# General comments



## SABL

Well, well.... a new forum!!

Very nice for those who wish to publish their photos on the net!!


----------



## zuluclayman

wow  - looky here - a new forum for us photographers. Thank you to whoever decided this was a good idea ray:


----------



## DonaldG

SABL said:


> Well, well.... a new forum!!
> 
> Very nice for those who wish to publish their photos on the net!!


Thanks for raising that point point about publishing photos on the net...

The Photographer's Corner, is not intended as a platform for members to *publish* their photographs. If that were to happen, very quickly we would run into problems with server overload etc.

That said, if any one wants to include a photo in a posting, then that is to be encouraged AS LONG AS it is part of a question and/or answer or to demonstrate a particular point.

The last thing we want to do is fill this forum with photo albums of last years holiday in where ever!

If anyone wants to publish their photos on the 'net, there are specialist websites for that. EG: Photobucket or ImageShack etc or one of the social networking sites.

Posting links to an online album is OK as long as it is not a posting to advertise personal services. That will result in an instant ban under the general TSF rules


----------



## yustr

Is it OK to post a pic and ask for a critique? Perhaps a sticky thread? :4-dontkno

I respect the views of TSF members and would appreciate the opportunity to improve my pictures.


----------



## DonaldG

yustr said:


> Is it OK to post a pic and ask for a critique? Perhaps a sticky thread? :4-dontkno


Absolutely - That would be great


----------



## SABL

Hi Donald:wave: yustr:wave: zuluclayman:wave:

I agree that anyone trying to use TSF for a storage site will be bad news:4-thatsba

I have seen the sites mentioned by Donald but don't really care for the format and, if I remember correctly, bunches of advertising. These sites are free aren't they?? File size restricted??

I would like to make a suggestion for storage and display:

http://www.smugmug.com/browse/

I do not currently have an account at this site but encourage serious photographers to take a look. Forums are available and the cost is inexpensive with unlimited uploads and downloads and no ads.

I recieve no compensation from the site and reccomend it. Of course you could be like me and be tight with your money:grin: I run Avast Free:1angel:


----------



## DonaldG

Thanks SABL, I will add the link to smugmug on the Hints & Tips Sticky.

Apart from my own website, I use Photobucket extensively for photos & images that I need/want to display on forums. That way, they get the bandwidth usage, not my website. :grin:

Generally there is no issue with advertising on the fee image hosting sites - I don't even notice adverts when uploading... and of course no adverts are seen when linking to a photograph.

Again, file size restriction is not usually an issue for the vast amount of amateur photographers who want to use internet as their medium.

One has to appreciate the current 'state of the art' apropos computer displays:
A few years ago 640x800px was the max screen size most folk had. Web designers had to use that as a max size. As time & technology marched on, so the monitors became larger. Now, most users have a monitor that can resolve a minimum of 1024px wide. Many can resolve much more. However, this means that it is not recommended to show content that exceeds 1024px.

No one likes to scroll horizontally & having to do so with a photograph is a no-no.


----------



## SABL

Hi Donald:wave:

Thanks for adding the linkray: I haven't checked but I trust that you have done so. IMHO I do believe that site is a good venue to flaunt the prowess of a person's ability with a camera.

I can't remember which link offered a subscription for services but the services were inferior to what my link offered and the price was/is $28 more per year. To say my recommened site is the best is not for me to say. The site's owners are quite oblivious to my existence and I expect no reward... I respect those who can utilize a camera and use it as a tool for art. My link is merely a place where personal works can be exibited. 

I am far from being a photographer... I lack the equipment and the knowledge. I only take snapshots to document what has transpired within my lifetime. There is a huge difference between photography and taking pictures .... I take pictures and respect those who can photograph their surroundings and events they have witnessed.


----------



## Done_Fishin

These days the old adage "Photographs can't lie" is a farce .. photography is the art of taking a photo of what is happening in the real world .. the professional photographer is more like an artist who manages to take reality and portray it as something more glamorous than it really is. He manages to take something full of flaws and re-creates it to show perfection!
I don't mind the idea of taking something and cropping out things that we don't want the public to see or force them to focus on a certain area of the topic rather than the part that was censored however when someone takes a photograph and merges, blends, tweaks, reshapes everything in it with a load of other images then it's no longer photography but art .. I just wish that there was some way to show a distinction .. however it all depends upon the "intelligence" of the viewer to decide what is being viewed.


----------



## SABL

Hi DF:wave:

So true.

Photography is truly an art form. In my occupation I have seen many things and made the comment, "that is a work of Art.... Art should have been shot".

If you notice the caps, I think you will get the meaning:grin:


----------



## Done_Fishin

There are both good and bad points to what you are saying 

there are the photo's that you see that take your breath away until you realise that there is no way on earth that they can have been done without "editing", rather like some of todays pop idols who are all show yet owe their "voice" to the studio!

Then there are the real life photo's that show todays' cruel world in all its glory .. however due to the fact that we live in this modern age no-one is paying attention to the message that is being put across. Whether we are talking about war journalism, starvation in 3rd world countries or the everyday crap that is going down all over the "civilized" world .. very few are paying attention any more since it has become an everyday occurence .. and if it's something we haven't seen before we assume that it's all been rigged with photoshop anyway!

we have chipped away at the public's conscience to the point that we are all accustomed to seeing blood & guts everywhere (thanks to the action movies) and so a violent street scene under our very noses raises no eyebrows except for those who live locally .. 

but I digress .. I am now mixing Photography with Art, Photography with Journalism, Photography with Documentation of Suffering.. in fact I am confusing Photography with distorting the way we see the world we live in and the way the world is portrayed to us who are trying to live in it.


----------



## SABL

Hi DF,

There are far too many peeps that don't wish to see the real picture. I am way out of my league in regard to photojournalism... why must some people edit/modify facts?? I am a true believer of the old adage, "believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see".

To modify a photo is what makes photography an art form. For the sake of argument let's say enhancement. To add or modify in a way that is pleasing to the observer is well within the realm of art.... to distort actual fact is a crime. We're talking a fine line that the professional is forced to take.


----------



## DonaldG

I am responding to the quote in the General Comments thread so as not to hijack yustr's thread any more :grin:



Done_Fishin said:


> Film has one major advantage over digital .. speed .. whip off the lens cap and click ... with a Digital Camera (unless things have changed since I last looked) by the time you switch it on ... the event has passed ..
> ...


As D_F comments, on many, and probably most 'home amateur' digital cameras, there are two terrible time lags. 
1) switch on time - can be 5 - 8 seconds
2) shutter lag, the time between pressing the button to the camera actually taking the shot - this can be over a second.

I had a Nikon 5700 - a great camera - I loved it...BUT it did suffer from the above (and the battery died after 60 - 80 shots.)

However modern DSLR cameras are a different breed.
My Canon 20D camera for example, is as quick as my 35mm Canon EOS 5 camera. I can leave it switched on permanently, day after day. (It goes to sleep but wakes up on a few milliseconds) Having the camera on a neck strap, by the time I have it to my eye, it is ready. I always leave it set on 'burst mode' which allows me to take 5 shots a second for up to 28 shots, then it slows to 3 shots a second while it stores them then reverts to 5 frames a second. In reality, I have never taken more that 5 shots in a burst.. Battery lasts for up to 800 shots (I still carry a spare though!)

With respect to sensitivity, I can set it any where from 100ASA to 1600ASA - shutter speed up to 1/8000. These specs are exceeded by new generation digital cameras.

All that said, film is a very rich media & I often wish.... but the convenience and immediacy of digital...


----------



## Done_Fishin

That sounds like the sort of gear I dream about .. who did you sell to get it ?? :grin:


----------



## DonaldG

Ebay!

You can buy the body as a seperate or body & stock lens.

Look a the Nikon or Canon 'prosumer' DSLRs - look at the specs, then sell the car and get a DSLR & a bike! :grin:


----------



## Done_Fishin

I'm still in dispute over my last purchase on e-bay .. 

NEVER AGAIN!!!:4-thatsba:4-thatsba .. 

not even if they want my better half ...
:laugh:

Bought some NEW 1GB DDR400 from the States, thinking that I was getting a good deal (even after shipping costs) which turned out to be 2nd hand 1GB DDR200 .. once bitten, twice shy ..


----------



## DonaldG

Ouch - bummer!
I have nealy 100 transaction on ebay only a couple of problems which either Ebay or Paypal sorted!


----------



## Done_Fishin

this is my first transaction .. always very wary, but with so many people saying they were happy i figured i would give it a try.
If I wasn't so Electronics/PC savvy I might not have realsied that they were second hand or that I needed to set my BIOS to 200MHz to get them to work .. but since they were to replace existing DDR400 RAM to give me 2GB on both PC's It was obvious something was wrong when both PC's refused to boot unless set to PC1600 as opposed to PC3200.


----------



## DonaldG

Did you report the seller to eBay? I have found them good at dealing with complaints - there is even a phone number if you look carefully. 

The seller could become 'troubled' on Ebay (No longer a registerd user!) if it was a deliberate con.


----------



## DonaldG

This will make you green...

I had a couple of Rollieflex cameras 2.25 sq. One was a Planar 2.8E. I had them for years, well used & almost worn out... They were at the back of a cupboard for 20 years.

I had tried to sell them into pro camera shops. couldn't even get £50 for them. Back in the cupboard for a few years.

I took a couple of nice pictures of the 2.8E and put it on ebay... long story short, I got £450 for it :smile: It went to a collector. I did the same with the backup Rollie & got £200 for it - it went to a collector in Hong Kong!

That virtually paid for the Canon 20D :grin:


----------



## Done_Fishin

I am currently working through paypal .. before that I complained to the seller and they offered me a FULL refund .. IF I gave them positive Feedback, then when I didn't agree they said they would accept RMA and give me back the money paid for the items and I would ONLY get re-imbursed shipping if I gave them positive or neutral feedback and ONLY after I had shipped the goods back to them and ONLY if I gave the feedback "in advance"
I suspect that their reputation is held high by their tactics. likewise I suspect that they knowingly sent out low quality stuff thinking that I live too far to cause trouble should I realise that I had been sold rubbish rather than the advertised goods .. although the goods that rrived are the goods advertised .. just that they are not fit for the purpose sold. ie they are 2nd hand rather than new and they are PC1600 instaed of PC3200.

I haven't seen the phone numbers you mentioned or the method of creating a grievance .. which is why I went to PayPal.

As for being green .. well Photographic Equipment and PC's are about the only things that manage to bring out a jealous streak in me .. so you could well be right .. however I jut cannot understand the idea of selling good equipment like that although I suppose that knowing how stretched my own finances are I can appreciate the temptation if I wanted something bad enough.


----------



## Glaswegian

DonaldG said:


> If anyone wants to publish their photos on the 'net, there are specialist websites for that. EG: Photobucket or ImageShack etc or one of the social networking sites.
> 
> Posting links to an online album is OK as long as it is not a posting to advertise personal services. That will result in an instant ban under the general TSF rules


Donald - just for info, following a recent incident in Offline, I created a sticky guide for posting photos - feel free to copy it over here, if you feel it might be needed.

http://www.techsupportforum.com/f36/please-read-before-posting-images-346456.html


----------



## DonaldG

Hi Glas - welcome to the 'corner' :wave:

Thanks for that point. I have requested that the only images posted in the corner are 'own work' so hopefully no embarrassments. I will add the link though, just in case! :grin:


----------



## jamiemac2005

Hey all, i'd just like to give my praises to whomever's idea this was. I love photography, it's about time it had a forum of its own.


----------



## DonaldG

Hi Jamie
A very warm welcome to the 'Corner' :wave:

I note your comments about RAW 24/7. :smile: 

You may just have the experience of RAW processing that the Corner needs. Are you up to writing a piece on the fundimentals of the subject?

Maybe a short beginner's guide?


----------



## jamiemac2005

Hey =] i like the corner already. It's a brilliant idea.

And yeah i love using my camera's raw format.

To be honest i think i'm too sketchy in the way i post-process to write a factual tut on the subject. I'd expect to see something on Photoshop's Raw processing or similar. But personally i use UFRaw and in a basic way. It just works for me.
Still i'm sure you can find someone so much better to cover the subject.

Anyway, if i do have the time at some point i may mock something up. Whether it's of any use or not would then be up to whoever reads it.


----------



## DonaldG

If you could mock up something, that would be great Jamie. We need someone here who can talk dirty (RAW, that is :grin

I have Photoshop and have only dabbled with RAW. I am lazy in that respect and have virtually exclusively have used jpg. I think I know all the theory etc but without the real experience of RAW....

I have set my camera to jpg + raw to get some real life experience.


----------



## dm01

I just got (as present, way to expensive for me to buy) a 12MP Nikon DSLR. I am using RAW/JPEG for now, just to see if there is a difference. Oh yes, there is a very big difference.

I let my girlfriend use it for an art project, and it came back with a shattered lens. Turns out the stand they used wasn't quite strong enough to hold it, and the entire arm of the stand broke. Now I need to go buy a (hundred) new lenses :grin:.


----------



## zuluclayman

If you know anybody with a similar camera, borrow a lens first and see if the camera still functions properly. If the camera has taken a tumble chances are there could be more internal damage - sensor etc. Also check the case for misaligned sections etc. these could mean internal mechanical damage.
Last time she gets a hold of your camera? :4-thatsba :grin:


----------



## jamiemac2005

dm01 which Nikon did you get? I love Nikon =] haha.

shame about the drop.


----------



## dm01

@zuluclayman: The camera's fine. I got a telephoto and wide-angle as well and have been using those. It's just a small detail-work lens that took damage. Looks like the rubber shock grips did their job quite well.

No one touches my camera now.

EDIT @Jamey: this one


----------



## jamiemac2005

Niiiice, i love the d300. Brilliant camera.


----------



## dm01

Me too.

I'll try to get some pictures on-line later, right now my connection's dodgy (local maintenance or some bs).


----------



## jamiemac2005

Nice i'd love to see the output of the camera. I have the D40x myself, and it's brilliant for intermediate junk but the D300 is immense.


----------



## zuluclayman

glad the camera's OK - nice unit btw :grin:


----------



## dm01

Oh, don't I know it. 

I think I'll keep you guys in suspense for a few days, that's the ETF from the ISP anyways. Apparently someone threw a rock at a transformer and sent the entire node into chaos, fun stuff.


----------



## DonaldG

*Very nice one - makes me green with envy...*

Still, I love my Canon 20D


----------



## Done_Fishin

If you think you're green you should see me right now .. I've been debating the outlay of 160 Euro for an 8400 Core Duo 3GHz CPU, would love to go for the 3GHz Quad at 350 Euro .. and all I can do is dream about the possibilities of $1800 for a new camera .. My Nikon E4300 cost me around 300 Euro several years ago, and was not really what I wanted .. DSLR .. but they were too expensive back then and I don't see them coming within my price range for a long time yet, if ever.


----------



## jamiemac2005

DonaldG said:


> *Very nice one - makes me green with envy...*


Ditto.


----------



## Glaswegian

I was having a rummage around in the loft and found my old Pentax P50 + case + lenses + tripod. Ah, brought back some memories...

Anyone else still have their old manual SLR?

I used to do quite a bit of photography (before my daughter was born) - there was something about manual focus, setting shutter speed, loading film etc that I really loved.


----------



## Done_Fishin

I should have one of those old , was it 126 ??, cameras somewhere that "bellowed out" after opening up the front cover 

I also have my Praktica B200 ( thought it was a B500 and had to open the camera bag to double check when I didn't get a result on Google :laugh



> http://www.thecamerasite.net/01_SLR_Cameras/Pages/practica.htm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Praktica B 200 (1979-1982)
> 
> At Photokina in 1978 introduced Praktica B 200 is the first model of Praktica B series of cameras. It has an aperture-priority automatic exposure system, workable with new Prakticar lenses. Metal focal plane shutter is electronically controlled, except the max X - sync speed 1/90 sec which is mechanical. Together with a new line of cameras and lenses came also a new lens mount, Praktica bayonet mount, and a motor winder connection. Power source is 6V Mallory PX 28 or equivalent. When the battery is exhausted the shutter automatically defaults to mechanical 1/90 sec speed.. Body dimension are W138mm x H87,5mm x D49mm. Body weight is 530g without battery.
> 
> "The PRAKTICA B 200 is a fully automatic compact reflex camera with infinitely variable electronic shutter speed control vvithin a speed range from 1/1000 sec. to 40 sec. Shutter speeds of any duration at B setting are electronically controlled. Through the electronic diaphragm-value transmission from the lens into the camera the internal metering can be made at open aperture so that the vievvfinder image always remains at the brightest.
> All data vvhich are of importance for exposing are signalled by light-emitting diodes at the right hand edge of the vievvfinder, e.g. the shutter speed to be expected, boundary values and automatic and semi-automatic modes, resp. Besides this, also the preselected dia-phragm numeral is reflected into the lovver edge of the vievvfinder image. For intentional over- and underexposures the automatic mode can be manually corrected. Being equipped with the PRAKTICA bayonet, the PRAKTICA B 200 offers a completely new and rapid lens connection."
> 
> With these features B 200 could have been categorized as a high end camera in 1979. On the other hand the plastic material and a plastic look was not especially attractive. Production of Praktica bayonet cameras was stopped around 2002


It still works fine and gave me some great results when I was in Moscow back in 2002, although one of the three lenses that came with it (35mm fisheye) seems to have developed some sort of a problem with some strange wobbly movement, so that doesn't get used very often, leaving me with the 50mm & 135mm to play with. Not bad going for a camera that I bought new about 30 years ago.


----------



## Glaswegian

Nice DF - they were good cameras. My original Pentax was a P30 but it was stolen during a break-in, and the nearest replacement at the time was the P50 (according to the insurance company).


----------



## jamiemac2005

I'd love one of the re-makes of the old film SLRs they're brilliant, i just don't have the money.


----------



## Done_Fishin

thats my problem too .. not for the equipment but for getting the film developed and photo's made.
one of the reasons I turned to slides ..still have my projector but not much wall to point it at! :grin:


----------



## jamiemac2005

Yeah, i never have the money for film/development, or throwaway shots on my digital i can take hundreds of photos and them all be useless before i get one decent shot but with film i'd have to be more precise.


----------



## zuluclayman

ha ha jamiemac - that's exctly what a lot of "old guard" photographers say is lacking in contemporary photographic practice - the precision and skill of shooting "good" shots every time. Digital cameras have made us lazy (I include myself here) - look and shoot again, take 100's of shots per shoot then edit heavily in Photoshop leading to a pretty laissez-faire attitude to composition and technical skills. I see this when teaching at a secondary school - the students have been brought up on digital "point and shoot" cameras or in-phone cameras and have a lot of trouble coming to grips with thinking about the shots they take when given a 12 shot black and white film to do an assessment task requiring 5 good shots.
on the other side of the coin, it is fantastic that we can do this in some ways - that once-in-a-lifetime shot needn't be underexposed/overexposed/have weird colours etc. - you can make it perfect.


----------



## DonaldG

I guess that is one of the huge advantaged of digital. Once you have the kit, pressing the button costs nothing but a bit of battery power.

That leaves you free to try those shots that you know won't come out, only to find they do! :grin:


----------



## DonaldG

zuluclayman said:


> .... of trouble coming to grips with thinking about the shots they take when given a 12 shot black and white film to do an assessment task requiring 5 good shots.
> .



Imagine when it is a very large format camera, like a custom made 20 x 16 plate camera! I never found out the cost of the plates but it took two to make the photo. A 20x16 neg and a 20x16 positive for display in a light box....

I was only allowed to use it twice...:sigh:


----------



## zuluclayman

mm - I miss working at uni where I had access to a couple of really nice medium format cameras. (can't afford to buy one or find easy access to good print facilities any more :sigh
Ah well, as Mp count goes up in cameras we're getting access to bigger and better resolutions for prints, though IMHO still doesn't have the same beautiful look of a cibachrome large/medium format print.


----------



## TheAtheist

Just like to say i really like this new part of the forum. I consider myself an amateur enthusiast when it comes to photography. I don't have a DSLR, although i am very much looking towards the (relatively) new Canon 450D, mainly because of the larger sensor and greater range of features and wider Focal range etc compared to my current bridge camera. Like most people who have posted before, i'd love to dabble in a bit of film photography, because i grew up in the era when 35mm cameras where still a bit popular but digital soon took over so didn't get to use it all that much. The cost is now the main prohibitive factor


----------



## yustr

Better move fast and gather everything you need to shoot and process film; my guess is that in 5 years it will be near impossible to find a lab that will do the work. Kind of like vinyl records today - only used by a small dedicated group and very expensive too.


----------



## zuluclayman

Yup - we find it difficult sometimes to get film supplies (chemicals, paper etc.) as Ilford has closed its Australian operations - everything comes from UK for us, via local suppliers. Agfa closed up shop altogether a few years ago (went broke I think). Funnily enough there are a number of Middle European concerns starting up or continuing in film/chemicals/paper supplies (some of questionable quality).
We have a fully equipped darkroom with 14 enlargers at school but find it increasingly difficult to get repairs and/or parts for the enlargers now.
Don't get me wrong, I love my DSLR but would like to have more film options open as well>


----------



## DonaldG

Is it time to get out the developer formulae book?
Get the chemicals put by in a dark dry place and fill the fridge with your favourite film & paper stock.

When I did my apprenticeship (in 1955!) I had to make up all the dev for the darkrooms...In those days colour was hardly used - it was all B&W....Ahhhh, those were the days :smile:


----------

