beegeedee

that is a great shot! i've never come close to capturing such a rush of energy or speed!

the science and engineering of top fuel racing is beyond most everyone's imagination! to ride a top fuel bike, now that s bravery.

This is an interesting topic, and when I want to make some interesting shots in a photojournalistic vein, I often work on getting things to "accidentally" appear in the scene. Mainly this just means spending some waiting for some undetermined sequence of events to fall into place, then take the shot. Of course, unless you are using models, the exact thing and how it works out are something of a crap shoot. But with the food servers, you know they'll be going back and forth every few minutes or so; it's just a matter of waiting (while avoiding making them self-conscious).

 

Something I do occasionally, at events when I have a very limited camera in dim light, is to try to pick up other photographer's flash. This is not that difficult if there is some "peak of action" with a numbers of camera users present. If you can brace your camera well enough to get a longish shutter speed of, say 1/20 second or longer, you might get some interesting shots. Some years back I was at a big-dollar drag race with a small-sensor digital camera. As evening came on, I ended up panning at about 1/20 second; the blur was largely terrible. But every 4 or 5 shots, the track photographer's flash (he is up close) would superimpose sharp detail onto one or both cars. So it is an interesting effect that you don't often see.

The reason I might have known who was calling me before the days of caller ID, I suspect, had to do with some combination of guess and quick deduction rather than my thoughts manifesting reality.

Can you offer some more convincing empirical evidence than my having a select group of friends and family who might at any time call me on the phone and my almost instantaneously deducing who it is at the moment. I also figure for every time I was amazingly right, I was probably wrong three or four times but conveniently forgot those, preferring to remember the more rare occasions on which I guessed right . . . I mean . . . manifested reality. :)

fred, there are many realms unknown to you. it takes time to learn and perceive nonphysical ones. photography is about perception. perception can be super-conscious. (i dislike the term subconscious.)

education is intentionally kept ignorant;

* medical schools don't teach about the perversion of the industry by Rockefeller and the (pay-to-play) AMA via the 1910 Flexner report which resulted in 80% of medical schools closing; ones that taught real preventative healthcare. "nontraditional" (!?) ancient Chinese methods can keep you out of surgery and avoid drugs!

* law schools don't teach the three types of laws in the US constitution or that state governments are in violation of their constitutions that they be run with the "law of the land".

* economics/civics professors don't completely teach the central banks' roles. for example, how did "we the people" agree to be debtors for the national debt?

* theology schools don't teach where Jesus and John and there mothers traveled during his "missing years" so they could learn and teach how to use your mind to perform miracles.

and my point:

* psychology schools don't teach that John B. Rhine statistically proved and taught the existence of ESP (his term), so Duke University threw him out of the Psychology dept.

people have been fired or worse for teaching forbidden knowledge.

you get one pass for being without knowledge. just don't smirk like you have this s#!+ figured out!

study JB Rhine's data; available since the 1920's! there is so much more, but you have to step out of the matrix, read, think and quit ignoring intuition or gut-feel.

"A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be." - Wayne Gretzky

"Ninety percent of hockey is mental and the other half is physical." - Wayne Gretzky

you can choose to believe he wasn't precognitive! Gretzky’s uncanny ability to read plays has never been matched; the hockey world has yet to produce another player capable of coming close to matching his record.

i believe most, if not all world class athletes leverage super-conscious info or intuition.

women are better at leveraging intuition, probably because they have better ego management. (note: men are victims of testosterone poisoning.)

let's say you want to go out and photograph. EVERYONE HERE has had this dilemma (except someone lucky enough to own one camera and lens) - where to go, what to take, when to leave (i seldom have this option). how do you DECIDE? do you ever FEEL the urge to go some place and pack a non-normal (pun intended) for you lens?

try it, go with the little urges. do we ever think alone, without our soul/spirit/subconscious?

try it - it can be fun! instead of posting a pic, i started another thread:

have you ever gone somewhere on a whim and made a good pic?

did you choose the lens, body, or flash a bit randomly, too?

one weekend, i was working at home and got the urge to go to a nearby lake to take pictures. not unusual for me.

i grabbed my big sig lens, a bit unusual for me, but sometimes it is my walk-about lens!

i'm walking along the shoreline and 4 friendly fellows start asking me about photography and asked me to take their picture. sure, but nothing to hang in a photo contest (although it was my first drunk redneck homosexual shoo!)

then, a heavily laden photographer walks by and tells us that she is doing a bride-to-be shoot but she doesn't know it yet! her boyfriend will soon crash the shoot and do a surprise marriage proposal!

so, i wondered, why did i go there then with that lens and why did the drunks delay my walk so i could get this shot?

an engineer would say i was lucky, but perhaps intuition was helping.

have you ever, been in the right place at the right time with the right gear, unexpectedly? post it!

_LNG1365 by BG Day, on Flickr

How much is Tokina's AT-X pro 16-28mm zoom in dollars these days?

 

I see Wex have it on offer in the UK at £579, that's probably well under $800 in the states.

 

I tried a sample of Samyang 14mm f/2.8 a while back. For the money it wasn't at all bad, but since I have the 14-24 Nikkor it wasn't for me, even though it's a darn sight smaller and lighter than the Nikkor!

 

14mm is about as wide as I care to shoot. You're on top of the subject before it gets anywhere close to filling the frame at that sort of focal length.

i sold my tokina 16-28 and it was really really good! i bought the sigma art 24 which is sharper, but is fixed. anyone can argue either way. i do miss that lens when i want to go wider. but i have the samyang 12 which is excellent also.. the tokina at 16 is wonderful: GEO_1237 by BG Day, on Flickr

everything here is french except the heinz catsup!

_170807_130914_EUR8059 by BG Day, on Flickr