[soosh]

[soosh]

You might look at low-budget flashes, like Vivitars and such. you don’t necessarily need them to be remote and triggered and all that, you just need them to go off. and since they’re not going to be connected to the camera, they don’t have to be made precisely for what you’re doing. I think flashes like the Vivitar 283 can be used for remote lighting like this to a great deal of usefulness, and you can get a used one from B&H for like $70.

[soosh]

what happened to the discussion about the picture of the guy in the mirror?

[soosh]

anybody can take shots like me. all it takes is moving to the coastal mountains, ingesting lots of various combinations of drugs, ignoring your day job for spending all night prowling the roads and forests, and a fondness for combustibles, rockfish, and tattooed women.

nothing to it, really.

[soosh]

i’ve had them in my profile, but I think I’ve used the one of the people on the bus. I’ll just leave it out.

[soosh]

the two bus shots and the infrared are ones I’m more concerned about having maybe used before. Anyway you can tell? I can’t get the FSM to load.

[soosh]

I’m having trouble narrowing it down from 6. Two are unnatural night skies caused by overcast skies reflecting city lights on long exposures, two are multiple light sources on a bus, & two are infrared.

I can’t tell if I’ve used any of them before, because the FSM isn’t responding. Here they are. Any thoughts?

[soosh]

i’ve been thinking of going with long-exposure something or other.

[soosh]

see I’m often in favor of art that makes the viewer uncomfortable. I think that can be the purpose of an art piece. Whether fark is the appropriate location for that, I have a feeling I know the answer.

[soosh]

Well, see, I don’t have a ready answer to that. I don’t think we want murder victims, but I don’t think that a found scene from nature is necessarily something that should be disallowed, either, just because one fish has been washed clean of blood by a stream and one hasn’t. Death for humor, no. Clubbing a baby seal and taking a picture of it, no. Hunting trophy picture of a boy and the deer he shot? sure, why not. Fake gore? You betcha. Emo kid arm cutting? Nope, and a referral to a shrink. Rare steak? No problem. Tiger eating a steak in the zoo? OK. Lion eating a zebra in the field? You bet. Eagle eating a piece of fish? Sure. Kid with fish & chips from a vendor on the beach? Sure. Sea Gull eating drowned child shark victim? Probably not. Dead cat swung on a string to represent “can’t swing a dead cat around here” cliche? Not so much. Australian aborigine throwing a boomerang for dinner and the cassowary he killed? Sure thing.

[soosh]

OK, but if the description on the same bloody hand photo had said “the knife slipped while I was cutting lettuce and I couldn’t resist taking this shot before I went to the ER because it looked like some horror movie set” it would have been disallowed? Because then we’re not judging the shot on the substance of the shot but rather the text that accompanies it. What if there had been no descriptive text?

[soosh]

I really don’t aim to criticize at all, so please don’t take it as such. But from what you’re saying, if I took a dead fish and applied fake blood to it, that would be ok, but actual blood that looks the same isn’t.

Honestly, I was surprised that my dead fish photo was allowed at all, so first off, thanks for the flex in allowing it.

[soosh]

I’m not overly wedded to the 8×12 form factor of my CCD, but even if I stuck with 8×12, may I crop? Or may I only post full-frames or full-frames corrected for off-kilter shooting angles?

this is currently allowed. You can crop to whatever perspective you wish.

[soosh]

Hmmm soosh hasn’t posted. Hope he didn’t forget!

I noticed that as well. Sort of a bummer.

because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

It was too beautiful of a day today to be inside at 4pm, farktography or no.

[soosh]

I’m staunchly pro-polygon type correction.

[Author]

Posts