[Curious]

Also Curious: Two of your images dropped into the ether, and I’ve restored them as well.

thanks. a friend told me they hadn’t seen but one image and (of course) when i looked they were all there.

it also explains why one got a single vote and the other didn’t get any.

i really don’t know what is up with my hosting. normally it is rock solid but lately not so much. i tried looking at my website stats but don’t understand them well enough to figure out what happened when.

[Curious]

I think I just voted for you, justkat. I likes. The problem is with SO many good pictures, I’d nearly want to vote for all of them. I tried to limit my voting to one of each type insect, and one per person. I failed at this, but that was the goal going in.

I don’t limit my voting like that. In general I vote by 1) does the picture fit the theme correctly? 2) Is it technically good? 3) Do I just plain like it? And for bonus points: 4) Is it clever in some way?

Generally a picture has to have the first three elements to get my vote, but sometimes if it has an abundance of, say, 2 or 3 or sometimes even 4 it may make up for a deficiency in 2 or 3. I almost never vote for something that is off theme as I interpret the theme.

All that said, if the right elements are there, I vote freely. It’s totally okay with me to vote for 50 pictures. 😀 I wouldn’t be surprised if I voted for that many or more this week; this contest is relevant to my interests to say the least.

But if you threw a vote my way, thank you!! 😀

i vote like you do. the “meets the theme” is heavily weighted and like you off theme get ignored.

[Curious]

[ The pic I posted non-voting in the thread was a p&s pic,

got there too late to comment. turns out there were a couple other bug on bug killers in the tread. not to mention the spiders with webs as killers.

BTW your p&s pic was clearer than my DSLR with ext tubes. even with f16 showing in the viewfinder my dof is crap.

this contest turned out as i’d expected. lots of great true macro shots, lots of faux macro shots, lots of not macro shots (albeit some good ones) and i had fun entering and viewing.

[Curious]

I should probably add it to the history, but in years past, before we had a set green time, voting up the thread was our primary means of attracting attention and a decent greenlight time. So, it’s kind of force of habit for me now…

once we got the regular time i quit link voting.

i’m guessing Drew would rather have page views than link votes 🙂

[Curious]

hey there are some really great macro bugs in tonight’s contest.

there are also so nice shots that at best are close ups but we knew that would happen.

[Curious]

it worked for me ravnostic, although i didn’t use it. yours has no closing tags.

i have three tonight which will do crap in the voting compared to many you all will submit but i wanted enter and it turns out 1) my archives are skimpy for macro bugs, 2) my film archives are old and don’t seem to scan very well, 3) waited to the last minute to shoot for this and the bugs were hiding. odd for spring in my yard.

[Curious]

so i have another idea this morning and since the ext tube is still mounted out i go to shoot it. turned out ok but not great.

an hour later wanting a shot of the dog i dismount the ext tube go outside and find a great dragonfly that will hold still while i poke at it with the camera. well the resulting shots are better than most of my dragonfly photos and since the lens is marked “macro” somewhere on the barrel i’m using the photos.

[Curious]

and for the last question I am pretty sure the answer is “no”.

I checked at my local camera store, and the cost for developing a reel of 120 at least was about $7. Not sure about prices in the States, but that didn’t strike me as too bad.

if your scanner will do 35mm you might be able to do 2 1/4. it would depend on the software more than the hardware since you can make a mask for the negative and probably find a decent light source to shine through the negative but if the software has preset boundaries rather than ones you can adjust .. well that’s really the limiting factor.

re film processing IIRC it was higher here the last time i checked. but that may have been with prints rather than just the film or film and a contact sheet.

[Curious]

holy crap. went to ebay to check used prices and found this http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolleiflex-3-5E-Planar-Lens-w-Cap-Case-Instr-MINT-/140410550944?cmd=ViewItem&pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item20b11efaa0 a mint rollei just like mine for $950. and mine is in the same condition or very close to it. no manual but still.

while i hate to sell stuff this looks tempting.

[Curious]

May I ask what you use for shooting medium format? I love using film (though for this competition, the advantages of digital are manifest, as people have said), and I am thinking of getting a medium format. If you have any advice, pointers, dos/donts, I would be grateful.

i have 4×5 speed graphic with a 6×9 roll film back. yeah i mixed inches and CM there 🙂 anyway it was fun to use but real slow to use. also have a rolleiflex tlr with built in match needle meter. since getting the film processed is a pain i haven’t used it in years.

if you have a few thousand dollars laying around here’s a modern version.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/303163-USA/Rollei_66607_Rolleiflex_4_0_FW_Medium.html#specifications

that price just HAS to be wrong. the damn thing isn’t gold plated.

[Curious]

It took me nearly an hour and untold shots to get the one I wanted…

Ain’t digital grand! I am glad I learned to shoot on film first, for the discipline of cost that it taught, but I LOVE being able to shoot a hundred shots to get ten good ones.

well being a film trained photographer and a master of my craft i shot 19 images of three bugs to get shots for this week.

then the damned bugs ran/flew away and i’m stuck with the few i got.

but as a pleasant change there are actually two of those i can use.

have two series of jumping spider, one from today and one from a while back, but don’t like any of them that much. those little buggers are hard to shoot and get decent DOF.

[Curious]

given that very few of us have true 1:1 macro lenses using the “macro” setting seems reasonable. of my 6 mountable lenses all claim some sort of macro and the best any will do is 1:2.

oh wait, someone here suggested the kenko extension tubes so got a set. love them.
http://www.thkphoto.com/products/kenko/slrc-04.html

[Curious]

/threadjack

I just had my trucks transmission fixed a couple weeks before this and that killed my savings completely. I guess it never rains but it pours

i put new tires on my truck depleting my cash on hand only to have the transmission go bad two days later. the truck is still in the driveway and that was last august.

/end threadjack

[Curious]

I have never printed out anything of mine on anything larger than A4 photopaper, and I am not sure if my 10 Megapixel 4/3 mount camera can go much larger without seeing a significant drop in picture quality.

if you’re still reading this thread go to sam’s (or cosco possibly or any place that has one of those roll printers) and try it out. i had a 3008×2000 pixel 3.78MB photo blown up to 16×20 and it turned out great. was using a 5 megapixel DSLR camera.

the folks at sam’s told me the size was too small to do that. ha, fooled them. and it was <$20.

[Curious]

went through the scrutinizer to get my three. ended up with more than that but will narrow it down by contest time.

many thanks to schnee for maintaining the past history.

[Author]

Posts