#26 May 28th, 2005 06:37 AM

wantingscott
Member

Re: camera???

Head,
i noticed the new ISM click of choice is a black body with a foldout window. now i know that ISM researched the hell out of the silver SONY (and if it is retired, is it for sale??? oooooooh) and i'm wondering what the latest model is... I might want one of my own.

wscott


_________________________________________________
that's the way it goes. but don't forget, it goes the other way too.

Offline

#27 May 28th, 2005 12:13 PM

Head
Member

Re: camera???

wantingscott wrote:

Head,
i noticed the new ISM click of choice is a black body with a foldout window. now i know that ISM researched the hell out of the silver SONY (and if it is retired, is it for sale??? oooooooh) and i'm wondering what the latest model is... I might want one of my own.

wscott

We don't lend cameras to all the girls - not sure what the black one is you refer to.  I have decided what I think is the best camera ever made - it's off the market now and it's replacement is not as good, but I'm not sharing that model number publicly.  I think there are two things which sets it apart from the rest - the lens, and the algorithms it uses to calculate exposure and white balance, sharpen, saturate and compress the images.   To get such good pics out of a pro camera you need to spend a while postprocessing.  Presuming you want 'reality' of course.

Offline

#28 August 20th, 2005 03:02 AM

wantingscott
Member

Re: camera???

Hey,
anyone know about the PowerShot Pro1 8 Mpx camera? i think Zille used it... anyone love it? i might buy one used... thinking about it...

Scott


_________________________________________________
that's the way it goes. but don't forget, it goes the other way too.

Offline

#29 August 20th, 2005 03:32 AM

Belgareth
Member

Re: camera???

wantingscott wrote:

Hey,
anyone know about the PowerShot Pro1 8 Mpx camera? i think Zille used it... anyone love it? i might buy one used... thinking about it...

Scott

I used to have one for mucking around with, then I upgraded(??) it to a the G5. They both have a disadvantage common to a lot of digicams and that is the inherent delay before the shutter fires. I would say it's a great "fun" camera but if you want fast reaction times to get that once-in-a-lifetime image, you still can't beat a decent digital SLR. I accept that SLR's are a lot more expensive, slightly bulkier and more inconvenient but the difference in quality and performance is very noticable.


[color="Red"]require "help.pl";[/color]

Offline

#30 August 20th, 2005 10:40 AM

SCSIgirl
Member

Re: camera???

wantingscott wrote:

Hey,
anyone know about the PowerShot Pro1 8 Mpx camera? i think Zille used it... anyone love it? i might buy one used... thinking about it...

Scott

Depends on your usage.  I've been shooting Nikons since college.  My camera source (who is a big time Canon dealer)  talked me into the 1st Canon digital out (I think it was called the Powershot P70).  It was horrible.  Shutter lag made it unusable for anything other than tripod still lifes.  I went back to Nikon in the 990 series and used it for several years.

Then I found a Powershot  75(yes, literally found it new and unlabled).  It was miles ahead of the Nikon.  I eventually traded it in for the Powershot 95.  That has been my "grab-shot" camera ever since.  (I still have the Nikon D100 for professional work).

People ask me all the time and my basic response is:  Nikon, Canon, Olympus.  They are the 3 leaders and you can't go wrong with them.

I bought a new Sony 801 last year and returned it the same day.  It's few unique features did not make up for it's clumsy and unprofessional design.  At one time Sony made some great cameras.  So did Kodak.  But right now, stick with Nik, Can, or Oly.


"Apple of my Eye", "bated breath", "brave new world", "caught red-handed" - all coined by Shakespeare.

Offline

#31 August 20th, 2005 01:38 PM

roxxie
Member

Re: camera???

Wow, so many comments to make.

1. Ms. Zille handed me her camera. I like seeing the cameras in the pics because I know that the women are shooting themselves rather than having someone else in there lending a hand.

2. Is it just me or this is a porn site? In my book appearing on a porn site makes one a porn star. Amateur or not, porn is always porn. Even artsy porn is still porn. I do a lot of other adult modeling, but I'm not in the mainstream Southern California porn industry. I know that there are a lot of misconceptions about the mainstream porn industry, but the performers are just as real, intelligent, creative, etc as anyone else. Oh I don't know where I'm going with this, but I really do feel strongly about feminism and the adult industry and the various misconceptions. I could talk on the topic all day if given the chance.

Offline

#32 August 20th, 2005 10:58 PM

Manring
Member

Re: camera???

I've used Nikons forever, and once things started going digital, tried the Nikon digitals as well . . . especially their CoolPix 990, 995, and 4500, which have the very cool split-body design so useful in shooting out in public, or in the studio. You can shoot yourself more easily that way, pointing both the lens and LCD your way, or shoot back over your shoulder, over a crowd, up from the floor, around corners, etc . . all while still having a great view of the LCD. It's all I made a living with one whole summer and fall, as I shot my way around the music and bar scene.   I could go on about the CoolPix series for a long time.    You can still find them on eBay for low, low, prices, and they'll be around for a good while, cultish and collectable as they've become.   Now I use the new Nikon D70S, digital SLR, and absolutely love it, too. NO shutter lag at all, though it does not have the split-body. The CoolPix cams I have have become my walkaround cameras and would make an excellent choice for self-shooting.

Offline

#33 August 21st, 2005 05:03 AM

Gimme_Danger
Member

Re: camera???

I have a coolpix 5700. Pretty good camera in a semi-professional kind of way. I pobably dont use half of what it can do hmm

I'd like to know what Heads secret preference is tho

Offline

#34 August 21st, 2005 05:22 AM

Belgareth
Member

Re: camera???

roxxie wrote:

Wow, so many comments to make.

2. Is it just me or this is a porn site? In my book appearing on a porn site makes one a porn star. Amateur or not, porn is always porn. Even artsy porn is still porn. I do a lot of other adult modeling, but I'm not in the mainstream Southern California porn industry. I know that there are a lot of misconceptions about the mainstream porn industry, but the performers are just as real, intelligent, creative, etc as anyone else. Oh I don't know where I'm going with this, but I really do feel strongly about feminism and the adult industry and the various misconceptions. I could talk on the topic all day if given the chance.

Pornography is defined as writings or drawings (including photographic and moving images) intended to stimulate sexual arousal.

If you believe that the folios and movies on ISM are used for the purpose of sexual arousal, then ISM is  porn site. However, from all of the (serious rather than joccular) comments that I have read in this forum, it would appear that the images are not being viewed for that purpose and, assuming that those who are posting are telling the truth, I conclude that ISM is not a porn site.

An interesting possibility that arises if any of the contributors are shooting themselves with the intention of causing sexual arousal.


[color="Red"]require "help.pl";[/color]

Offline

#35 August 21st, 2005 08:47 AM

skippo
Member

Re: camera???

Belgareth wrote:

Pornography is defined as writings or drawings (including photographic and moving images) intended to stimulate sexual arousal.

If you believe that the folios and movies on ISM are used for the purpose of sexual arousal, then ISM is  porn site. However, from all of the (serious rather than joccular) comments that I have read in this forum, it would appear that the images are not being viewed for that purpose and, assuming that those who are posting are telling the truth, I conclude that ISM is not a porn site.

An interesting possibility that arises if any of the contributors are shooting themselves with the intention of causing sexual arousal.

For the record, I do find the images on this site sexually arousing and I do visit this site for that reason. I also find many of them artistic and most of them just plain interesting (as in, oh, so that's what this real woman's body looks like from that angle).

I suspect that many men who claim they are not here at least partially because they find the pictures arousing, are being dishonest. I could be wrong though. For whatever it's worth though, my honest truth is they turn me on.

Offline

#36 August 21st, 2005 01:13 PM

Head
Member

Re: camera???

Gimme_Danger wrote:

I have a coolpix 5700. Pretty good camera in a semi-professional kind of way. I pobably dont use half of what it can do hmm

I'd like to know what Heads secret preference is tho

The biggest myth is that it's all about megapixels - maybe so if you're going to print out 8x10's but anything smaller than that, or if you're viewing on your screen, you're only using a couple of megapixels.  A good lens and clever processing algorithms are much more important.  No camera with a 3/4" wide hole is going to take sharp pics.

Offline

#37 August 22nd, 2005 03:41 AM

SCSIgirl
Member

Re: camera???

Belgareth wrote:

Pornography is defined as writings or drawings (including photographic and moving images) intended to stimulate sexual arousal.

>>>  snipped for brevity <<<<

themselves with the intention of causing sexual arousal.

If this is true,  then Reubens was the biggest smut peddler of his day.  And, of course,  it is society based.  The Romans got pretty basic.  Nudity and gay activities were part of normal everyday life,  and in some situations expected.  I wonder what they considered porn??


"Apple of my Eye", "bated breath", "brave new world", "caught red-handed" - all coined by Shakespeare.

Offline

#38 August 22nd, 2005 03:46 AM

SCSIgirl
Member

Re: camera???

Manring wrote:

I've used Nikons forever, and once things started going digital, tried the Nikon digitals as well . . . especially their CoolPix 990, 995, and 4500,
>>> snipped for brevity <<<
The CoolPix cams I have have become my walkaround cameras and would make an excellent choice for self-shooting.

I agree the swivel body had great advantages.  Not for self-protraits  (which I did only once or twice)  but when stuck in a crowd,  I could hold the cam high overhead and still see what I was shooting.

In the end, though,  the new Canons are faster and not as battery hungry.  I had to have a Quantum battery pack attached to my 990.


"Apple of my Eye", "bated breath", "brave new world", "caught red-handed" - all coined by Shakespeare.

Offline

#39 August 22nd, 2005 03:53 AM

SCSIgirl
Member

Re: camera???

Head wrote:

The biggest myth is that it's all about megapixels - maybe so if you're going to print out 8x10's but anything smaller than that, or if you're viewing on your screen, you're only using a couple of megapixels.  A good lens and clever processing algorithms are much more important.  No camera with a 3/4" wide hole is going to take sharp pics.

Yeah,  the megapixel myth is ad hype.  Who's going to take an 8 meg pic of the family and then try and email it?

I find most of my grab-shot work is at the near lowest res.  Right now I have a side job of shooting motorhomes for a local RV dealer for his web site.  I have to use the D100 to use the 18mm wide angle lens.  But the D100s lowest res is still 1500x.   These will take forever to dl and the shopper will get bored and move on.  I still have to reduce them to less than 900x.

800x is plenty res for INet work.


"Apple of my Eye", "bated breath", "brave new world", "caught red-handed" - all coined by Shakespeare.

Offline

#40 August 22nd, 2005 04:04 AM

SCSIgirl
Member

Re: camera???

roxxie wrote:

Wow, so many comments to make.

2. Is it just me or this is a porn site? In my book appearing on a porn site makes one a porn star. Amateur or not, porn is always porn. Even artsy porn is still porn. I do a lot of other adult modeling, but I'm not in the mainstream Southern California porn industry. I know that there are a lot of misconceptions about the mainstream porn industry, but the performers are just as real, intelligent, creative, etc as anyone else. Oh I don't know where I'm going with this, but I really do feel strongly about feminism and the adult industry and the various misconceptions. I could talk on the topic all day if given the chance.

Roxie,  check out weirdnews.com's current column.  There is a story of a grandmother back East who is sueing a video game company.  They produce a game called Grand Theft Auto,  to which somebody had made a patch to make the game more sexually explicit.

Her complaint is that the game is rated for 17 and up and should have been rated for 18 and up since that patch is available to modify the game.

She seems to ignore that she bought it for her 14yo child,  and that in it's basic state,  promotes murder,  joining gangs, etc.

Now,  what's really porn here?


"Apple of my Eye", "bated breath", "brave new world", "caught red-handed" - all coined by Shakespeare.

Offline

#41 August 22nd, 2005 05:43 AM

Belgareth
Member

Re: camera???

SCSIgirl wrote:

If this is true,  then Reubens was the biggest smut peddler of his day.  And, of course,  it is society based.  The Romans got pretty basic.  Nudity and gay activities were part of normal everyday life,  and in some situations expected.  I wonder what they considered porn??

Reubens WAS considered to be smutty by some of his contemporaries but it has always been true and it probably always will be true, that what is the porn of today is the art of tomorrow.


[color="Red"]require "help.pl";[/color]

Offline

#42 August 22nd, 2005 06:04 AM

Belgareth
Member

Re: camera???

SCSIgirl wrote:

Yeah,  the megapixel myth is ad hype.  Who's going to take an 8 meg pic of the family and then try and email it?

I find most of my grab-shot work is at the near lowest res.  Right now I have a side job of shooting motorhomes for a local RV dealer for his web site.  I have to use the D100 to use the 18mm wide angle lens.  But the D100s lowest res is still 1500x.   These will take forever to dl and the shopper will get bored and move on.  I still have to reduce them to less than 900x.

800x is plenty res for INet work.

I think I must be in a very affable mood today becaue I find myself agreeing with you again - well sort of.

There is a general misunderstanding of the absolute resolution of the digital camera CCD, with no account taken of the lens/CCD combination, nor of the purpose for which it will be used. It's a bit like having a 3.6GHz CPU installed in your computer when you have a cheap and nasty motherboard, then wondering why it doesn't run any faster.

I do some work which requires a fast shutter to catch the moment and I end up with the intended subject only covering 25% of the frame. It's a blessing to have the 8Mpixel plus image from my Canon 20D because I can crop the part I want, scale it up and still have acceptable resolution for the Web and general use. On the other hand that same resolution will give me great A3 portraits.


[color="Red"]require "help.pl";[/color]

Offline

#43 August 22nd, 2005 06:31 PM

nihilonx
Member

Re: camera???

SCSIgirl wrote:

If this is true,  then Reubens was the biggest smut peddler of his day.  And, of course,  it is society based.  The Romans got pretty basic.  Nudity and gay activities were part of normal everyday life,  and in some situations expected.  I wonder what they considered porn??

Pacifism.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB