If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
If there's no shake, I can't be responsible
I really wasn't too concerned about the background. I was just practicing
getting the subject framed fairly centrally. I would get Mich sitting beside me; then I'd take two steps forward, turn 180 degrees, and take a shot with the camera positioned about waste height. If I got the turn just right and held the camera fairly straight, I'd get Mich pretty decently framed. It's kind of muscle memory training. If I do it enough, it becomes routine when I get him in a better setting. And, it never fails at 35mm, or something pretty close. If I use the XSi, with the 28mm lens, it's only about 1 1/2 step, and I have to hold the camera a bit lower. It's one of the routine shots I like to do, and it works with anything about the size of Mich sitting pretty... And, it helps a lot with Mich's obedience training. After I take the shot, I give him the "heel" command, and he comes running over to sit at my left side. I give him a few pats and "Good Boy!" rewards, sometimes followed with a treat. Then, a couple of "puppy push-ups," followed by some more pats and ear tousling, and I step forward a couple of steps after giving him the "stay" command. Then, I take a few shots again, and we repeat. Some shots with flash, some without. It also helps to keep him comfortable around the flash. He loves the game, and I end up with some good shots of him looking all playful and perky, although it sounds like he looked a little too perky in that shot... What can I say, Mich LOVES his food rewards... Later this summer, I hope to take him to a nice scenic spot on a hot day, and, with a little luck, I should be able to get a nice portrait of him. It's just one of the techniques I use to help keep Mich in top form, and my photography on an upward progression... Take Care, Dudley |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
If there's no shake, I can't be responsible
"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message news:JadSn.6890$Z6.4431@edtnps82... for LOL's actions ... http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size) http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast Loading) Handheld @ 1/3 sec... If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ... I think he has an ear missing, mich that is rather than LOL who seems to be missing a brain. ;-) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
If there's no shake, I can't be responsible
"whisky-dave" wrote in message news:hvd4j4$bnf$1@qmul... "Dudley Hanks" wrote in message news:JadSn.6890$Z6.4431@edtnps82... for LOL's actions ... http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size) http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast Loading) Handheld @ 1/3 sec... If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ... I think he has an ear missing, mich that is rather than LOL who seems to be missing a brain. ;-) One of the other shots I took, Mich was doing that cocked head thing shpherds do when they find something interesting. I was making a funny noise to get his attention, and apparently, he had his head so twisted, it was almost upside down. He's a crazy dog... Take Care, Dudley |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
If there's no shake, I can't be responsible
"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message news:XFdSn.6891$Z6.5070@edtnps82... "LOL!" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" wrote: for LOL's actions ... http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size) http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast Loading) Handheld @ 1/3 sec... If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ... Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can shoot a tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens. Just to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS works, its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional handheld skills to begin with. In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything illuminated by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the higher speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is off, the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly tilted, and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that you can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so. You're not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that. LOL! LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second exposure, and post the result? You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient yourself... Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should they not? This is what you'll never understand. I'm not after traditional pics; I'm after pics that depict the world as a blind photographer interacts with it. What else could it be? You don't even know how to interact properly with the sighted world as a sighted person, so I guess I should not be surprised... Take Care, Dudley Just curious, Dudley -- how blind are you? How do you view the images you capture, and how do you read the posts in this newsgroup? Also, I don't know why you bother replying to "LOL" -- he's just a pest and a complete waste of time. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
If there's no shake, I can't be responsible
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message ... "Dudley Hanks" wrote in message news:XFdSn.6891$Z6.5070@edtnps82... "LOL!" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" wrote: for LOL's actions ... http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size) http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast Loading) Handheld @ 1/3 sec... If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ... Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can shoot a tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens. Just to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS works, its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional handheld skills to begin with. In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything illuminated by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the higher speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is off, the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly tilted, and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that you can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so. You're not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that. LOL! LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second exposure, and post the result? You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient yourself... Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should they not? This is what you'll never understand. I'm not after traditional pics; I'm after pics that depict the world as a blind photographer interacts with it. What else could it be? You don't even know how to interact properly with the sighted world as a sighted person, so I guess I should not be surprised... Take Care, Dudley Just curious, Dudley -- how blind are you? How do you view the images you capture, and how do you read the posts in this newsgroup? Also, I don't know why you bother replying to "LOL" -- he's just a pest and a complete waste of time. Regarding my sight: I see only gross light perception, which means I can tell if there is light, but I can't make out any detail other than gross shapes. For instance, If there is a large plant in front of a window, I would see a bright area where the window is, but I probably wouldn't see the plant in front -- except maybe if it were a very large and bulky one. On the other hand, If a person is standing in front of the window, I would see a dark rather ill-defined silhouette, as the person would block enough light to negate part of the window As for what I see in my pictures, usually not much. In the pic I posted a while back of the $1 coin on a keyboard, I just saw a bright circle carved out of the remaining darkness. I couldn't see anything in the last flower pics I posted, or the shot of Mich sitting pretty. And, I saw a dark blog where the fig newton was in that shot of the treat sitting on a plate. There are some exquisite moments, where the light is just right, when I can see enough to actually compose the shapes I see in the viewfinder / display, but those seem to get fewer and farther between all the time. Regarding why I bother with LOL, you might say it's "force of habit." I've come across people like him in real life, and I haven't backed down. Why would I back down to some one not even brave enough to step out of the shadow of anonymity? If other disabled people read these posts, I want them to get the message that blindness is just one more feature of their day they need to cope with. It isn't anything they need be ashamed of, nothing that others can use against them, not a freakish deformity that should cause them to shrink into the murky background, definitely not a force strong enough to keep them from achieving their goals -- regardless of what their goals might be. I regard giving the silent treatment to LOL / Jeff / Jerry / etc much like trying to appease Hitler; it just doesn't work, at least not so far as LOL's comments about how blindness should limit my options. You'll notice I usually don't say too much when he's just spouting off about cams and other equipment. In that area he's harmless. But, when it comes to his bigoted, narcissistic, self-aggrandisement of himself through the debasement of another's physical, emotional or mental limitation simply because he's intent on destroying another's soul in order for him to feel a warm fuzzy glow where his heart should be, I say my piece. It may not help him, or further my pursuit of progress, but I hope it serves as an example to other blind people to step up and try to hit their home run, in whatever art / sport / business venture they have chosen... Take Care, Dudley |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
If there's no shake, I can't be responsible
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 19:13:02 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote: "Neil Harrington" wrote in message m... "Dudley Hanks" wrote in message news:XFdSn.6891$Z6.5070@edtnps82... "LOL!" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" wrote: for LOL's actions ... http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size) http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast Loading) Handheld @ 1/3 sec... If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ... Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can shoot a tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens. Just to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS works, its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional handheld skills to begin with. In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything illuminated by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the higher speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is off, the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly tilted, and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that you can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so. You're not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that. LOL! LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second exposure, and post the result? You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient yourself... Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should they not? This is what you'll never understand. I'm not after traditional pics; I'm after pics that depict the world as a blind photographer interacts with it. What else could it be? You don't even know how to interact properly with the sighted world as a sighted person, so I guess I should not be surprised... Take Care, Dudley Just curious, Dudley -- how blind are you? How do you view the images you capture, and how do you read the posts in this newsgroup? Also, I don't know why you bother replying to "LOL" -- he's just a pest and a complete waste of time. Regarding my sight: I see only gross light perception, which means I can tell if there is light, but I can't make out any detail other than gross shapes. For instance, If there is a large plant in front of a window, I would see a bright area where the window is, but I probably wouldn't see the plant in front -- except maybe if it were a very large and bulky one. On the other hand, If a person is standing in front of the window, I would see a dark rather ill-defined silhouette, as the person would block enough light to negate part of the window As for what I see in my pictures, usually not much. In the pic I posted a while back of the $1 coin on a keyboard, I just saw a bright circle carved out of the remaining darkness. I couldn't see anything in the last flower pics I posted, or the shot of Mich sitting pretty. And, I saw a dark blog where the fig newton was in that shot of the treat sitting on a plate. There are some exquisite moments, where the light is just right, when I can see enough to actually compose the shapes I see in the viewfinder / display, but those seem to get fewer and farther between all the time. Regarding why I bother with LOL, you might say it's "force of habit." I've come across people like him in real life, and I haven't backed down. Why would I back down to some one not even brave enough to step out of the shadow of anonymity? If other disabled people read these posts, I want them to get the message that blindness is just one more feature of their day they need to cope with. It isn't anything they need be ashamed of, nothing that others can use against them, not a freakish deformity that should cause them to shrink into the murky background, definitely not a force strong enough to keep them from achieving their goals -- regardless of what their goals might be. I regard giving the silent treatment to LOL / Jeff / Jerry / etc much like trying to appease Hitler; it just doesn't work, at least not so far as LOL's comments about how blindness should limit my options. You'll notice I usually don't say too much when he's just spouting off about cams and other equipment. In that area he's harmless. But, when it comes to his bigoted, narcissistic, self-aggrandisement of himself through the debasement of another's physical, emotional or mental limitation simply because he's intent on destroying another's soul in order for him to feel a warm fuzzy glow where his heart should be, I say my piece. It may not help him, or further my pursuit of progress, but I hope it serves as an example to other blind people to step up and try to hit their home run, in whatever art / sport / business venture they have chosen... Take Care, Dudley Let's all watch the paraplegic psychotic believing he's going to be a famous ballet-dancer one day while he's flopping around on the floor. While fools just as twisted by their misplaced pity urge him on for their own sick form of entertainment. There is absolutely NO difference between those two situations. In scenarios like that, just as yours, they are all pitiable and disgusting humans. This has NOTHING to do with bigotry you ****ingly demented, psychotic, and pathetic ass--all the while playing your glaringly transparent self-victimizing routine to manipulate others. It has to do with REALITY. Ever hear of it? Did you get another donation to buy a Leica while you stick the money in some other bank account because the Leica will do you absolutely no good? Even a Barbie-Cam would be no different than the results that you would get with a Leica. You know it, everyone that knows you knows it. But someone online that you would be able to scam would be too stupid to know it. How about it, scam-artist? Because that's all and exactly what you really are. An online scammer and scam artist, nothing more, nothing less. You're most definitely not any kind of photographer. Your photographs wouldn't even beat those of a 2 year-old snapshooter with his very first Fisher-Price "Toddler's 1st Camera". BTW: how the hell would something like you know if I am giving worthwhile advice about cameras and photography, when you can't even see anything in photographs, and your own skills stink to high heaven. Your comments about others' advice is just as obviously empty as your photography skills. LOL! |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
If there's no shake, I can't be responsible
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
If there's no shake, I can't be responsible
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:26:48 -0500, George Kerby
wrote: Dudley sees the world around him in a way that you are incapable of ever perceiving. Not even close, little twit. Au contraire mon idiot. Three decades ago I used to volunteer for an organization that would take disabled people into wilderness treks for weeks or a month at a time, places so remote that you wouldn't even cross paths with other humans during the whole adventure. They needed able-bodied people like me with my survival skills to help those with blindness, paralysis, lost limbs, and other missing functions. Have you ever tried to portage a wheelchair through 5 miles of scrub and swamp? Have you ever backpacked a paraplegic for miles? I used to enjoy leading the blind adventurers and helping them to imagine what the seeing world is like. Because of my high spatial IQ I could describe it to them in a way they would understand. Even being able to help "visualize" things in the minds of those who were born blind, things that they could never touch, like clouds in the sky. Colors can even be visualized in temperatures by a blind person. Often they would exclaim, "Wow! I GET IT NOW!" when describing visuals to them in their spatial terms. Did you even know that they dream in only tactile-shapes and motions? Just like the world they were born into. This is why I know what a hopeless pathetic piece of **** that Dud-ley is. Trying to pawn off his scam-act as some joke attempt at being a photographer makes him even a more disgusting human. I know people with handicaps and I'm proud to know them and respect them. They aren't manipulating people with some poor-pitiful-me carnival sideshow act to try to make a buck off the less aware fools just like you. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
If there's no shake, I can't be responsible
"LOL!" wrote in message ... On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 19:13:02 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" wrote: "Neil Harrington" wrote in message om... "Dudley Hanks" wrote in message news:XFdSn.6891$Z6.5070@edtnps82... "LOL!" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:32:57 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" wrote: for LOL's actions ... http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...tingPretty.jpg (Full Size) http://www.blind-apertures.ca/Latest...rettySmall.jpg (Fast Loading) Handheld @ 1/3 sec... If it's clean, LOL's gonna flip his lid ... Why? I tested my own handheld skills on IS equipped cameras. I can shoot a tack-sharp image at a full 1-second long exposure with a 432mm lens. Just to see where my and its limits lie. But it requires knowing how IS works, its limitations, using the proper IS setting, and having exceptional handheld skills to begin with. In your image you're not so skilled, nor even lucky. Everything illuminated by available light is blurred. Only those features stopped by the higher speed of the fill-flash burst are clearer. Not to mention the focus is off, the camera focused on the oven behind the randomly placed, badly tilted, and aroused dog. Is your spatial acuity and motor-control so poor that you can't even tell when you are holding a camera level? Apparently so. You're not going to make a very good blind person. You'll even suck at that. LOL! LOL, why don't you try blind-folding yourself and doing that one second exposure, and post the result? You'll find that it's a bit tricky with no visual cues to orient yourself... Besides, I'm a blind photographer, my pics should look the part, should they not? This is what you'll never understand. I'm not after traditional pics; I'm after pics that depict the world as a blind photographer interacts with it. What else could it be? You don't even know how to interact properly with the sighted world as a sighted person, so I guess I should not be surprised... Take Care, Dudley Just curious, Dudley -- how blind are you? How do you view the images you capture, and how do you read the posts in this newsgroup? Also, I don't know why you bother replying to "LOL" -- he's just a pest and a complete waste of time. Regarding my sight: I see only gross light perception, which means I can tell if there is light, but I can't make out any detail other than gross shapes. For instance, If there is a large plant in front of a window, I would see a bright area where the window is, but I probably wouldn't see the plant in front -- except maybe if it were a very large and bulky one. On the other hand, If a person is standing in front of the window, I would see a dark rather ill-defined silhouette, as the person would block enough light to negate part of the window As for what I see in my pictures, usually not much. In the pic I posted a while back of the $1 coin on a keyboard, I just saw a bright circle carved out of the remaining darkness. I couldn't see anything in the last flower pics I posted, or the shot of Mich sitting pretty. And, I saw a dark blog where the fig newton was in that shot of the treat sitting on a plate. There are some exquisite moments, where the light is just right, when I can see enough to actually compose the shapes I see in the viewfinder / display, but those seem to get fewer and farther between all the time. Regarding why I bother with LOL, you might say it's "force of habit." I've come across people like him in real life, and I haven't backed down. Why would I back down to some one not even brave enough to step out of the shadow of anonymity? If other disabled people read these posts, I want them to get the message that blindness is just one more feature of their day they need to cope with. It isn't anything they need be ashamed of, nothing that others can use against them, not a freakish deformity that should cause them to shrink into the murky background, definitely not a force strong enough to keep them from achieving their goals -- regardless of what their goals might be. I regard giving the silent treatment to LOL / Jeff / Jerry / etc much like trying to appease Hitler; it just doesn't work, at least not so far as LOL's comments about how blindness should limit my options. You'll notice I usually don't say too much when he's just spouting off about cams and other equipment. In that area he's harmless. But, when it comes to his bigoted, narcissistic, self-aggrandisement of himself through the debasement of another's physical, emotional or mental limitation simply because he's intent on destroying another's soul in order for him to feel a warm fuzzy glow where his heart should be, I say my piece. It may not help him, or further my pursuit of progress, but I hope it serves as an example to other blind people to step up and try to hit their home run, in whatever art / sport / business venture they have chosen... Take Care, Dudley Let's all watch the paraplegic psychotic believing he's going to be a famous ballet-dancer one day while he's flopping around on the floor. While fools just as twisted by their misplaced pity urge him on for their own sick form of entertainment. There is absolutely NO difference between those two situations. In scenarios like that, just as yours, they are all pitiable and disgusting humans. Spoken like a true, bigotted, narcissistic Nazi... You obviously haven't realized what the true essence of life consists of... Besides, your quad analogy doesn't hold up. I use technology to assist me in taking photos. In your analogy, the quad would be trying to do it all on his / her own. A better analogy would be somebody who has lost all function to their limbs, but who is attempting to use some sort of muscle stimulation to regain movement, and perform dance routines. Perhaps, the system could include a computer controlled, mind activated control center, which gives the individual a certain degree of movement again. The unfortunate person would be striving to use that technology to perfect the dance moves of his / her choice... And, yes, I would applaud the individuals efforts... I would go so far as to applaud any attempt by that individual to do whatever he or she could accomplish with whatever limited mobility he or she possess. But, I doubt they'd opt for ballet, as I opted to give up my drivers license once my vision deteriorated past the lower limit of possibility. The difference between you and me, and other disabled persons, is that we think rationally, not narcissistically... This has NOTHING to do with bigotry you ****ingly demented, psychotic, and pathetic ass--all the while playing your glaringly transparent self-victimizing routine to manipulate others. It has to do with REALITY. Ever hear of it? Yes, I've heard of reality, but you don't know how to apply it. So, indeed it has everything to do with bigotry. A bigot always thinks that he / she is right, and doesn't stop to think that a decision taken by others might be right for them, in spite of any opposition the bigot might conjure up in his / her mind. That's bigotry, plain and simple. You are not me. You have no idea of what my abilities are, and you certainly have no right to make personal decisions for me; nor do you have any right to make decisions for other, able-bodied members of the group. If you are so intent on eliminating scams, why not get out there and phone up all those seniors who've been taken in by telemarketing scams and tell those poor, dementia inflicted people what suckers they are? That they should just curl up and die? Why confine your expertise in reality to the realm of photography, and deciding who should and who shouldn't be allowed to pursue it? Ever heard of freedom of choice? No, LOL, you have no idea of what my reality is, nor will you ever make any decision for me. And, yes, LOL, you are a bigot of the highest order... But, feel free to show to every one here on the group how easy it is for me to get a reaction out of you... Pavlov... Did you get another donation to buy a Leica while you stick the money in some other bank account because the Leica will do you absolutely no good? Even a Barbie-Cam would be no different than the results that you would get with a Leica. You know it, everyone that knows you knows it. But someone online that you would be able to scam would be too stupid to know it. How about it, scam-artist? Because that's all and exactly what you really are. An online scammer and scam artist, nothing more, nothing less. You're most definitely not any kind of photographer. Your photographs wouldn't even beat those of a 2 year-old snapshooter with his very first Fisher-Price "Toddler's 1st Camera". Everyone's entitled to their opinion. But, LOL, I'll spend the donations of anyone who chooses to donate on quality equipment. And, yes, people can tell, as I leave the EXIF data on all pics posted... My disability has been independently varified by an American organization with a proven track record proven over 60 years of providing services to blind persons in both the United States and Canada Guide Dogs for the Blind). That should be enough for any sane person to realize I have less than 10% vision. How much less, that's hard to quantify. But, even if you look at the upper limit, I function with at least a 90% visual deficit. Not easy by any measurement. You keep criticising me for whining about my disability. But, the only time it comes up is when you do one of your rants... I post a pic and ask for feedback. Others respond, sometimes with words of encouragement. And you step off the deep end. If you'd knock it off, I wouldn't have to waste bandwidth explaining why society should not be as hardcore as you'd like to see it. Appeasement didn't work with Hitler, and I'll do my best to keep society as kind and gentle as I can, simply to offer a counterweight to your bigoted, technocratic approach. BTW: how the hell would something like you know if I am giving worthwhile advice about cameras and photography, when you can't even see anything in photographs, and your own skills stink to high heaven. Your comments about others' advice is just as obviously empty as your photography skills. You've already proven that logic isn't one of your strongest traits, so I won't expect you to understand how the validity of any assertion can be verified logically. I'll just say that I take into consideration what others say about your posts, at least I take into consideration what is said by those individuals out there who I believe aren't your puppets... From a multitude of statements and responses, I can get a very good idea of who knows what about what... You do seem to have a good eye, as is witnessed by your peers, if there is such a thing as a peer for you... Let's just say that the Spirit of Da Vinci lives in me, in so far as his quest for perfection never kept him from experimenting, even when numerous endeavors proved ineffectual. He kept on is quest, led by his desire to progress, and his ability to learn from his mistakes... You'll never be strong enough of character to either do the same yourself, nor understand why anybody else might choose that route... Take Care, Dudley |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
WOW - A wreck! (Not responsible if it works for you!) | Lorem Ipsum | Large Format Equipment For Sale | 0 | October 1st 05 11:22 PM |
Camera Shake | rda | Digital Photography | 29 | October 10th 04 02:22 AM |
Camera shake and lp/mm | RolandRB | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 97 | August 25th 04 09:23 PM |
Responsible For All World Problems | William Graham | 35mm Photo Equipment | 1 | July 26th 04 09:59 PM |
FORGERY: Responsible For All World Problems | Susan Cohen | Digital Photography | 0 | July 26th 04 06:49 PM |