[soosh]

I would look at a 10-22 or 12-24 on the wide end, and either the 100-400 or a 400 or 500 prime on the long end. The 28-300 is good for the zoom that it is, but it’s nothing like a dedicated long lens.

[soosh]

I’ve got (somewhere) a Tamron 1.4x extender, and I really can’t stand the results it gives on my 100-400. However, I have a friend who uses a Canon extender on his 500mm prime, and it gives lovely results. I think a lot has to do with the lens they are used on.

[soosh]

Can someone tell me if these are ok? They all work for the original rule (subjects are under 2″), but the total in frame is over 2″ on a couple.

http://noticeablyfat.com/gallery2/v/Farktography/Upcoming/

I think they’re fine. either way on the rules works for me.

[soosh]

True. I pretty much only shoot color 120. I haven’t looked into what it would cost me to get the setup to process that.

[soosh]

I like to look for reflections on pavement. It can be tough, though, trying to capture the mood of a rainy day. I think shooting around twilight and soft focus would help.

Here’s a shot with the kind of reflections I’m talking about.

What part of Oklahoma are you in, Zumaki?

[soosh]

Definitely cool to have new/old faces show up.

[soosh]

That’s awesome. I’ve wanted one of those folders for a long time. Here are some of my collection of antique cameras. Some work, some don’t, but I just love to look at them:

I buy my 120 film from B&H, or look for lots of expired film on ebay. I really love working with expired film, as you never know precisely what you’re going to get. If you have a scanner, try to find a local lab that will just process and not print the film. You’ll save a bundle, and then can scan it and print it yourself.

[soosh]

I’m not sure about the aperture

The wider the aperture, the more stars you will get. However, if the sky isn’t all that dark, relatively, you may be surprised at the color of the sky with a wider aperture.

[soosh]

I think 100mm is a great length for most macro subjects. It’s awesome for flowers. I currently have a 180 macro, and it’s cool for some things, especially where you want to isolate a small object and blur the hell out of the background, but it can be tricky to use. this image, for instance, makes it look like the one fiddlehead is all on its own, but it was really in a clump of many. the longer lens is good for isolating that.

[soosh]

you don’t eat that stuff, do you? it is one of the few japanese foods I haven’t been able to tolerate.

[soosh]

no idea. all i remember was some tugging on my leg and telling the anesthesiologist “the last time I felt like this, I was listening to Jethro Tull”.

I enjoy Phenergan, myself,, especially with Codeine.

/lightweight
//sorry for the threadjack
///get better soon Soosh!

thanks, el. phenergan is indeed fun. mostly, though, I’m partial to weed. not gonna mix that with the antibiotics and mid-size mango I’m carrying around at the moment.

[soosh]

vicodin and me don’t get along too well. itching, tolerance-building, turns me into a raging asshole, etc. it was hell being on that and oxycodone after my quadriceps surgeries.

now the stuff they gave me for the second surgery, that kept me awake but oh so incredibly stoned, that stuff felt like drinking ice water on a hot day. just perfectly lovely.

[soosh]

the last one is a baby moose standing next to a mother moose.

dandelions do grow really tall up here, but the deer is standing on an embankment next to a road and the dandelions are at the road level.

no pain meds, unfortunately. dammit.

[soosh]

I think that’d qualify. What are the pixel dimensions of the original file and what does it look like uncropped?

[soosh]

thanks! I’ve got several from that find in the woods.

[Author]

Posts