, because I'm amazed at the new levels of badness constantly achieved.

A proper TLR like a Yashica/Rollei, etc. can take crappy, out of focus, blurry, vignetted, technically flawed photos, and it can take properly exposed, in focus photos too. The operator can consciously decide what he/she wants.

 

A Holga can take only crappy, technically flawed photos. These "cameras", which give technically flawed, random results, are ridiculous for someone trying to learn a new format. How do you learn from your results when your results are random and crappy no matter what your technique?

 

Do yourself a favor and do not listen to people recommending Holgas/Dianas/Seagulls. Get a Yashica or better and learn properly.