[SI] Don't forget to send your favorites!
Bowser
the Month." Send us something you shot and tellus why you like it. Any
subject matter is OK. Except porn. Put a brief description in the e-mail and
I'll paste it into the description so we know why you like it. the gallery
is here:
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/your_favorite
And please send the pix here:
si dot moderator at yahoo dot com
We look forward to your entries.
PS: all I shoot this time of year is HS sports, so don't break my chops if
all I submit are football pix.
Tim Conway
"Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote in message
news:4adf9fcd$0$12230$ec3e...@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
I didn't receive any replies.
Tim Conway
tony cooper
There's your next mandate: sports and games. "Games" could include a
wide range of subjects that are not necessarily athletic events for
the people who don't particularly want to shoot jocks in action.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Bowser
"Tim Conway" <tconw...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hbpueh$mah$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I only received a single file, which instructed me to replace #3...
Robert Coe
: subject matter is OK. Except porn. Put a brief description in the e-mail and
: I'll paste it into the description so we know why you like it. the gallery
: is here:
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/your_favorite
:
: And please send the pix here:
:
: si dot moderator at yahoo dot com
:
: We look forward to your entries.
Martha and I are in, as soon as I finish reducing our entries to 300KB. :^(
: PS: all I shoot this time of year is HS sports, so don't break my chops if
: all I submit are football pix.
Don't worry. You may recall that 11 months ago I had just tried to photograph
a football game the night before Thanxgiving. (My daughter's husband's nephew
is one of the best HS running backs in eastern Pennsylvania; if he doesn't get
injured, we're hoping to see him playing for Mr Paterno in a couple of years.)
My pix were pretty awful, so I know how hard it is!
Bob
Robert Coe
wrote:
:
: "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote in message
And I sent you (Bowser) four messages (one picture per message) today: three
from me and one from my wife. I got only one acknowledgement. Is that OK? Did
you receive the pix?
Bob
Russell D.
>
> PS: all I shoot this time of year is HS sports, so don't break my chops
> if all I submit are football pix.
Hey, it's your favorites, not ours. :)
Russell
Alan Browne
> And I sent you (Bowser) four messages (one picture per message) today: three
> from me and one from my wife. I got only one acknowledgement. Is that OK? Did
> you receive the pix?
Sometimes gmail and yahoo mail generate a receipt for a first mailing,
but not for subsequent mailings to the same address in a short period of
time.
Bowser
"Russell D." <r...@sfcn.org> wrote in message
news:7kfdq3F...@mid.individual.net...
I swear I didn't plan it this way, but the light and leaves got nice over
the last couple of days, so I'll post two "leaf" shots and a cheerleader
shot. Only because Bret has been such a huge disappointment to me.
;-)
Robert Coe
<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
Maybe that's it. Thanks for the tip.
Bob
Bowser
"Robert Coe" <b...@1776.COM> wrote in message
news:klj4e51undhfgt36a...@4ax.com...
Got them. For some reason, the "vacation" feature isn't working on Yahoo.
Bowser
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dr91e513se4kjnjaa...@4ax.com...
Excellent idea. Especially since it suits the SI Dictator perfectly, who is
lazy and shiftless. However, this, like all mandates, must be reviewed by
the Shoot-In Committee Board Advisory Team Group. It requires a full vote,
and if approved, it'll be the next mandate.
Bowser
"Robert Coe" <b...@1776.COM> wrote in message
news:bu22e5lagi3uqn3fb...@4ax.com...
It is a pain, and in another NG I was foolishly debating John Navas who said
he could shoot night football with his FZ20. I challenged him to post
results, and he eventually killfiled me. He also claimed that contrast
detect AF was faster than Phase Detect AF, and a few other pretty silly
things. Anyway, it's not easy. I shoot at ISO 6400 just to get the shutter
above 1/250th at f4.
tony cooper
Yeah. Put it to the BATshit group...Board Advisory Team.
Huh ...
Huh...
And yet all high-school students on their yearbook staffs, armed with only
ASA100 film can, and have, captured those exact types of images for the
last half-century and more and had them published in books for the whole
world to see. Back then they even had poorer lighting that what you have
available now. A quite impressive feat when you consider everything those
beginner photographer teenagers have done in every school across the
country for so long.
Must feel pretty bad that you can't even use a camera as well as a beginner
photographer teenager. I guess you'll just have to keep posting why you
NEED ISO6400 to justify not looking in the mirror and your own pathetic
photography skills.
Sucks to be you, doesn't it.
mikey4
"Huh ..." <h...@huh.org> wrote in message
news:roa7e5pp6hihrq1au...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 20:26:00 -0400, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>
>
> And yet all high-school students on their yearbook staffs, armed with only
> ASA100 film can, and have, captured those exact types of images for the
> last half-century and more and had them published in books for the whole
> world to see. Back then they even had poorer lighting that what you have
> available now. A quite impressive feat when you consider everything those
> beginner photographer teenagers have done in every school across the
> country for so long.
>
photogs shot Tri-X at night sporting events. Of course back then everything
shot for the school paper and year book B&W.
Savageduck
Congratulations on attaining Navas killfileship. It seems you are in
good company.
It would be interesting to see if he does turn up in SI.
One thought has crossed my mind, Those who are rapidly filling the
Navas killfile, have the ability to respond to any of his arguments at
least once to clarify things for the rest of the World, and he
shouldn't bitch about it.
We wouldn't be bothering him at all, would we?
If he responds, he has proven two things; his filters stink, and he
confirms his lier status.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Robert Coe
wrote:
Sitting High in Tower.
Annika1980
>
> I swear I didn't plan it this way, but the light and leaves got nice over
> the last couple of days, so I'll post two "leaf" shots and a cheerleader
> shot. Only because Bret has been such a huge disappointment to me.
>
> ;-)
Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1/666521757_yRkn3
Annika1980
wrote:
I also sent in my 3, but only got one response.
Savageduck
Holy shit!!
Boy am I thankful my father moved away from the areas of his boyhood,
in Walker Co. GA where he was born, Chattanooga TN and Granite Falls NC
where we still have family locked into Bible Belt thinking, down the
road to atheism.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Alan Browne
My quantum vote bit is set to yes and no.
Alan Browne
school students on their yearbook staffs, armed with only
> ASA100 film can, and have, captured those exact types of images for the
> last half-century and more and had them published in books for the whole
> world to see.
Most yearbook photos are actually done by pros, companies that
specialize in school photos. My HS certainly was. Yearbooks also
include casual snaps of school life - usually done by students. But
that's a slim part of the whole.
Alan Browne
Nice set of phots. The god squad is out in force. Bible belters are
truly lost.
I saw an article about this school and its scripture issues a week or so
ago in the LA Times (I think).
Funny, though, in the US separation of Church and State causes all sorts
of silliness and trouble.
Here (at least until a few years ago) there were the Protestant School
Board and the Catholic School Board - and very little religion ever
discussed in school (The Jewish schools were either private or under the
Protestant board). Even in Religion and Morals class it was mostly
about civics than anything else. One of the best best teachers was an
old nun who was once a prisoner of the Japanese in Hong Kong... (Now
the school boards are English and French).
Robert Coe
<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
Careful, Alan. You're raising expectations. Next we'll be demanding from you a
disquisition on how the fact that a photon can be in more than one place at
the same time affects noise levels at high ISO. ;^)
Bob
Robert Coe
wrote:
: On Oct 24, 11:07�am, Alan Browne <alan.bro...@FreelunchVideotron.ca>
Bowser has since reported that he received all four of the ones I sent. I
suspect that Alan's explanation is the correct one.
Bob
Alan Browne
Whenever there's an article on quantum computing in SciAm or on the web
somewhere, I eagerly read it hoping to have that "click!" moment where I
finally understand it. Hasn't happened yet. I sort of doubt it will.
I get the counter-detection part (Heisenberg) as it applies to
information transfer of encrypted data, but that's about it.
I leave disquisition (lovely word that I haven't heard in a long time)
to Mr. Maus - who, come to think of it, has disappeared since I showed
his fondly held notions about the US nuclear industry and US gov't
policy to be somewhat in error.
Robert Coe
<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
I wonder if you're just showing your age. (Don't take offense; I'm almost
certainly older than you.) My sense is that more such activities are in the
hands of students than was the case when we were kids. That's A Good Thing,
IMO.
I work for a city government, and we of course use HS interns (many with
political connections, but almost all of them very bright) in our Information
Technology Department. A few years ago a student (without any obvious
political connections) badgered me for an interview until we finally invited
him in. He turned out to one of the smartest kids I ever met. His HS and
college careers behind him, he's now one of our most valuable system
administrators. (FWIW, he's a Canon user.)
Bob
Alan Browne
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:03:03 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> : Huh ... wrote:
> : school students on their yearbook staffs, armed with only
> : > ASA100 film can, and have, captured those exact types of images for the
> : > last half-century and more and had them published in books for the whole
> : > world to see.
> :
> : Most yearbook photos are actually done by pros, companies that
> : specialize in school photos. My HS certainly was. Yearbooks also
> : include casual snaps of school life - usually done by students. But
> : that's a slim part of the whole.
>
> I wonder if you're just showing your age. (Don't take offense; I'm almost
> certainly older than you.) My sense is that more such activities are in the
> hands of students than was the case when we were kids. That's A Good Thing,
> IMO.
I know a couple pros who work for companies here that do nothing but
school photography including individuals, to groups, grads, yearbook, ID
cards, special grad photos and so on. This is their baseline income,
the rest outside the company doing weddings, confirmations, first
communion, event photos and so on.
The company one of these guys works for is huge. Hundreds of
photographers all over the US and Canada. The setup they have for
capture, control, proofing, ordering, blue screen backgrounds with
background options for the parents is quite advanced. Lighting control
is done by a dedicated computer connected to the camera and lights.
Composition and image recording is done on a laptop connected to the
lighting computer and camera. Pose styles are enforced as much as
possible and QC includes master photographer feedback to the line
photogs, coaching and so on. Scheduling has these photogs shooting
daily sometimes with as many as 5 full mini-studios (and photogs) at a
high school running from first class to well after lunch.
And then, a few weeks later they return to each school, set up again and
shoot people who were absent or simply not happy with the proofs. Then
they cover 2 schools per day.
I should make some time and tag along one of these days (although that
would probably require school permission in todays paranoid environment).
Alan Browne
I went to some effort to re-organize the SI mandate set to
latest-to-oldest-order. I see you put the "your_favourite" to "last".
All you need to do is re-number that one to a number in between the
"rulz" set and "Interesting" set. The pbase system will eventually
re-number all of them.
Bowser
"Huh ..." <h...@huh.org> wrote in message
news:roa7e5pp6hihrq1au...@4ax.com...
Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS football
game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400. Take the
shots, post your results, and let's see you put your money where your BS
mouth is. And no flash allowed in my leagues, so use available light only.
Just so you know, shooting 1/500 at f4 at ISO 6400 equates to 1/8 at f4. So
if you can capture good shots at 1/8th of a second shutter speed, you'll
have earned the money.
Actually, it's pretty great to be me, but you wouldn't understand. I could
only explain it to a human being.
Bowser
"Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:2009102419484829560-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
I made his killfile simply by asking to prove anything he said. He can't,
obviously, so away I went...
I was just crushed.
:-)
Bowser
"Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:QIadnflu1fmb5HnX...@giganews.com...
I have been doing that, as I'm sure you noticed, but I just forgot to do it
this time. No need to worry...
Alan Browne
But <arms waving> I *do* worry.
Annika1980
> :
> : I also sent in my 3, but only got one response.
>
> Bowser has since reported that he received all four of the ones I sent. I
> suspect that Alan's explanation is the correct one.
>
Four? Cheater!
The hardest part of this assignment for me was culling them down to
just three.
I'll post the rest of my Top-10 later.
Huh ...
>Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS football
>game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.
The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited enough
to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.
You should be more careful about making offers like that, there are
thousands of previous high-school yearbook photographers in existence who
have done nothing but what you are claiming can't be done. I'm certainly
not the only one that can take your fool's money from such a rudimentary
snapshooter.
As for the other trolls claiming that putting those school-related
activities into the hands of hired photographers ... this perfectly
explains why there's so many poor snapshooters (and books written) today,
causing such things like the photographs posted on Flickr groups to get
such high praise. It all makes sense why things have gone from trash to
gutter.
Alan Browne
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>
>> Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS football
>> game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.
>
> The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited enough
> to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.
>
> You should be more careful about making offers like that, there are
> thousands of previous high-school yearbook photographers in existence who
Shut up and put up. Walk the walk. Show the goods.
Robert Coe
wrote:
Go back and read my original article. Three of them were mine; one was my
wife's.
Bob
Frank ess
Some of all that in this middle 1950s album.
http://www.fototime.com/inv/026DBC694F3BE97
Looks as if the football snaps were flash-lit, and some on the pages
of casual from-the-family-album shots of Seniors as children look
surprisingly good. I took several of the school-life shots with our
family's no-name camera, using 127 film if I recall correctly. Which
is increasingly doubtful, given the time lapse and ... what was I
saying?
Do today's professionals bring a backdrop and do the shooting on
campuses? Several of the no-shows in this graduating class missed the
book because they worked on the family farm and couldn't get to the
photographer's studio when it was open.
--
Frank ess
Frank ess
Was that a spontaneous report, or did you solicit it?
--
Frank ess
tony cooper
wrote:
The student photographs for my high school yearbooks (1952/56) were
taken by a professional in the school auditorium. He had a portable
set-up much like what you see today where a baby photographer will set
up in a store like K-Mart.
The shots of the sports teams in action were taken by student
photographers who worked on the yearbook staff or the school newspaper
staff. All black-and-white. The group shots of clubs and
organizations were also taken by student photographers.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Alan Browne
One co I know bring a portable studio of sorts with multiple background
lights, reflector lighting (for hairlight), key and fill lights. The
background is blue chromakey so the parents can choose the print
backgrounds. Several of these at once in a school is typical. Re-takes
for absent kids (or for photos that weren't good) are done a few weeks
later.
I've heard of an outfit in the US who have a studio in an 18 wheeler,
and the students go out to the truck.
Eric Stevens
Open the box.
Eric Stevens
Alan Browne
The SPCA said no.
Calvin Sambrook
That'll be because as soon as you open the box either your cat or its friend
spinning the other way dies. It's a no-win situation really, just like lots
of physics.
Bowser
"Huh ..." <h...@huh.org> wrote in message
news:ao09e5tt1g6scskgo...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>
>>Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS
>>football
>>game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.
>
> The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited
> enough
> to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.
Weasel. Troll. Fake.
Bowser
"Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:-vSdnTtbE-oAF3nX...@giganews.com...
Like Navas, we'll never see anything. 1/8th at f4? Good results? Right......
Ray Fischer
>On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>
>>Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS football
>>game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.
>
>The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited enough
>to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.
Bleats some anonymous coward who doesn't even use a real name or email
address.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Move along folks - nothing but talentless snapshooters here - nothing to see ...
Or ... 1/32s at f/2.8, or 1/64s at f/1.4. No, no way, there are no lenses
of that size, never was. Panning with a subject, snapping the shutter just
at the full extension of motion or when the subject is reversing positions.
During that momentary pause that ALL decent sports photographer learn to
predict and know like the back of their hand. Easy to do at those speeds
and arrest all motion. Even easier if using Tri-X. Easy for anyone who is
the least bit talented that is. Even teenage high-school yearbook
photographers who are just learning to use a camera.
The fact that you can't do what nearly every teenager on a year-book staff
could do proves just how pathetic you are no matter what camera gear will
ever be in your hands. Thanks for posting and zealously insisting what high
ISOs you require, otherwise we wouldn't have realized just how bad you are
with any camera. Your own words proved it. Unbeknownst to you, until now.
Give it up, you useless talentless snapshooting know-nothing hack trolls.
One more thing. Stop handing out your snapshooter's advice. NOBODY deserves
the pitiable fate of having to learn anything photography related from
talentless idiots like you.
Bowser
"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4ae4d05a$0$1659$742e...@news.sonic.net...
Right. Just an attempt at privacy, that's all. Send mail to the Yahoo
account, I'll get it.
Note that the weasel troll has internet access but claims to live in the
middle of the Sahara.
As far as privacy, do you stand up in the middle of Grand Central Station
and shout out your personal info?
Ray Fischer
>
>
>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>news:4ae4d05a$0$1659$742e...@news.sonic.net...
>> Huh ... <h...@huh.org> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS
>>>>football
>>>>game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.
>>>
>>>The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited
>>>enough
>>>to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.
>>
>> Bleats some anonymous coward who doesn't even use a real name or email
>> address.
>
>Right. Just an attempt at privacy, that's all.
A bullshit excuse.
>As far as privacy, do you stand up in the middle of Grand Central Station
>and shout out your personal info?
Do you realize why that's a stupid question?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Robert Coe
:
:
I asked, after receiving only one response to four separate messages.
Bob
George Kerby
On 10/25/09 5:33 PM, in article 7kj9e512lj4bbvobo...@4ax.com,
"Move along folks - nothing but talentless snapshooters here - nothing to
see ..." <mafnb...@antispam.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:05:25 -0400, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
>> news:-vSdnTtbE-oAF3nX...@giganews.com...
>>> Huh ... wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS
>>>>> football game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO
>>>>> 6400.
>>>>
>>>> The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited
>>>> enough
>>>> to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.
>>>>
>>>> You should be more careful about making offers like that, there are
>>>> thousands of previous high-school yearbook photographers in existence who
>>> <snip the ya-ya-ya-da>
>>>
>>> Shut up and put up. Walk the walk. Show the goods.
>>
>> Like Navas, we'll never see anything. 1/8th at f4? Good results? Right......
>
> Or ... 1/32s at f/2.8, or 1/64s at f/1.4.
<snip>
Nuff said. You have just proven yourself a buffoon in regard to photography.
No go bother some other children and leave the adults alone...
Bowser
>>> Shut up and put up. Walk the walk. Show the goods.
>>
>>Like Navas, we'll never see anything. 1/8th at f4? Good results?
>>Right......
>
> Or ... 1/32s at f/2.8, or 1/64s at f/1.4. No, no way, there are no lenses
> of that size, never was. Panning with a subject, snapping the shutter just
> at the full extension of motion or when the subject is reversing
> positions.
> During that momentary pause that ALL decent sports photographer learn to
> predict and know like the back of their hand. Easy to do at those speeds
> and arrest all motion. Even easier if using Tri-X. Easy for anyone who is
> the least bit talented that is. Even teenage high-school yearbook
> photographers who are just learning to use a camera.
Post the links, weasel. Fake. Troll.
Bowser
"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4ae4d419$0$1659$742e...@news.sonic.net...
> Bowser <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>>
>>
>>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>news:4ae4d05a$0$1659$742e...@news.sonic.net...
>>> Huh ... <h...@huh.org> wrote:
>>>>On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS
>>>>>football
>>>>>game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.
>>>>
>>>>The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited
>>>>enough
>>>>to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.
>>>
>>> Bleats some anonymous coward who doesn't even use a real name or email
>>> address.
>>
>>Right. Just an attempt at privacy, that's all.
>
> A bullshit excuse.
Your opinion, my choice. Finding out who I am is very, very easy, and even
the biggest moron on the planet can figure it out. So, who am I?
>
>>As far as privacy, do you stand up in the middle of Grand Central Station
>>and shout out your personal info?
>
> Do you realize why that's a stupid question?
I realize many, many things you don't.
Bowser
"George Kerby" <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:C70B2762.37292%ghost_...@hotmail.com...
Do you think that the troll is a Navas sock puppet? Seriously, 1/32nd?
Bowser
"Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:WImdneCZOIfSHXnX...@giganews.com...
Repeat after me: "What, me worry?"
Alan Browne
> Do you think that the troll is a Navas sock puppet? Seriously, 1/32nd?
Some leaf shutters, marked 1/15, 1/30, 1/60 etc. are actually 1/16,
1/32, 1/64 ... in timing. (I'd bet many FP shutters from yore are as
well and I wouldn't be shocked if modern DSLR's are so).
George Kerby
On 10/26/09 4:54 PM, in article
4ae61a9f$0$4281$ec3e...@unlimited.usenetmonster.com, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now>
wrote:
Stating the obvious. Most with a double-digit IQ could say that, though...
George Kerby
On 10/26/09 4:55 PM, in article
4ae61ad6$0$16654$ec3e...@unlimited.usenetmonster.com, "Bowser"
<u...@gone.now> wrote:
I believed that someone else suggested that. It IS possible. I will check
next time. They are both completely eaten up with themselves.
1/32 is sorta of an elementary progression - but I was referring to the
trolls complete lack of understanding � stop sequences.
Catch Up
Anyone with any modern camera can easily test this for themselves. Set it
for 15 seconds. It times out at 16 seconds. If unsure with the 15 second
test, then set it for 30 seconds, watch the shutter close at a 32 duration.
Easier for the photographer to double or half the numbers if they are
rounded.
1s, 2s, 4s, 8s, 15s, 30s. 60s.
Rather than the true speeds which are
1s, 2s. 4s. 8s. 16s. 32s. 64s
The rounded numbers were only added for convenience. The CHDK team, for
lack of a better term, has defined these rounded values the "marketed
values". This numbering scheme, rounding f/stop, exposure, and even ISO
values to the nearest round had been in existence since the beginning of
photography.
In the other direction, their "marketed value" might be named
1/8, 1/15, 1/30, 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500
But in reality they will always time to
1/8, 1/16, 1/32, 1/64, 1/128, 1/248, 1/496
This is quite confusing to newcomers to the CHDK team. They've never been
aware of this. (Old-time photographers are, but none of the newer
photographers know this.) When people new to CHDK get into the APEX
numbering scheme for setting Av and Tv values, they have to rely on the
true values, not the "marketed values".
Paul Furman
>
>> 1/8th at f4? Good results? Right......
>
> Or ... 1/32s at f/2.8, or 1/64s at f/1.4.
Apart from rounding, a stop got lost/mixed up...
1/8 f/4
1/15 f/2.8
1/30 f/2
1/60 f/1.4
Ray Fischer
>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>> Bowser <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>>>On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:30:21 -0400, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Nice try, troll. I'll pay yout $10,000 if you can shoot a night HS
>>>>>>football
>>>>>>game with ISO 100 file as well as I do with my digital at ISO 6400.
>>>>>
>>>>>The next time I'm ever traveling through a location that's inhabited
>>>>>enough
>>>>>to have a high-school, you'll be out that $10,000.
>>>>
>>>> Bleats some anonymous coward who doesn't even use a real name or email
>>>> address.
>>>
>>>Right. Just an attempt at privacy, that's all.
>>
>> A bullshit excuse.
>
>Your opinion, my choice.
And my choice to disreagrd your crap as being trollery.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Bob Larter
"Miao!"
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Larter
I have one good photo that I took at about 1/8th & F2.8 or so (with a
digicam). It was an incredibly lucky shot, & I'll be surprised if I ever
manage to do it again.
Bob Larter
I've been wondering the same thing. The fact that the P&S troll changes
his handle & NSP so often is a dead giveaway that he's scared of being
tracked down.
Bob Larter
> On Oct 24, 1:01 pm, "Bowser" <u...@gone.now> wrote:
>
>> I swear I didn't plan it this way, but the light and leaves got nice over
>> the last couple of days, so I'll post two "leaf" shots and a cheerleader
>>
>> ;-)
>
> Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
> http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1/666521757_yRkn3
Jeez, Brett! - Where are the cute girls?
Bowser
"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4ae66a9e$0$1656$742e...@news.sonic.net...
Thanks! I appreciate being ignored by you, and humbly request the addition
of my name to your killfile.
Eric Stevens
wrote:
This old-time photographer quickly learned that the rated speed was
only a convenient reference point for setting the shutter speed. The
expected tolerance on (say) 1/125 would include 1/128 without any
trouble. And vice versa.
What's more, the extent of the expected under/over exposure would vary
from one part of the speed range to another. All this is to be
expected when you look at the means they used for setting/controlling
speed.
Eric Stevens
Catch Up
wrote:
This could very well be the reason they decided to just round to the
nearest in the past. Which now became convention for simplicity sake, even
though shutters of some of today's cameras have been found to be as
accurate as 1/80,000 of a second timing tolerance (CHDK P&S cameras for
example), reproducible every time. Long ago I had tested shutter speeds on
some old bellows field-cameras. Whether due to age or design they were
decidedly very far off the mark. Often being random in nature. At times
faster, others slower for the very same speed setting. And as you say,
varying greatly at either end of their ranges. These were precision
leaf-shutters too mind you. The focal-plane shutters of SLR cameras with
their heavy-cloth curtains were always all over the board. Springs,
rubberized cloth, and mechanical trip mechanisms don't tolerate
fluctuations in humidity and temperature well. Nor whatever lubricant or
lack of lubricant is in use on the transport mechanism. Another reason I'd
rather use a P&S camera that does not rely on mechanical contrivances and
springs, other than for door-latches and lens covers.
The average snapshooter would probably have a difficult time trying to
think, "What's 4 stops faster than 1/64 second?" when faced with cameras
designed with 1/3EV steps in mind. 60 x 4 being near to 250 is easy, 200
don't cut it, and neither does 320. One less digit to mentally play with.
They already have a difficult enough time with their cameras on full-auto
modes.
Often my photography projects are of scientific analysis in nature. When I
choose 1/227.3 seconds (44/10,000th) shutter speed it damn well better be
that speed. Easily available in CHDK P&S cameras with their two (three) Tv
override methods. One being standard 1/3EV increments as a menu option for
the average photographer. If using the APEX shutter-speed selection using
calculations in scripts to set Tv values, then even more steps are
available. 96 distinct shutter-speeds per EV step. The other method (also
on a CHDK menu) as decimal fractions.1/227.3 = 44/10,000 = 44 x a factor
of 1/10k. This decimal method available in factors of 100, 10, 1, 1/10,
1/100, 1/1k, 1/10k, and 1/100k, using multipliers of 0 to 100. Selectable
shutter-speeds from 2.77 hours to 1/40,000 second with a 1/80,000th second
accuracy. This is a nice century for photography.
Catch Up
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:07:34 +1300, Eric Stevens <eric.s...@sum.co.nz>
wrote:
This could very well be the reason they decided to just round to the
nearest in the past. Which now became convention for simplicity sake, even
though shutters of some of today's cameras have been found to be as
accurate as 1/80,000 of a second timing tolerance (CHDK P&S cameras for
example), reproducible every time. Long ago I had tested shutter speeds on
some old bellows field-cameras. Whether due to age or design they were
decidedly very far off the mark. Often being random in nature. At times
faster, others slower for the very same speed setting. And as you say,
varying greatly at either end of their ranges. These were precision
leaf-shutters too mind you. The focal-plane shutters of SLR cameras with
their heavy-cloth curtains were always all over the board. Springs,
rubberized cloth, and mechanical trip mechanisms don't tolerate
fluctuations in humidity and temperature well. Nor whatever lubricant or
lack of lubricant is in use on the transport mechanism. Another reason I'd
rather use a P&S camera that does not rely on mechanical contrivances and
springs, other than for door-latches and lens covers.
The average snapshooter would probably have a difficult time trying to
think, "What's -2EV stops (4x's) faster than 1/64 second?" when faced with
Annika1980
wrote:
>
> > Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
> >http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1...
>
> Nice set of phots. The god squad is out in force. Bible belters are
> truly lost.
>
> I saw an article about this school and its scripture issues a week or so
> ago in the LA Times (I think).
Yes, and the NY Times also ran an article on it yesterday. The guy
who wrote it wanted to interview me about it since I have been very
vocal railing against the Biblical banners. I never called him back
since I was on vacation, but I was hoping they'd use one of my pics
like the "God Zombies" photo I submitted to the SI.
Those Bible-thumpers are pretty nasty here in the buckle of the Bible
Belt.
One of them even called me a pedophile because I was at the game
taking pics and I dared take a photo of her precious daughter, who was
one of the cheerleaders. Can you imagine such a thing?
Here's the pic in question, which I call "Mocking Jesus."
http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/20090352/668395527_kttkG-L.jpg
Annika1980
>
> Jeez, Brett! - Where are the cute
These are good wholesome Christian girls, not the usual Asian sluts
you're used to, Lionel.
Savageduck
> On Oct 25, 11:16�am, Alan Browne <alan.bro...@FreelunchVideotron.ca>
> wrote:
>>
>>> Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
>>> http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1...
>>
>> Nice set of phots. �The god squad is out in force. �Bible belters are
>> truly lost.
>>
>> I saw an article about this school and its scripture issues a week or so
>> ago in the LA Times (I think).
>
> Yes, and the NY Times also ran an article on it yesterday. The guy
> who wrote it wanted to interview me about it since I have been very
> vocal railing against the Biblical banners. I never called him back
> since I was on vacation, but I was hoping they'd use one of my pics
> like the "God Zombies" photo I submitted to the SI.
>
> Those Bible-thumpers are pretty nasty here in the buckle of the Bible
> Belt.
The Bible thumpers are pretty nasty wherever they appear.
> One of them even called me a pedophile because I was at the game
> taking pics and I dared take a photo of her precious daughter, who was
> one of the cheerleaders. Can you imagine such a thing?
>
Didn't the Australian "who's name shall go unmentioned" and Noons make
similar accusations?
Could there be stealth Antipodean cousins among the SIRR (Southern
Irrational Reactionary Religious??)
--
Regards,
Savageduck
Alan Browne
> On Oct 25, 11:16 am, Alan Browne <alan.bro...@FreelunchVideotron.ca>
> wrote:
>>> Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
>>> http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1...
>> Nice set of phots. The god squad is out in force. Bible belters are
>> truly lost.
>>
>> I saw an article about this school and its scripture issues a week or so
>> ago in the LA Times (I think).
>
> Yes, and the NY Times also ran an article on it yesterday. The guy
> who wrote it wanted to interview me about it since I have been very
> vocal railing against the Biblical banners. I never called him back
> since I was on vacation, but I was hoping they'd use one of my pics
> like the "God Zombies" photo I submitted to the SI.
>
> Those Bible-thumpers are pretty nasty here in the buckle of the Bible
> Belt.
> One of them even called me a pedophile because I was at the game
> taking pics and I dared take a photo of her precious daughter, who was
> one of the cheerleaders. Can you imagine such a thing?
Tell them that if they call you a pedophile in public they are open to
being sued for libel.
> Here's the pic in question, which I call "Mocking Jesus."
> http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/20090352/668395527_kttkG-L.jpg
Chick looks real happy.
Bob Larter
> On Oct 27, 2:38 am, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
>>> http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1...
>> Jeez, Brett! - Where are the cute
>
> These are good wholesome Christian girls,
Pfft. Odds on that half of them will be pregnant before they graduate HS.
> not the usual Asian sluts
> you're used to, Lionel.
So you're racist as well as being sexist? What a surprise...
Annika1980
wrote:
>
> > Here's the pic in question, which I call "Mocking Jesus."
>
> Chick looks real happy.
If you ever dealt with her mom online you'd know why she looks so sad.
I've met a lot of ignorant lowlifes online, but this lady is special.
She claims I was stalking her daughter because I posted that pic of
her among all the others I took at the game and at the Christian rally
earlier in the week. She even tried to make the logical leap that
since I went to football games and took pics (including pics of
cheerleaders) then I must be a pedo. Sux to be you, Bowser, you perv!
Annika1980
> Annika1980 wrote:
> > On Oct 27, 2:38 am, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
> >>>http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1...
> >> Jeez, Brett! - Where are the cute
>
> > These are good wholesome Christian girls,
>
> Pfft. Odds on that half of them will be pregnant before they graduate HS.
>
> > not the usual Asian sluts
> > you're used to, Lionel.
>
> So you're racist as well as being sexist? What a surprise...
Hell no. One of my favorite films is Anal Asians IV.
But you are correct about the cheerleaders. I have learned that
besides posting Bible verses on banners one of the other long held
traditions at that school is cheerleaders getting pregnant. By good
Christian boys, no doubt.
Alan Browne
> But you are correct about the cheerleaders. I have learned that
> besides posting Bible verses on banners one of the other long held
> traditions at that school is cheerleaders getting pregnant. By good
> Christian boys, no doubt.
I always find it ironic that "Right to Life" anti-abortion Christians
also don't want frank sex education in schools and especially not
discussion of effective birth control beyond abstinence.
Abstinence is 100% effective to be sure, except when it isn't practiced.
Mother nature has not equipped teenagers with a strong ability to
overcome natural urges. The tiny amount of brain power left when
they're horny is just enough to put on a condom.
Here kids can get condoms openly - some pharmacies give them out for
free to teens. School health teachers/nurses give them out on demand.
(I do remember a couple girls suddenly switching schools back in the day
...)
Alan Browne
Like I said, call her on it if she says so in public. Should give her a
case of the STFU real quick.
Jeff R.
"Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> Annika1980 wrote:
>
>> But you are correct about the cheerleaders. I have learned that
>> besides posting Bible verses on banners one of the other long held
>> traditions at that school is cheerleaders getting pregnant. By good
>> Christian boys, no doubt.
>
> I always find it ironic that "Right to Life" anti-abortion Christians also
> don't want frank sex education in schools and especially not discussion of
> effective birth control beyond abstinence.
>
Oh I dunno.
Ask Mary...
(or Joseph)
Alan Browne
The greatest cuckold?
Anyone who believes that story really needs a does of objectivity. But
even the most deeply bathed in the blood Baptist would not suspect God
of impregnating their precious little virgin.
Jeff R.
"Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> Jeff R. wrote:
>>> Abstinence is 100% effective to be sure, ...
>>
>> Oh I dunno.
>> Ask Mary...
>> (or Joseph)
>
> The greatest cuckold?
>
> Anyone who believes that story really needs a does of objectivity. But
> even the most deeply bathed in the blood Baptist would not suspect God of
> impregnating their precious little virgin.
Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one of the
easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary beliefs.
Heck - I talk to the reptiles in my backyard, and they regularly reply in
very eloquent hisses.
What was this thread about?
--
Jeff R.
Bob Larter
> On Oct 29, 9:16 pm, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Annika1980 wrote:
>>> On Oct 27, 2:38 am, Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Did someone say "Cheerleaders?"
>>>>> http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/Other/LFO-Cheerleaders/9848722_Wrs35/1...
>>>> Jeez, Brett! - Where are the cute
>>> These are good wholesome Christian girls,
>> Pfft. Odds on that half of them will be pregnant before they graduate HS.
>>
>>> not the usual Asian sluts
>>> you're used to, Lionel.
>> So you're racist as well as being sexist? What a surprise...
>
> Hell no. One of my favorite films is Anal Asians IV.
Why doesn't it surprise me that the only things you know about Asian
women comes from pornos?
> But you are correct about the cheerleaders. I have learned that
> besides posting Bible verses on banners one of the other long held
> traditions at that school is cheerleaders getting pregnant. By good
> Christian boys, no doubt.
No doubt.
Alan Browne
> "Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:ZYWdnfGDweFodnfX...@giganews.com...
>> Jeff R. wrote:
>>>> Abstinence is 100% effective to be sure, ...
>>> Oh I dunno.
>>> Ask Mary...
>>> (or Joseph)
>> The greatest cuckold?
>>
>> Anyone who believes that story really needs a does of objectivity. But
>> even the most deeply bathed in the blood Baptist would not suspect God of
>> impregnating their precious little virgin.
>
>
> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one of the
> easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary beliefs.
Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred numerous
times. Has it?
Jeff R.
"Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> Jeff R. wrote:
>>
>> Yet even that -parthenogenesis- is conceivably ( sorry - :-| ) one of
>> the easist to believe and, maybe, more likely of the necessary beliefs.
>
> Surely. But in the time since it would likely have occurred numerous
> times. Has it?
I think so.
I *cannot* believe that some of the mothers I see with kids in tow have
*ever* had sex.
Savageduck
Bob Larter
*shudder* I know what you mean.
Alan Browne
Doesn't obviate sex.
Savageduck
<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:
It does if you use the cruder definition of sex as actual coitus, as
opposed to fertilization and cell division. Especially since the female
in this case wouldn't even have to meet the sperm donor, let alone be
intimate.
I doubt many men would call invitro, without penetration, sex.
Let's see you sit back and be gratified by that?
--
Regards,
Savageduck
mikey4
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:2009110108235680278-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
Alan Browne
You misunderstand what I said. Because a woman has an in-vitro fert.,
that does not mean she's a virgin. In fact it's extremely unlikely that
a virgin would be approved for IVF.
Further, your reply cur around the definition of parthenogenesis which
is essentially "self reproduction". IVF is definitely not parthenogenesis.
NameHere
To put the kibosh on this puerile off-topic troll's nonsense.
One of my own truisms:
"Ugliness, as well as beauty, lies solely within the eye of the beholder.
Those that see ugliness in others are only revealing the ugliness within
themselves." by ~ caMel ~
Yes, you may quote me in the future. You'll have to. The next time someone
tells you how ugly you are you'll be able to explain to them why.
Savageduck
<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:
OK! OK! I did think we were talking "human" mothers in this humorous
sidetrack, not those life forms for which parthenogenesis is a valid
form of reproduction.
The bottom line is "virgin" birth as proposed in the New Testament
remains fiction, and for humans is a myth.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
J. Clarke
Yep. Note that the Bible is silent on the question of how it was determined
that Mary was a virgin. All that we have is that Matthew and Luke said so.
We don't know if she told them or whether God told them or whether they
personally put a chastity belt on her or if they had it from a team of
whatever passed for OB/GYNs in the middle east of the time or whether Joseph
complained to them incessantly about how she never put out and got pregnant
anyway or what.
The OT-Troll's Omega
wrote:
Their virgin mary was just a name they carved over the name of Isis on her
statues when people demanded that there must be a female counterpart to
their invent-as-you-go christian beliefs. The virgin birth was stolen from
a more ancient Pagan Roman legend. The "easter resurrection" is a
bastardization of the holiday of Eostre, a Pagan Goddess of spring, to
celebrate the yearly resurrection of life in a northern climate, a holiday
that began over 3500 years ago under various names and cultures.
No mother + no birth + no resurrection = no christ.
Alan Browne
> Yep. Note that the Bible is silent on the question of how it was determined
> that Mary was a virgin.
The Bible is silent on a lot of facts that are inconvenient to its myths.
Jeff R.
"NameHere" <wh...@address.info> wrote in message
news:ttmre5pp7acloiman...@4ax.com...
Here's one my favourites, by way of reply:
" ...The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
by ~ Shakespeare, Ham A.III Sc.II ~
Act III Scene II
Wilba
>
> Note that the Bible is silent on the question of how it was determined
> that Mary was a virgin. All that we have is that Matthew and Luke said
> so.
> We don't know if she told them or whether God told them or whether they
> personally put a chastity belt on her or if they had it from a team of
> whatever passed for OB/GYNs in the middle east of the time or whether
> Joseph
> complained to them incessantly about how she never put out and got
> pregnant
> anyway or what.
It's a translation error. The Aramaic word used to describe her has mutated
through several steps into "virgin", but a good direct translation would be
"lass" - simply a young woman.
NameHere
Yes, I figured you'd read it wrong, as all trolls read everything wrong.
Etymology of that truism: I came up with that saying when someone was
telling me how unattractive they thought someone was. I, on the other hand,
found the person they were calling "ugly" to be very attractive. I started
to question the discrepancies between our viewpoints. How could two
different people perceive a third so differently. No different than how one
person that might find a spider's appearance and coloring patterns a
marvelous and beautiful thing, others being disgusted at the sight, now
revealing the ugliness of that person's fears and insecurities, whether
learned or innate. The above quotable about ugliness is the answer. That
saying holds true no matter what way that you try to warp it to justify
your own inadequacies.