Yet Another Cycling Forum

Random Musings => Gallery => Phototalk => Topic started by: Ham on 30 January, 2016, 09:10:37 am

Title: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 30 January, 2016, 09:10:37 am
A bit of fun in Petapixel http://petapixel.com/2016/01/29/nikon-awards-prize-to-badly-shopped-photo-hilarity-ensues/
Title: Re: Where's the Phototalk random thread?
Post by: Ham on 02 February, 2016, 07:52:07 am
And the future of drones http://www.flyability.com/product/  - a device proof against collisions able to bodly go
Title: Re: Where's the Phototalk random thread?
Post by: Ham on 09 February, 2016, 08:57:45 am
Hong Kong in the 50's here, worth a look http://designyoutrust.com/2016/02/hong-kong-in-the-1950s-captured-by-a-teenager/
Title: Re: Where's the Phototalk random thread?
Post by: tonycollinet on 10 February, 2016, 08:42:27 am
And the future of drones http://www.flyability.com/product/  - a device proof against collisions able to bodly go

Still gonna get stuck in the trees though - possibly worse than conventional.
Title: Re: Where's the Phototalk random thread?
Post by: T42 on 10 February, 2016, 11:13:21 am
Now they need a bit of programming and to remove the lattice from the video.
Title: Re: Where's the Phototalk random thread?
Post by: Ham on 10 February, 2016, 10:22:24 pm
If I put together a collection of my photos, I'd have a porkfolio.
Title: Re: Where's the Phototalk random thread?
Post by: Jaded on 10 February, 2016, 10:33:23 pm
If we haven't got one there probably isn't a need for one.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 05 March, 2016, 11:42:03 pm
London photos from the 1870's

http://mashable.com/2016/03/03/street-life-london/
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 06 March, 2016, 07:48:20 am
^^^ Ta. Duly pinched.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: clarion on 06 March, 2016, 10:14:21 am
Amazing.  I've seen a few before, but the detail is fascinating
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: LEE on 07 March, 2016, 12:18:42 pm
London photos from the 1870's

http://mashable.com/2016/03/03/street-life-london/

Fabulous photos.

What I can't help notice is that nobody in those images seems represented by ANY period drama I have ever seen.

Some of the dress is more reminiscent of "The Old West" than London. 

Has our impression of period dress been misguided by the fact that photography, especially portraits, were a preserve of the better-off?

Just as every period car in a TV drama is an immaculate, shining example (TV cars are sourced from enthusiasts who polish them relentlessly, Ergo. No rusty cars on TV), it seems that everyone in a period drama had access to a Washing Machine and Showers.  There's a general absence of grime which seems ubiquitous in these images.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 07 March, 2016, 01:14:29 pm
It was the hats that surprised me, like a cross between a bowler and a bobbie's helmet.  And did you notice the built-up shoe the cough-lozenge peddler was wearing?
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: clarion on 07 March, 2016, 01:23:57 pm
Yes, the hats were remarkable.  I wonder if the photographer was particularly focussing on the Italian community.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: fruitcake on 07 March, 2016, 04:18:40 pm
grime which seems ubiquitous in these images.

Much of it will be coal dust. There was a TV documentary series a few years ago where two men and a woman took over a farm and lived as Victorians, with 19th century technology and gender roles, as they recorded their thoughts. The woman spent most of her time either cleaning clothing or cleaning the house which became dirty very quickly. Wiping the coal dust and soot from the surfaces every day, she realised how much of Victorian life was determined by the heating technology.

When I looked through these images, it struck me how many of those people are working with their hands in some kind of craft in the street. And those streets are spaces to be used (for making and selling stuff), rather than just spaces to travel through.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 01 August, 2016, 05:17:45 pm
Worth clicking on this for the photo of Tesla, really

http://www.boredpanda.com/rare-historical-photos/

(If you don't agree I'll give you your money back)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: cycleman on 01 August, 2016, 07:05:41 pm
Some moving images there. The protestant and Catholic graves struck a cord. Together in life divided in death. So sad.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: thing1 on 05 September, 2016, 10:08:55 pm
Stanford prof puts his entire digital photography course online, free

http://www.diyphotography.net/stanford-professor-puts-entire-digital-photography-course-online-free/
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 19 September, 2016, 02:02:26 pm
http://www.thomasjmueller.de/kanton/

No prices, but it looks interesting - 35mm / 120 - Colour / B&W - OK, most use for colour but if you had it, why not B&W. Torn between signing up and not wanting to know.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: David Martin on 20 September, 2016, 10:34:02 pm
I have been asked for the use of one of my pictures of Dundee by a local architectural practice as the background to a crazy golf hole.
This is part of the Festival of Architecture and they want to print it at 4.8m wide. https://www.foa2016.com/events/2016-october-1-crazy-golf-architecture

Needless to say it is the "it's for charity and we aren't making a penny" plea, so as the hole is demolished after the tour I have negotiated that I keep the printed backdrop. I'm sure our museum services or outreach folk would be more than happy to receive it :)

The pic in question is (https://c7.staticflickr.com/1/153/431275686_63d1ebf607_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/E7peG)nightview wide_w (https://flic.kr/p/E7peG) by David Martin (https://www.flickr.com/photos/davidmam/), on Flickr and is on 4x5" velvia 50 so scans to about 10k pixels wide and 8k high.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 28 September, 2016, 11:23:22 am
Photophobia: last time the missus went running with my daughter in Strasbourg she left her camera at home. "I don't want the abuse" was her reason.

I've done a few shoots in town centres and never had a problem. Anyone else had?
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Jaded on 08 October, 2016, 12:33:30 am
Got another photo on the BBC Your Photos of Scotland this week page.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 14 November, 2016, 09:24:09 am
PC 2017 CC build 20161012.r53.x64 no longer wants to copy certain vector shapes.

Select layer containing shape / ctrl+A / ctrl+C / change to destination file / ctrl+V ==> SFA.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: hellymedic on 18 January, 2017, 05:10:53 pm
Diamondgeezer's blog today tells of Bob Dylan's 'adoption' of one of his images.
http://diamondgeezer.blogspot.co.uk (http://diamondgeezer.blogspot.co.uk)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 14 March, 2017, 04:54:26 pm
Fed up with piddling zoom on my cycling camera. It goes from 28mm equiv (which is nice) to 128, which means that any wildlife I want to snap looks like a flea on an elephant.

I want a camera that's

a: weather-sealed
b: has a 30x zoom,
c: Gorilla glass over the LCD,
d: a viewfinder, and
e: a 20 Mp sensor (I'm not greedy); and
f: weighs less than 250g

Is that so hard, O Lord?  Crikey, I'd even pay a pound for it.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: clarion on 15 March, 2017, 10:07:45 am
;D
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 15 March, 2017, 10:24:26 am
Actually, I can get all of those by half-inching my wife's Sony Hwhatever90v and putting a protector on the LCD. All that's missing is the weather-proofing.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 18 March, 2017, 09:06:04 am
14 stops of dynamic range........

http://www.hasselblad.com/x1d

That appears to be 16,384:1

Drooool
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 18 March, 2017, 09:14:36 am
Never mind that techy stuff, where's the wooden version?
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: davelodwig on 18 March, 2017, 01:09:03 pm
14 stops of dynamic range........

http://www.hasselblad.com/x1d

That appears to be 16,384:1

Drooool

I'm sold where do i sign up and who do I have to sleep with to get one.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 22 May, 2017, 04:53:10 pm
The Wildlife  photography comedy awards are rather fun

https://www.comedywildlifephoto.com/gallery/2016_finalists.php
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: LEE on 23 May, 2017, 02:38:52 pm
14 stops of dynamic range........

http://www.hasselblad.com/x1d

That appears to be 16,384:1

Drooool

I'm sold where do i sign up and who do I have to sleep with to get one.

It's £11,000 with lens so you may need to do more with them than just sleep.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Gattopardo on 23 May, 2017, 11:27:05 pm
Ok I hate canon compact pop out lenses.  Have two that I have taken apart and have broken plastic cogs.

Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: hellymedic on 04 June, 2017, 11:26:55 pm
Are they the ones that give the E18 error message when they jam?

(ETA Ahh yes! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E18_error (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E18_error))

My first IXUS 70 did this after 6 weeks and was replaced by the supplier (Amazon).

The replacement is still going strong after 9.9 years.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 19 July, 2017, 10:14:17 am
Month 1:
- You need a screen protector on that
- I haven't got one

Month 2:
- You need a screen protector on that or it'll get scratched
- I haven't got one
...
...
Month 10:
- You need a screen protector on that or it'll get scratched
- It's already scratched.

:demon:

Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 19 July, 2017, 10:19:58 am
A petapixel must-see, frame rate synched with a bird's wings: https://petapixel.com/2017/07/18/cameras-frame-rate-synced-birds-wings/
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: hellymedic on 23 July, 2017, 11:25:59 pm
A Facebook friend posted this caption on some holiday photography...
Quote
ParФenon 2017 in 360 degrees Centigrade
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 18 October, 2017, 04:38:03 pm
Some REALLY good wedding photos in this lot https://www.boredpanda.com/best-wedding-photos-2017-fearless-awards/

Personally the ones that aren't staged are more my fave, but there are good examples of both types
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: fruitcake on 18 October, 2017, 08:11:28 pm
Here are some daft pictures of a hedgehog with tiny camping equipment:

https://www.boredpanda.com/cute-hedgehog-azuki-camping/
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: hellymedic on 27 October, 2017, 02:28:14 pm
Friends and family:
If you are blessed with a stereotypical Jewish nose, this will be exaggerated when you post phone selfies.

Short focal length lenses being unflattering is neither news nor rocket science.

I find it hard to 'like' some things on BookFace!
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 28 October, 2017, 08:56:14 am
[rant]
Dear misbegotten Adobe, why the hell can't your so-called on-line help simply list every Photoshop menu item and then provide detailed instructions for every feature of every tool available under that item?  That's what computer professionals have been doing since the 1940s.

Instead we have either to muddle through your stuff without a guiding hand, wade for an hour through your mish-mash of poor anticipation of what we ought to want to be doing, or undergo your "helpful" videos in the hope that something helpful will accidentally emerge. Or have a gander on YouTube to find out if some helpful soul has already supplied what you were too fucking lazy to.

You are twats, and I pee in your porridge.
[/rant]
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ben T on 05 December, 2017, 10:39:00 am
go to https://www.thetrainline.com/ if you get the background a picture of a woman with a camera... hasn't it been flipped?!... isn't the film winder on the wrong side - shouldn't it be on the right? Or is that how they have them in europe/USA? If not I might complain. :)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: fruitcake on 05 December, 2017, 11:34:56 am
go to https://www.thetrainline.com/ if you get the background a picture of a woman with a camera... hasn't it been flipped?!...

Horizontally flipped - to fit the page layout which places the form at screen left. As you say the winder and shutter release are on the left. There's also some blotchiness on the rucksack - where they've cloned out the branding.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: LEE on 06 December, 2017, 10:01:45 am
Here are some daft pictures of a hedgehog with tiny camping equipment:

https://www.boredpanda.com/cute-hedgehog-azuki-camping/

Or a bloody massive Hedgehog
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 13 December, 2017, 06:18:19 pm
2017 comedy nature photograph awards are live https://www.comedywildlifephoto.com/gallery/2017_finalists.php
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: BrianI on 15 December, 2017, 09:41:23 pm
Just been uploading some of my old 360x180 degree panoramas to 360cities.net!

https://www.360cities.net/image/charlestown-harbour-fife-scotland  :thumbsup:]

Sadly my new Canon 750D + Canon 10-18mm kit lens is to big a combination for my trusty Nodal Ninja 3 panoramic head.  And the larger Nodal Ninja 6 is a wee bit too pricey a £450 or thereabouts....

However there is a Nodal Ninja clone on Amazon, for £150 or so (which a friend at my camera club bought, and is pleased with). So a new year treat for myself!  :)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 27 December, 2017, 10:51:26 am
Just unearthed the Oly EP-3 I bought in a 2013 brain-fart moment.  Easily the most awful camera I have ever owned - crappy autofocus, crappy image quality and, when I put it up for sale on line, totally unsellable. Got the battery on charge for form's sake, but I don't reckon it'll be seeing much other than the inside of a cupboard for the next five years.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: David Martin on 23 January, 2018, 09:36:29 pm
Helped a colleague scan some cyanotypes today. Really nice.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUPqL7XXkAUv_px.jpg:large)
Zoom in
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUPqJ0IW4AoRMFe.jpg:large)

On cold pressed watercolour paper. Stunning in the hand. The leaf is quite large, about 15cm long.
Zoomed scan is 4800dpi scan. The top one is 240dpi (downres from 2400 dpi scan)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 01 February, 2018, 07:34:45 pm
I've decided to put all my Bronica SQ-A gear up for sale, it hasn't been used in 10 years I reckon.

(anyone fancy some, pm)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 19 February, 2018, 06:15:59 pm
Actually unconnected with the previous post, I'm re-evaluating all subs I pay, Adobe CC is one of them. I pay annual sub, paid monthly, I suspect that's a common way

Online chat:
I'd like to cancel my sub
agent: why?
Because I don't get value from it, I prefer a software purchase which I upgrade when I want the new features or support.
agent: would you like our special offer? Would that help? Three months free
So my current sub ends in July, that would mean it ends in Oct, what would my additional commitment be?
agent: nothing
So  come October I'm as free to cancel?
agent: Yes. Would you like to do it?
OK then, I'll have your special offer (and make a mark on my Calendar for September)

That is one weird special offer, but anyone else with a CC sub might like to try it.



Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 10 April, 2018, 03:28:18 pm
Just noticed that it's 10 years this month that I bought my first Panasonic camera, a TZ3. Didn't much like it at first because of low-light muck, but soon found it excellent on bike trips. Daughter has it now, unless she's lost it.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: LEE on 11 April, 2018, 10:25:05 am
Actually unconnected with the previous post, I'm re-evaluating all subs I pay, Adobe CC is one of them. I pay annual sub, paid monthly, I suspect that's a common way

Online chat:
I'd like to cancel my sub
agent: why?
Because I don't get value from it, I prefer a software purchase which I upgrade when I want the new features or support.
agent: would you like our special offer? Would that help? Three months free
So my current sub ends in July, that would mean it ends in Oct, what would my additional commitment be?
agent: nothing
So  come October I'm as free to cancel?
agent: Yes. Would you like to do it?
OK then, I'll have your special offer (and make a mark on my Calendar for September)

That is one weird special offer, but anyone else with a CC sub might like to try it.

I use Adobe Photoshop CS6, one of their older "Buy it on CD and use it as long as you like" approaches to software.  They can shove monthly subscriptions up their arse.

My next move will be to Luminar.

Being honest I only use about 5% of Photoshop's feature set, I rarely use a layer.  Most of my adjustments are in Lightroom/CameraRAW anyway.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Jaded on 11 April, 2018, 08:08:39 pm
I have Affinity Photo, bought for £25 at the Photography Show, ready for when CS6 no longer works. I already have their Illustrator kiiler, and I'm awaiting their launch of Affinity Publisher, in Spring. Then it will only be an Acrobat Pro replacement I'll be after and Adobe can swivel.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: hellymedic on 08 May, 2018, 09:11:15 pm
David has broken my Canon IXUS 70. I know it's ancient but:
I don't need lots of pixels.
I like having an optical viewfinder.
I can only manage a lightweight camera.

The camera still works but the lens cover mechanism is damaged as the aluminium ring on the nose got bent when the camera fell off a ledge when he was doing a selfie.

He admits he should have used a tripod.

I have the two leaves that close over the lens, a tiny spring, a plastic ring and the somewhat bent aluminium ring in a nice clean plastic bag.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: barakta on 08 May, 2018, 11:58:40 pm
Could David be made responsible for obtaining a replacement of the same model or paying for repair?

Sounds very frustrating :(
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: hellymedic on 09 May, 2018, 12:48:21 am
I doubt repair is economically feasible though I suspect it could be done by a willing volunteer with good lighting, magnification and micro-tools; the spring is about 3mm long and half a millimetre wide.
The same make and model starts from £15 + P&P on ebay.
All David's money originates in my bank account.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: LEE on 09 May, 2018, 11:27:14 am
I doubt repair is economically feasible though I suspect it could be done by a willing volunteer with good lighting, magnification and micro-tools; the spring is about 3mm long and half a millimetre wide.
The same make and model starts from £15 + P&P on ebay.
All David's money originates in my bank account.

If you're happy with that camera then £15 sounds like a bargain.  I think it's one of Canon's best designs and looks like it could have come out of the Porsche or Apple design studios.

7Mp is perfectly adequate.  What are you waiting for?

If you want a step up in quality then look at a used Canon S90.  No optical viewfinder but a lovely compact camera (I have the S120 , the final incarnation of that S-series compact body.  I also had the S70 but the S90 shrunk it all down significantly, it's quality.)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: barakta on 09 May, 2018, 11:32:36 am
Sounds like a replacement on ebay is viable for you to get. I'd go for it as well.

Still sorry yours got wrecked and hope it doesn't happen again.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: fruitcake on 09 May, 2018, 12:15:32 pm
Hellymedic,

I have a Canon Powershot A560 (http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/canon/powershot-a560/canon-powershot-a560-review-6.html) going spare. It's lightweight, it has optical viewfinder, a layout (http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/canon/powershot-a560/canon-powershot-a560-review-2.html) similar to your IXUS - and it takes AA batteries. Working. How about £10 posted? Let me know if you're interested.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: LEE on 09 May, 2018, 12:19:01 pm
Hellymedic,

I have a Canon Powershot 560 going spare. It's lightweight, it has optical viewfinder, a layout similar to your IXUS - and it takes AA batteries. Working. How about £10 posted? Let me know if you're interested.

Too good to miss Hellymedic !!!  It's probably the same internal gubbins as your camera.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 17 May, 2018, 08:24:56 am
Yup. I had an A590IS, much the same. I used it with a Gigapan - great fun: http://www.gigapan.com/gigapans/19485

There is/was quite a hacker community centred on these cameras - I think there was even firmware to be had that would turn out RAW files.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Torslanda on 20 May, 2018, 01:28:41 am
Has ph*t*bucket given up trying to charge for 3rd party hosting?

I revisited my gallery thread and found all the pictures are visible again . . .
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Salvatore on 20 May, 2018, 05:29:24 am
Has ph*t*bucket given up trying to charge for 3rd party hosting?


Yes.
https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2018/05/17/photobucket-drops-pricing-that-angered-millions.html
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 20 May, 2018, 10:35:00 am
The new setup isn't a bad deal.  $24 p.a. for 10 Gb is cheaper pro rata than PBase - I pay $22 p.a. for 2 Gb; but after 15 years of membership and over 3000 pics I haven't used up a Gb yet.

PBase is advert-free, mind you.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 21 May, 2018, 05:34:27 pm
After many moons have passed without me setting up a formal, strategic photo backup, as I have already sold my soul to google I thought, why not use their backup? Allegedly "unlimited" storage for 1600x1200 (ie, ok to look at) I've pushed the button.

24 hours and 15,000 into 120,000 images it seems to be working ok. Amusingly, it is backing up all my RAW files, by converting them to jpg, providing duplicates of each although the converted jpg is more lossy and lower quality than the reduced in camera jpg.

Organisation wise, there is a folder structure, only the maximum granularity is a year, which is a shame, the date is from the EXIF as expected, rather than the folder it comes from.

So, a handy painless backstop against losing it all, but not much use for serious organisation. I wouldn't consider using it for a serious archive.

ETA - found the "Don't back up RAW file setting" now
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: LEE on 22 May, 2018, 12:26:24 am
After many moons have passed without me setting up a formal, strategic photo backup, as I have already sold my soul to google I thought, why not use their backup? Allegedly "unlimited" storage for 1600x1200 (ie, ok to look at) I've pushed the button.

24 hours and 15,000 into 120,000 images it seems to be working ok. Amusingly, it is backing up all my RAW files, by converting them to jpg, providing duplicates of each although the converted jpg is more lossy and lower quality than the reduced in camera jpg.

Organisation wise, there is a folder structure, only the maximum granularity is a year, which is a shame, the date is from the EXIF as expected, rather than the folder it comes from.

So, a handy painless backstop against losing it all, but not much use for serious organisation. I wouldn't consider using it for a serious archive.

ETA - found the "Don't back up RAW file setting" now

Good tip, as a Google user I may give that a go.

I already backup to a couple of USB drives and keep one in the garage but, for free, 1600x1200 is the same resolution as my old 2Mp Fuji Finepix and I've printed 10x8 no problem off that. 

The beauty is that now I'd be backing up already cropped and edited images, from high-end cameras, at 2mp.  As a very last resort I'd be happy to have a 2Mp jpg copy of my edited images because, in reality, 1600 pixels is enough resolution for the human eye, for any size print (up to billboard size) when viewed at the optimum distance*.

* Zooming in on a monitor would quickly reveal a lack of detail of course but therein lies the problem with most camera reviews... "pixel-peeping" way beyond what is actually meaningful.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 22 May, 2018, 06:55:52 am
OK. Well Well.

In Google photos, the image displays at 1600 x 1200 pixels. Behind the scenes, the file is held in Google drive. At original resolution. That's not to say that Mr Google won't work his way through these files in time, reducing the size on disk, but there you go.

I found this as I could see that the file size was similar in Drive to the local file (c 3-4Mb/file for a 4608 * 3456 file). So I downloaded and spent about 5 minutes pixel peeping and thinking this looks very much the same, before I had the nous to just check Image->File size.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: fuaran on 22 May, 2018, 12:22:51 pm
Google Photos now gives unlimited storage for up to 16 megapixel resolution. Anything higher will get resized. It might also use a bit more JPEG compression, but you probably won't notice much difference.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 24 May, 2018, 09:55:47 pm
OK. Well Well.

In Google photos, the image displays at 1600 x 1200 pixels. Behind the scenes, the file is held in Google drive. At original resolution. That's not to say that Mr Google won't work his way through these files in time, reducing the size on disk, but there you go.

I found this as I could see that the file size was similar in Drive to the local file (c 3-4Mb/file for a 4608 * 3456 file). So I downloaded and spent about 5 minutes pixel peeping and thinking this looks very much the same, before I had the nous to just check Image->File size.

Update.

Yes, Mr Google has worked his way through reducing jpg file size to c.200kb, which I suppose was to be expected.

Unfortunately he is also busy trying to make albums and other photo niceties out of my stash. Rather a LOT of them (from what is, I suppose, rather a lot of photos). Once you get over the spookiness of identifying the locations from the image (not exif/GPS  or phone trace) - including some pretty obscure places and the slight fun of sifting through images over the years, it gets tedious dismissing 30 or more suggested albumations at a time.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: hellymedic on 30 May, 2018, 08:56:47 pm
Found in the loft...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-43782267 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-43782267)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: ElyDave on 30 May, 2018, 10:54:23 pm
WOT new camera?

I have a ten year service award, a bit of offshore bonus already earned and a bit more coming up.  Enough after tax to buy a new camera to record this year's tour to Islay and the west coast back down across the SOlway firth.

I'm torn between about three cameras at the moment of similar price range.
- olympus OMD EM 10 - in solver of course to match my old 35mm OM10
- Panasonic GX80 - liked for compactness
- panasonic G7 - perhaps a bit on the chunky side, but good reviews

As an outlier also the Canon EOS M50 at the next price bracket, recommended for the larger sensor size by an airport duty free salesman

Pros - micro 4/3 have more lenses available, and more compact, but perhaps poorer low light/landscape performance vs the canons?
I'm looking for an upgrade from my current Lumix P&S high zoom model I use for work, keen to take better photos, partic landscape/cityscape/parks and gardens

Thoughts?
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: LEE on 30 May, 2018, 11:33:37 pm
Found in the loft...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-43782267 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-43782267)

They may have stumbled upon a goldmine.

1 - They look like really excellent photos

2 - Similar Vivian Maier prints now sell for thousands each.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: LEE on 30 May, 2018, 11:40:54 pm
WOT new camera?

I have a ten year service award, a bit of offshore bonus already earned and a bit more coming up.  Enough after tax to buy a new camera to record this year's tour to Islay and the west coast back down across the SOlway firth.

I'm torn between about three cameras at the moment of similar price range.
- olympus OMD EM 10 - in solver of course to match my old 35mm OM10
- Panasonic GX80 - liked for compactness
- panasonic G7 - perhaps a bit on the chunky side, but good reviews

As an outlier also the Canon EOS M50 at the next price bracket, recommended for the larger sensor size by an airport duty free salesman

Pros - micro 4/3 have more lenses available, and more compact, but perhaps poorer low light/landscape performance vs the canons?
I'm looking for an upgrade from my current Lumix P&S high zoom model I use for work, keen to take better photos, partic landscape/cityscape/parks and gardens

Thoughts?

Olympus for me (The Mk3).  I don't think you can go wrong with any of them but the Olympus looks so pretty.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Jaded on 31 May, 2018, 12:25:15 am
Oly. All the way.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: jsabine on 31 May, 2018, 12:53:05 am
I had an endowment mature recently - I am trying *very* hard to resist the temptation of an OM-D E-M5ii, especially as Olympus have a cashback promotion (https://www.olympus.co.uk/company/en/news/press-releases/olympus-summer-promotion.html) until the end of July ...
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 31 May, 2018, 06:16:33 am
Worth mentioning that even with the cashback, HDew are substantially less https://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/olympus-om-d-e-m5-mk-ii-body-black-2996-p.asp
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: ElyDave on 31 May, 2018, 06:46:58 am
It would be the Olympus mk2, mk3 is still too steep for me

Thanks
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: ElyDave on 31 May, 2018, 07:17:39 am
Worth mentioning that even with the cashback, HDew are substantially less https://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/olympus-om-d-e-m5-mk-ii-body-black-2996-p.asp

that is even better than John Lewis who are usualy very competetive.  HDew are also giving a 3 year warranty.  I'm assuming you can then go onto Olympus' site and still claim the cashback offer.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 31 May, 2018, 07:44:50 am
No, the Oly site says "Participating Dealers" so I assume you would not get the cashback.

As far as low light performance is concerned, it is quite possible that the CaNikons have better performance, the question is, is the Oly adequate? One major benefit is the in body stabilisation, and of course the compact lenses help too, so you can effectively shoot at a lower ISO.

My experience with an OM-10 MkII is that I very very rarely come up against any low light deficiencies, I had to look through archives to come up with a grainy shot. Here's one, streetlit in India, shot at ISO1600 using the 17mm cheapie pancake lens, which just happens to be forum suitable (click for bigness), that's as bad as I've got.

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DS3FVfxinMs/Ww-YtH702JI/AAAAAAACnrw/rG62K4v_NnkZF-HaB8UZ0oxyl-AgYsC3QCKgBGAs/s1600/P9030161.JPG)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 31 May, 2018, 10:57:35 am
Found in the loft...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-43782267 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-43782267)

They may have stumbled upon a goldmine.

1 - They look like really excellent photos

2 - Similar Vivian Maier prints now sell for thousands each.

The Bond St. Window looks like a game of Space Invaders.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Jaded on 31 May, 2018, 12:07:27 pm
Here's a 6000 ISO snap with no adjustments. 17mm f1.8 lens f8 1/60th

The 20mp sensor (this one) is better than the 16mp one, I understand.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hinrykq96kr3ber/P4120036%20%281%29.jpg?dl=0
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: jsabine on 31 May, 2018, 12:20:48 pm
Worth mentioning that even with the cashback, HDew are substantially less https://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/olympus-om-d-e-m5-mk-ii-body-black-2996-p.asp

that is even better than John Lewis who are usualy very competetive.  HDew are also giving a 3 year warranty.  I'm assuming you can then go onto Olympus' site and still claim the cashback offer.

No, the Oly site says "Participating Dealers" so I assume you would not get the cashback.

And the HDew FAQs say explicitly that they aren't eligible for UK cashbacks (though they don't actually name Olympus ...). An EM-5 with 12-40mm lens is £1049 in Dixons Travel (which I imagine *does* accrue the cashback) and £999 from HDew (or £998 if you add body and lens to your cart separately).

HDew has got an ex-demo EM-10 Mk2 for £269, body-only.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Paul H on 31 May, 2018, 12:33:16 pm
WOT new camera?

I have a ten year service award, a bit of offshore bonus already earned and a bit more coming up.  Enough after tax to buy a new camera to record this year's tour to Islay and the west coast back down across the SOlway firth.

I'm torn between about three cameras at the moment of similar price range.
- olympus OMD EM 10 - in solver of course to match my old 35mm OM10
- Panasonic GX80 - liked for compactness
- panasonic G7 - perhaps a bit on the chunky side, but good reviews

As an outlier also the Canon EOS M50 at the next price bracket, recommended for the larger sensor size by an airport duty free salesman

Pros - micro 4/3 have more lenses available, and more compact, but perhaps poorer low light/landscape performance vs the canons?
I'm looking for an upgrade from my current Lumix P&S high zoom model I use for work, keen to take better photos, partic landscape/cityscape/parks and gardens

Thoughts?
You're not going to go wrong, deciding factors for me would be ergonomics and menus and I prefer the Panasonic, currently using the excellent GX80 and tiny GM1.
IMO none of the cameras on your list are really compact, the GX80 is quite brick like, for this reason the GM1 is far more likely to come cycling with me.  I'm tied into M 4/3 with some lovely lenses, if I wasn't the newer 1" sensor cameras might be under consideration.
Quote
partic landscape/cityscape/parks and gardens
Good cameras, like good bikes, are a hobby in themselves. Your interests are not IMO going to be challenging for any enthusiast camera, for any given budget I'd be tempted to put most of it in the glass.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: ElyDave on 31 May, 2018, 01:42:16 pm
thanks all,

I do like Panasonic as well, my P&S is one of theirs, the TZ55, which is perfect for me for work and does take some decent photographs in itself as well. 

FWIW, pricing seems competitive on the Olympus with Park Cameras also doing some good deals https://www.parkcameras.com/bc/35-1602/olympus/mirrorless-cameras (https://www.parkcameras.com/bc/35-1602/olympus/mirrorless-cameras)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 04 June, 2018, 03:38:17 pm
Magnum have a print sale on:

https://shop.magnumphotos.com/?rfsn=613924.b8e164&subid=email#lemonde

Too pricey for me but it's free to look.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: ElyDave on 04 June, 2018, 09:00:48 pm
went with the Olympus in the end, after a chat with DEW, I'm as attached to Olympus as I am to Garmin.  Still have my first ever Oly dig camera - 4 x AA and chewed them up like antacids.

I'll explain to SWMBO when it arrives
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: ElyDave on 10 June, 2018, 09:38:11 pm
I explained, she was not impressed. I was not surprised. 

What I am suprised at however is the speed at which this thing is capable of filling an SD card.  I'm very impressed already, particularly with the speed of writing to the card. 
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 13 July, 2018, 07:55:10 am
You just gotta love that sharpen brush in Photoshop, eh? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/13/trump-hails-boris-johnson-as-future-pm-and-attacks-sadiq-khan#img-1

(the possibility that it might be DoF is countered by the sharpness of the lines on May's dress)


That photo has now been relegated to a teeny thumbnail on the side and you can't see the way that the lines in the orange one's face had been emphasised.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Gattopardo on 06 October, 2018, 11:06:16 am
Fujifilm s8200 stopped working, the on off switch didn't function.

Took camera apart, cleaned the on off switch, put it back together...and now works.  That is the first digital camera that reassembly has been not find out how the camera worked.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Gattopardo on 11 October, 2018, 08:37:39 pm
Not working now  ::-) ::-)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Woofage on 30 October, 2018, 11:16:47 am
Woofage junior is doing work experience at Vitec (https://www.vitecgroup.com/). He gets to play with robotic camera supports for the next couple of weeks 8).
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 05 November, 2018, 04:19:11 pm
Rather spiffing all-action shots of chess games. worth a click

https://www.worldphoto.org/blogs/04-11-18/capturing-intimate-portraits-chess-board
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: pcolbeck on 05 November, 2018, 07:49:57 pm
Rather spiffing all-action shots of chess games. worth a click

https://www.worldphoto.org/blogs/04-11-18/capturing-intimate-portraits-chess-board

I liked those. I wouldn't mess with lady with red hijab.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 12 January, 2019, 06:15:33 pm
Could anyone use what appears to be a reasonable amount left in a box of 50 10x8 of Ilford Multigrade RC? probably about .....8? 10? years old, been kept in reasonable conditions so may well be ok

Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Jakob on 07 February, 2019, 07:58:50 am
Anyone here play with large format cameras (4x5). For reasons I have yet to figure out, I've decided to try it. (Ok, so quality can be amazing, but it's still very impractical!!!)
Since I also like making stuff (and have a 3D printer), I have also decided to build my own camera. View cameras are pretty simple, so all I need to buy is the lens, ground glass and a couple of film holders.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Jaded on 07 February, 2019, 08:44:19 am
Someone’s done that...

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1794420225/chroma-the-unique-4x5-technical-camera?ref=393947&token=1d76404c
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Jakob on 07 February, 2019, 06:36:53 pm
Yeah, there's a one on thingiverse too. Has anyone here played with large format?
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: hellymedic on 31 August, 2019, 09:16:47 pm
A friend has found a cable with a 3.5mm jack plug one end and coaxial AV plugs at the other.

I had similar in kit with Canon IXUS 70.

Multiple Canons in this abode have 3.5mm sockets, which have had no/little use.

Friend has only had Olympus and Sony digital Cameras.

I reckon one of these cameras had a 3.5mm socket, as well as USB.

Can someone who has OLD Sony/Olympus digital cameras tell me if there's a socket hidden beyond friend's consciousness?
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: perpetual dan on 08 September, 2019, 05:04:36 pm
I got my old camera out of the loft - a nikon FM2. I'm not tempeted by going back to film for delayed gratification, but the focus is so much smoother and nicer than what I'm using now.

Also, I've found myself in the position of having to use it, in order to finish the film i started quite a few (maybe 10?) years ago.

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Salvatore on 25 October, 2019, 09:51:10 am
How much ??!!!??!?!?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48954714877_443e075755_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hzXHbe)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 21 November, 2019, 08:05:04 am
I know we have a mobile phone photo thread, but (1) I couldn't find it and (2) this is about the tech rather than the image, because I'm just blown away by the quality of the images out my phone (Pixel 4, now). Here's a crop of an image straight out the phone

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dqyKmH3RKKM/XdZEQEaaenI/AAAAAAADJgg/Jwsn0yJ_CkYwqoljXTC9MlWxd4P6s6lFwCKgBGAsYHg/s1600/00100trPORTRAIT_00100_BURST20191027083250630_COVER.jpg)

Pin sharp focus on the face, motion blur, likely software created DoF, but none the worse for that, all from a hasty point and click. Just amazing tech.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 05 March, 2020, 01:08:41 pm
Here's a bit of a laff.  I have a Nikon D600 and a Nikon V1. They both take the same type of battery, an EN-EL15.  A couple of days ago I recharged the battery from the V1 and put it back: the V1 then said "this battery has reached the end of its useful life and can no longer be used in this camera".  But in the D600 it still shows a full charge - and after shooting a time-lapse 25' long with AF & built-in flash every 5", it's showing 80% capacity, assuming that the blob scale in the control panel is linear and not borrowed from a Morris Minor.

I reckon that merits a medium-long Hmm...

Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: andytheflyer on 16 April, 2020, 09:40:19 am
Anyone know where I put the 67mm polarising filter for my Canon?  All this beautiful sunshine needs  a PL filter.......
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Ham on 17 April, 2020, 10:55:07 am
I think you put it with my dymo labeller. Does that help?
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Jaded on 17 April, 2020, 10:56:17 am
Ah, it is you that has lost my dymo labeller then...
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: andytheflyer on 18 April, 2020, 01:53:06 pm
I think you put it with my dymo labeller. Does that help?
No, no.  I know where your Dymo labeller is...............
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: nicknack on 31 May, 2020, 03:45:00 pm
42 years ago I graduated with a degree in photographic science, so I was somewhat embarrassed to discover something moderately fundamental that I'm sure I should have known about.
If you stick a close up lens on a long focus lens you can get closer (effectively, IYSWIM) than you can with the close up lens on a short focus lens. Since the closest focus of a long focus lens is always further away than that of a similar shorter focus one this seems somewhat counter-intuitive. At least, it does to me. 42 years obviously scrambles the brain cells. If I thought really hard and drew some ray diagrams I could probably prove it but ICBA.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Paul H on 07 June, 2020, 09:44:37 pm
My Panasonic GX80 keeps thinking we're in 2016 whenever I remove the battery, I'm bored with resetting it.  Any ideas what the fault might be?  I'm assuming there's something in there that's supposed to hold some charge to keep the clock running.  Anyone had something similar and fixed it?  It's an irritation rather than a problem, I've got nothing against 2016.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Salvatore on 08 June, 2020, 07:00:34 am
This is all the manual says on the subject:
Quote
The clock setting is maintained for 3 months using the built-in clock battery even
without the battery.
(Leave the charged battery in the unit for 24 hours to charge the built-in battery.)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Sergeant Pluck on 24 June, 2020, 10:41:53 pm
Olympus ending camera side of business:

https://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2020/06/olympus-is-getting-out-of-the-camera-game/

Quote
Quote
This transition could be especially important for anyone with a Micro Four Thirds camera, which is a camera format that has been jointly managed by Olympus and Panasonic since its creation back in 2008. However, with Olympus now getting out the camera market and Panasonic having found success with its recent line of full-frame mirrorless cameras, it quite possible that Olympus’s exit from the camera world could also result in the death of the Micro Four Thirds standard sometime in the not-too-distant future.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: fuaran on 25 June, 2020, 03:46:47 am
Olympus ending camera side of business:
Not exactly. They have sold the camera business to another company, who will continue to make cameras. Probably the same brands, and mostly Micro 4/3.

As for Panasonic, I don't think their full frame range has been that popular yet. It is more of an expensive niche. I'm sure they are still outsold by their Micro 4/3 cameras.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Jaded on 25 June, 2020, 08:47:13 am
It is a loverly system, with some great lenses, and performance that knocks older full frame performance into a cocked hat. If I want shoulder ache and to know I've been on a shoot (or very low light performance, or more subject separation), I take the Full Frame kit. Otherwise it's the Olympus M3/4 every time.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 17 January, 2021, 05:14:41 pm
Just given up after 10 frustrating minutes trying to put a Tamron lens hood back onto the lens.  :demon: >:(
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: mzjo on 17 February, 2023, 03:12:17 pm
Last night I did my first film developing for a very long while (might even be measured in decades and fractions there of).
Unknown camera saved from the tip in a flat clearance, well out of date Tri-X, well out of date developer (Ultrafin+) of a type that I have never used before, diy stopbath from a recipe in a book and Rapid Fixer that was as old as the developer. What's to go wrong? ???
As it happens I decided to do the whole film rather than just the first half dozen frames (and it was the wrong film with pictures I might want to save!). Only problem was the fixer which hadn't cleared after 5 minutes. I looked at the film after a minute of washing, thought "Oh crikes!" and put the fixer back in for a further 20mins. Then a very long wash while I walked the dogs. I need to get my cheap scanner out tonight to see what I've really got but the negs look fine. FWIW fixer and developer were unopened bottles.
I will invest in some new chemicals before going further but for now I'm pleased :thumbsup:

ETA Pleased with the results on the whole. A bit soot and whitewash which is in part due to extending the contrast in the developer (in case it turned out a bit soft) and in greater part due to the jumble sale 15€ scanner (on which I have broken a trap on the exit side trying to clean it, which didn't help). It is 32 bit so I must try it on the old XP netbook to see if it is any happier. (Need a darkroom and a decent enlarger but I'm not investing at the moment). Future developing may try to adapt contrast to the scanner.
On-camera flash on an autofocus compact is definitely limiting!
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: ppg on 23 February, 2023, 07:24:51 am
I inherited a Leica 111g over 30 years ago and having restarted my film photo activities I decided to bite the bullet and get it serviced, by Cameraworks-uk who are highly rated. It's taken 6 months but they have finished and sent the bill - £339 as I expected, but look what they did for it!

Quote
Service. Camera dismantled in order to service. Baffles removed, shutter area cleaned of debris. Main drum, guides and spring
take-up rollers cleaned and re-lubed. Slow speed escapement removed, ultrasonically cleaned and bearing points lubed. Speed
cams/shutter release catches cleaned/lube. Transport mechanism cl;eaned and re-lube. Shutter speeds adjusted to standard
although we had some difficulty with this, eventually, slightly binding transport gears/brake was causing problems and was
rectified. We noted that the rangefinder optics were poor with clear signs of oxidation of the silver beamsplitter (used for
projecting framelines). The decision was taken to dismantle the main prism into three parts - two prisms and one lens. The
optics were polished and a new main mirror was sputtered along with a beamsplitter. The main prism components were
reassembled using UV cure optical cement and painted. We also found that the regular rangefinder beamsplitter had badly
tarnished. We made up a new one and sputtered gold instead of silver. This will not oxidise over time and provides better RF
patch contrast. The rangefinder was reassembled and calibrated. The camera was checked again for correct shutter speeds,
run-down of shutter when reverse lever activated - checked. Flange to FP distance checked. Final check and test

Looking forward to trying it, assuming I can still remember how to get the film in (clue: it isn't easy)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 23 February, 2023, 07:44:17 am
I inherited a Leica 111g over 30 years ago and having restarted my film photo activities I decided to bite the bullet and get it serviced, by Cameraworks-uk who are highly rated. It's taken 6 months but they have finished and sent the bill - £339 as I expected, but look what they did for it!

Quote
Service. Camera dismantled in order to service. Baffles removed, shutter area cleaned of debris. Main drum, guides and spring
take-up rollers cleaned and re-lubed. Slow speed escapement removed, ultrasonically cleaned and bearing points lubed. Speed
cams/shutter release catches cleaned/lube. Transport mechanism cl;eaned and re-lube. Shutter speeds adjusted to standard
although we had some difficulty with this, eventually, slightly binding transport gears/brake was causing problems and was
rectified. We noted that the rangefinder optics were poor with clear signs of oxidation of the silver beamsplitter (used for
projecting framelines). The decision was taken to dismantle the main prism into three parts - two prisms and one lens. The
optics were polished and a new main mirror was sputtered along with a beamsplitter. The main prism components were
reassembled using UV cure optical cement and painted. We also found that the regular rangefinder beamsplitter had badly
tarnished. We made up a new one and sputtered gold instead of silver. This will not oxidise over time and provides better RF
patch contrast. The rangefinder was reassembled and calibrated. The camera was checked again for correct shutter speeds,
run-down of shutter when reverse lever activated - checked. Flange to FP distance checked. Final check and test

Looking forward to trying it, assuming I can still remember how to get the film in (clue: it isn't easy)

Crikey.  We have a IIIc and a IIIf in our collection. Considering that asking prices on eBay are around 1500€ that's a real bargain.

Fancy a bit of Leica porn?  Here's our kit:

(https://pbase.com/johnewing/image/151956455.jpg)

Of course the meter gave up the ghost even before I was given the kit on the left, which it was part of. I had to dismantle the Canon lens and re-engage the focusing screw 90° round from its original position before it would focus properly, but it wasn't expensive so I didn't mind if I broke it.

Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: ppg on 23 February, 2023, 01:28:56 pm
^ Very nice too!

The Leica man in our local camera shop told me Leica prices are very cyclical, so mine (in full order) can be worth between £500 - £1500.
Not that I will sell it as it was my Dad's, though even he got fed up with the fussing and bought an Olympus SLR! so it probably hadn't been used for over 40 years.

I CBA to find out (again!) how to post photos here, so here is the Google Photos link from a few years back
https://goo.gl/photos/U4coqMhooZCDXL758
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 23 February, 2023, 02:32:47 pm
^ Very nice too!

The Leica man in our local camera shop told me Leica prices are very cyclical, so mine (in full order) can be worth between £500 - £1500.
Not that I will sell it as it was my Dad's, though even he got fed up with the fussing and bought an Olympus SLR! so it probably hadn't been used for over 40 years.

I CBA to find out (again!) how to post photos here, so here is the Google Photos link from a few years back
https://goo.gl/photos/U4coqMhooZCDXL758

Original box and all!  And a Weston Master.  We have a couple of those in the cupboard, IIRC one of them with just degrees Weston.  Dunno if they'd still work, probably not.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: ppg on 23 February, 2023, 03:22:00 pm
Weston doesn't sadly, I don't think Selenium cells like 40+ years without a single photon to excite them.
I picked up a Euromaster on fleabay for a fiver which does work, though Lightmaster apps are easier (& TTL metering easier still!)

I doubt I'll put more than a single roll through the 111g just to check it out, I'm afraid it's too Old Skool even for me.
I'll stick to the ME Super when my eyes feel up to focussing, and the Nikon F80 when they don't  8)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: mike on 23 February, 2023, 03:32:43 pm
Very jealous. 

I've just sold my Leica-lookabitalikey-fuji xpro3, it was lovely to use but the results were almost always a bit disappointing next to my 'proper' canon kit, so am going to buy a smaller, lighter lens for that and use it more often rather than feeling compromised using the fuji.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 23 February, 2023, 03:50:51 pm
Weston doesn't sadly, I don't think Selenium cells like 40+ years without a single photon to excite them.
I picked up a Euromaster on fleabay for a fiver which does work, though Lightmaster apps are easier (& TTL metering easier still!)

I doubt I'll put more than a single roll through the 111g just to check it out, I'm afraid it's too Old Skool even for me.
I'll stick to the ME Super when my eyes feel up to focussing, and the Nikon F80 when they don't  8)

We have a B/W enlarger + developing kit unused for the last quarter-century. Couldn't face the faff any more.

I was very disappointed with my first DSLR to find that it didn't have a split prism focusing screen.  These days I'm straining to hear the autofocus beep.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Salvatore on 23 February, 2023, 04:35:12 pm
Leica prices.

I watched a couple of auctions of photographic items online at Flints Auctions. Here are the results of one last November https://www.flintsauctions.com/auction/search/?au=49&sd=2 . Leica items usually have the low lot numbers. Bodies usually go for a few hundred, but anything out of the ordinary (e.g. engraved with 'H.M GOVT' or 'Luftwaffe') can go for ten times as much (lots 6, 10,11).

But £600 for this (lot 32, described as 'chargrilled') ??????
(https://flints.blob.core.windows.net/stock/16939-0-medium.jpg?v=63800693572650)


 
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: andyoxon on 16 March, 2023, 09:40:45 am
Did a double take, one of my Google maps review photos has had over 750 000 views in ~ 8 months.  Then I discovered it's being used for the highlight image of a National trust garden.  Not a bad way to get your photo seen.   :)
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: mzjo on 16 March, 2023, 09:56:13 am
Did a double take, one of my Google maps review photos has had over 750 000 views in ~ 8 months.  Then I discovered it's being used for the highlight image of that National trust garden.  Not a bad way to get you photo seen.   :)

I hope you're being credited for it!
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: andyoxon on 10 April, 2023, 12:33:03 pm
Yes, photo has attribution.  Almost 1 million views now.   :o
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Wowbagger on 20 September, 2023, 11:03:15 pm
The Internet knows that I have an interest in photography, presumably thanks to me signing up to an OU course. I keep being bombarded with advertisements for Very Expensive Cameras, which is a bit of a waste because I don’t know what any of the technical terms mean. All I know is that they bear names like Canon, Leica and Nikon and go for sums in excess of £2,500.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Gattopardo on 06 January, 2024, 09:48:11 pm
How would you go about testing a sony nex-c3 and nex 3n that you are buying second hand.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Polar Bear on 06 January, 2024, 10:31:23 pm
Re: Weston Master light meters:

There's a guy who can be found on the internet who refurbs some models of Weston light meters.  He also buys old ones and refurbs them before selling them on.

When I bought my Bronica ETRSi I also bought one of his refurb jobs.  It is truly exquisite.

I do not have his details immediately to hand but I will try to remember to search them out.

Edit:

ian-partridge.com (https://ian-partridge.com/)

I am too tired to do a linky using my mobile.  Sorry.

We are here to do these thing for you  Mods  ;D
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Graeme on 10 January, 2024, 10:22:43 pm
My daughter bought me a Pentax MX for my birthday and I'm having all sorts of photography fun. I'm making every mistake - but I'm not worried. Sometimes I'm getting interesting results as a result of my mistakes. For example, I misloaded some film and the perforated bits at the top and bottom got mangled, so it didn't wind on. I ended up taking about 20 nighttime photos on the same piece of film. I'm quite happy with the serendipitous results - 20 images of Slaithwaite overlaid.

https://fatherhilarious.blog/2023/12/serendipity-slaithwaite/
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: T42 on 11 January, 2024, 08:58:42 am
That is rather splendid - worth blowing up and exhibiting.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: sam on 11 January, 2024, 11:45:54 am
https://fatherhilarious.blog

That's some nice blogging, vicar.

Reading about Carol reminded me that I have a friend who was involved in a new translation of the bible. He wasn't a translator himself, more on the IT side. He works for NASA now, so still gazing at the heavens.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Graeme on 12 January, 2024, 02:16:24 pm
Taking my daughter to the Yorkshire Sculpture Park on Saturday, and I'm going to use the opportunity for a photo-walk with her and taking the Pentax with some Ilford XP2, also a cheap Boots AF point-and-shoot with Kentmere 400. Really looking forward to some creative opportunities.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Graeme on 13 January, 2024, 04:42:29 pm
Taking my daughter to the Yorkshire Sculpture Park on Saturday, and I'm going to use the opportunity for a photo-walk with her and taking the Pentax with some Ilford XP2, also a cheap Boots AF point-and-shoot with Kentmere 400. Really looking forward to some creative opportunities.

YSP was thought provoking, and gave my daughter and I a lot to ruminate on while taking photos. The Boots point n shoot has a 29mm lens, but she's so used to phone cameras she had no idea it couldn't focus on macro images. She'd taken a couple of extreme close-ups of moss before I noticed. If I'd given her the SLR she'd have been able to see that the images won't focus. We're both looking forward to the results. She was using Kentmere 400 and I had XP2 Super. A very bright day.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Wowbagger on 14 January, 2024, 12:24:10 pm
A week or so ago I watched an entertaining and informative Youtube video about photography. It was introduced by a Scots woman and in the hour-long show I watched, three guys were give a project to take a photo in every one of the UK's National Parks and were set a time limit - it may have been 48 hours, I can't recall now. They were using a swish-looking motor home for their travels. In another part of the programme, one of the three was given an assignment to take photos in Namibia.

But I can't remember what it was called and I want to watch the next issue! It was a bit "Top Gear"ish in some ways, with a contrived rivalry between the blokes in the programme, but still rather good in spite of that.

Can anyone come to my rescue please?
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Wowbagger on 14 January, 2024, 01:10:05 pm
Found it!

https://www.youtube.com/c/PhotographyOnline
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: lissotriton on 14 January, 2024, 02:00:37 pm
Surely the photography equivalent of Top Gear is Digital Rev?
Some of the classic videos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6MBjDFJX_s
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Wowbagger on 18 January, 2024, 06:11:24 pm
I went to the Southend Photographic Society's meeting again last night. This time it was a talk by one of the members on HDR photography. I don't think I knew what this was before we started.

It was pretty clear that the member concerned was not much good when it came to delivering a lecture. He did a lot of faffing about on a screen that I could barely read (it was projected onto a big screen) and he didn't really explain what was going on with regard to there being more than one almost identical image taken by "bracketing" (I had come across this expression on my course). After he finished his talk, we had a break and a cup of tea and he and his wife then showed us some of their prints of HDR photos. This was better, but it became apparent (to me, at any rate) that his wife was at least as skilful a photographer as he was, and also rather better at explaining stuff.

The society is very male dominated and I reckon that at almost 70, I'm of below average age. At one point one of the prints on display was of Blackpool Tower, and one of the old guys standing near me muttered "I'm surprised they still let us call it Blackpool." FFS.

I don't think I'm going to go again. The first time, when there was a (young) visiting speaker giving a talk about his really good wildlife photographs, it was right up my street. But on the two occasions since then, it's been pretty dull and shambolic. I reckon I'll benefit more by looking around the photography pages on this forum and the Talk Photography forum I've recently joined.
Title: Re: Phototalk random thread
Post by: Tim Hall on 20 February, 2024, 09:12:36 pm
The YouTube algorithm sent me a video by a bloke who identified, purchased and used the camera and lens combination* used by James Stewart in Rear Window.

My level of geekery.
 
https://youtu.be/86xRvftRGc4?si=JEP35OcR5Y37UuEU (https://youtu.be/86xRvftRGc4?si=JEP35OcR5Y37UuEU)

*Ihagee Exakta VX 35mm SLR with a Kilfitt Fern-Kilar 1:5.6/400 lens