Photographs

6FeetOver · 22 Sep 2007, 00:17

Sweet!

smiscandlon · 22 Sep 2007, 12:31

SINsister wrote:Sweet!

I'm wondering if I should follow Carpy's lead and start giving my pictures clever names. I think that one would be:

"Calling Dr Freud"

Carpathian Psychonaut · 22 Sep 2007, 12:48

smiscandlon wrote:
SINsister wrote:Sweet!
I'm wondering if I should follow Carpy's lead and start giving my pictures clever names.

You'll note that I only do that if I can think of one - if I sneak an untitled pic in then you know I'm stumped!

I've just spent 20mins messing around with all the shiny dials and buttons of my new one. It seems that most are fairly easy to recognise and get to, but it's still going to take a while.

Got my head round the "continuous/multi" button today - three shots in a quick run, keep taking them but only store the final three or just keep grabbing them until the memory fills up. The "whir-whir-whir" sounds very professional

smiscandlon · 22 Sep 2007, 13:12

I must admit I feel a bit of a fraud using my wee camera phone. Although I just discovered a couple of nights ago that you can actually change the 'ISO' setting to 100/200/400, change the 'metering exposure' etc.

I look forward to someone telling me what all that actually means...

The stuff you've taken with that Holga thingy is pretty amazing, I look forward to seeing the new beast at work!

Carpathian Psychonaut · 22 Sep 2007, 13:17

smiscandlon wrote:The stuff you've taken with that Holga thingy is pretty amazing, I look forward to seeing the new beast at work!

Thanking you. The bizarre thing is that the Holga has virtually nothing you can alter - you choose flash off or on but that's about it. What you get is very much down to it's rather unique (for that read "toy like") plastic and spring innards.

I'm picking a set up later today but due to still being a bit flu'd up I made all sorts of screw-ups. I'll be happy to get six usable out of 12 !

Carpathian Psychonaut · 22 Sep 2007, 16:41

"Sagely Reflections On The Tyne"

"Ruby"

"Behold - The Lady Of The Lens"

smiscandlon · 22 Sep 2007, 17:48

Nice.

Love the first one. I took a load of pictures on the Clyde during the week, the surface of the river was really still and allowed for some great reflective shots. Just an example:

Is that your friend in the other 2 pics?

Inspired by earlier talk in this thread I went back to my alma mater today and ended up taking almost 100 pictures.

So expect photos of Hogwarts ... um, I mean the University of Glasgow, to be making an appearance shortly...

weebleswobble · 22 Sep 2007, 18:29

You make me pine for home

6FeetOver · 22 Sep 2007, 18:35

Carps, you need to help me get my hands on one of them there Holgas - and soon...

Carpathian Psychonaut · 22 Sep 2007, 18:38

smiscandlon wrote:Nice.
Is that your friend in the other 2 pics?

Yeah, she'd popped over from Manchester to see the UK's first exhibition of Daniel Johnston artwork. It was pretty cool, I have to say.

EvilBastard · 22 Sep 2007, 18:39

smiscandlon wrote: I must admit I feel a bit of a fraud using my wee camera phone. Although I just discovered a couple of nights ago that you can actually change the 'ISO' setting to 100/200/400, change the 'metering exposure' etc. I look forward to someone telling me what all that actually means...

[Evil Camera Geek]

ISO relates to what used to be called the film speed - basically, the higher the ISO the more sensitive to light the 'film' is, so if you're taking a lot of pictures in the dark then you want the 400 setting. The trade-off is that the higher the ISO gets, the "grainier" the picture is, so if you decide to enlarge it you get quite a fuzzy image.

Metering exposure - the camera decides how much light to let in. Most of the time the camera's settings are ok, but if you're taking pictures in the snow or on a bright sandy beach, the light that's reflected off the snow or sand fools the camera into thinking that it's brighter than it is, so it underexposes the picture, and you get greyish snow. So you want to change the exposure settings so that it "overexposes" the picture, that way you get nice bright white snow. Depending on how your phone is set up, the "+" means overexposure, the "-" means underexposure. Underexposure is useful when you're taking a picture of something that's spotlit against a dark background. By setting it to "underexpose" you're making the camera think that it's brighter than it is, but you will end up with a better-exposed picture.

[/Evil Camera Geek]

smiscandlon · 22 Sep 2007, 18:44

Thank you.

smiscandlon · 22 Sep 2007, 18:46

Carpathian Psychonaut wrote:
smiscandlon wrote:Nice.
Is that your friend in the other 2 pics?
Yeah, she'd popped over from Manchester to see the UK's first exhibition of Daniel Johnston artwork. It was pretty cool, I have to say.

Nice one. Actually, the more I look at it, the more I like your "Ruby" pic.

6FeetOver · 22 Sep 2007, 18:46

It's been so long since I took basic photography at uni that *I* couldn't have told you that, Steven. *Sigh* Looks like I'll have to start all over again from scratch.

6FeetOver · 22 Sep 2007, 18:47

smiscandlon wrote:
Carpathian Psychonaut wrote:
smiscandlon wrote:Nice.
Is that your friend in the other 2 pics?
Yeah, she'd popped over from Manchester to see the UK's first exhibition of Daniel Johnston artwork. It was pretty cool, I have to say.
Nice one. Actually, the more I look at it, the more I like your "Ruby" pic.

She *is* cute, isn't she?

EvilBastard · 22 Sep 2007, 18:54

As we're on Reflections...

6FeetOver · 22 Sep 2007, 18:55

Ooooooh - nice colors!

smiscandlon · 22 Sep 2007, 18:56

SINsister wrote:
smiscandlon wrote:
Carpathian Psychonaut wrote: Yeah, she'd popped over from Manchester to see the UK's first exhibition of Daniel Johnston artwork. It was pretty cool, I have to say.
Nice one. Actually, the more I look at it, the more I like your "Ruby" pic.
She *is* cute, isn't she?

Yes ... but I was talking about the photographer's skills, obviously.

I've never really done portrait photography, but I know from my old drawing and painting days that it's relatively easy to glean a good picture from an older subject with a 'characterful' face (Carpy's 'street portrait' of the guy with the placard is a good example) - but it's a lot harder taking a picture of someone young and pretty but still conveying depth and character in a portrait. The "Ruby" pic somehow manages it.

Does that make sense?

6FeetOver · 22 Sep 2007, 18:58

Yep! It looks like something out of the '30s or '40s, without even trying. Old glamour...noirish, almost.

smiscandlon · 22 Sep 2007, 20:06

smiscandlon · 22 Sep 2007, 20:17

Carpathian Psychonaut · 22 Sep 2007, 21:28

smiscandlon wrote:

Have you been scouting for sci-fi movie sets from the 50's?

Great shot!

smiscandlon · 22 Sep 2007, 21:50

I met a little friend on my travels today.

(It's safe to post this with Blast away for the weekend!)

smiscandlon · 23 Sep 2007, 16:55

Dr. Moody · 24 Sep 2007, 08:25

few more from Berlin.....