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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creatures frozen in time
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:24:24 -0700 (PDT), Val Hallah
wrote: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear...n-in-time.html What a shame. So many images ruined by too shallow DOF and eye-offending artificial lighting. I shoot many macro images of small insects in flight in available light alone, handheld, without all that DOF blur and garish fake lighting. I was just browsing through one folder of mine where in only one afternoon I amassed about 150 tight macro shots of bees hovering near their intended flower-targets. And who hasn't shot a bird coming in for a landing before? Or similarly a crane flipping a fish into the air and capturing a shot of it just before the catch. Or an osprey making its catch. He spent FOUR DAYS to get that shot of the osprey making its catch? I got about 15 like that in 2 hours one casual afternoon by just sitting around where some ospreys were fishing, no elaborate camouflage hide required. (One was especially clumsy and kept dropping his catch, no doubt a juvenile learning its trade.) The osprey could have cared less if I was there, they were focused on getting their dinners. This guy's just a talentless tech-head cityboy hack. ZERO talent. Totally unimpressed. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creatures frozen in time
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:33:29 -0500, Russ D
wrote: ng. I shoot many macro images of small insects in flight in available lig You're a waste of organic chemistry. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creatures frozen in time
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:27:58 -0700 (PDT), Nervous Nick
wrote: On Jul 21, 5:33*pm, Russ D wrote: On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:24:24 -0700 (PDT), Val Hallah wrote: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear...7902773/Scott-... What a shame. So many images ruined by too shallow DOF and eye-offending artificial lighting. I shoot many macro images of small insects in flight in available light alone, handheld, without all that DOF blur and garish fake lighting. I was just browsing through one folder of mine where in only one afternoon I amassed about 150 tight macro shots of bees hovering near their intended flower-targets. And who hasn't shot a bird coming in for a landing before? Or similarly a crane flipping a fish into the air and capturing a shot of it just before the catch. Or an osprey making its catch. He spent FOUR DAYS to get that shot of the osprey making its catch? I got about 15 like that in 2 hours one casual afternoon by just sitting around where some ospreys were fishing, no elaborate camouflage hide required. (One was especially clumsy and kept dropping his catch, no doubt a juvenile learning its trade.) The osprey could have cared less if I was there, they were focused on getting their dinners. This guy's just a talentless tech-head cityboy hack. ZERO talent. Totally unimpressed. I think some of them are pretty cool. The fact that he did most of them in a studio is, IMO, kind of strange but pretty impressive for the technical side of it. Not that you would bother, but would you be able to set up some of those shots? Easily. But the more important question is, why on earth would I or anyone want to? When I can get much better images using available light alone outside of any contrived artificial setting. You people are easily entertained and amused by tech-head bull****. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creatures frozen in time
"rwalker" wrote in message
... On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:33:29 -0500, Russ D wrote: ng. I shoot many macro images of small insects in flight in available lig You're a waste of organic chemistry. Killfile it, and don't feed it by any form of reply. Please, for all our sakes. David |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creatures frozen in time
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:44:54 -0500, Russ D wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:27:58 -0700 (PDT), Nervous Nick wrote: On Jul 21, 5:33*pm, Russ D wrote: On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:24:24 -0700 (PDT), Val Hallah wrote: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear...7902773/Scott-... What a shame. So many images ruined by too shallow DOF and eye-offending artificial lighting. I shoot many macro images of small insects in flight in available light alone, handheld, without all that DOF blur and garish fake lighting. I was just browsing through one folder of mine where in only one afternoon I amassed about 150 tight macro shots of bees hovering near their intended flower-targets. And who hasn't shot a bird coming in for a landing before? Or similarly a crane flipping a fish into the air and capturing a shot of it just before the catch. Or an osprey making its catch. He spent FOUR DAYS to get that shot of the osprey making its catch? I got about 15 like that in 2 hours one casual afternoon by just sitting around where some ospreys were fishing, no elaborate camouflage hide required. (One was especially clumsy and kept dropping his catch, no doubt a juvenile learning its trade.) The osprey could have cared less if I was there, they were focused on getting their dinners. This guy's just a talentless tech-head cityboy hack. ZERO talent. Totally unimpressed. I think some of them are pretty cool. The fact that he did most of them in a studio is, IMO, kind of strange but pretty impressive for the technical side of it. Not that you would bother, but would you be able to set up some of those shots? Easily. But the more important question is, why on earth would I or anyone want to? When I can get much better images using available light alone outside of any contrived artificial setting. You people are easily entertained and amused by tech-head bull****. In case you doubt, here's an example of a tight macro shot of an insect in flight taken with a hand-held camera with flash. The ONLY time I'll make an exception for available light is for nocturnal species where there is no time where you can capture them with available light. No electronic triggers or other tech-head crap required. Just skill and talent. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4117/4817084851_5b403f812f_b.jpg Oh, did I forget to mention this was also taken with a 2002 year model of SLOW SHUTTER-LAG superzoom P&S camera that doesn't even have image stabilization too? Thought you might like to know that. So don't any of you crapshooting trolls give me any bull**** that I don't know what I'm talking about. Haven't any you ever heard of the word "talent" before? Of course not. It's not a label on any of your camera buttons nor in the index of your camera manuals. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creatures frozen in time
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 07:27:06 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote: "rwalker" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:33:29 -0500, Russ D wrote: ng. I shoot many macro images of small insects in flight in available lig You're a waste of organic chemistry. Killfile it, and don't feed it by any form of reply. Please, for all our sakes. David Yes, please. Poke your own eyes out. Trying to retain your bliss of self-induced ignorance demands it! LOL! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creaturesfrozen in time
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 02:00:57 -0500, Russ D wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:44:54 -0500, Russ D wrote: On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:27:58 -0700 (PDT), Nervous Nick wrote: On Jul 21, 5:33Â*pm, Russ D wrote: On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:24:24 -0700 (PDT), Val Hallah wrote: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear...eries/7902773/ Scott-... What a shame. So many images ruined by too shallow DOF and eye-offending artificial lighting. I shoot many macro images of small insects in flight in available light alone, handheld, without all that DOF blur and garish fake lighting. I was just browsing through one folder of mine where in only one afternoon I amassed about 150 tight macro shots of bees hovering near their intended flower-targets. And who hasn't shot a bird coming in for a landing before? Or similarly a crane flipping a fish into the air and capturing a shot of it just before the catch. Or an osprey making its catch. He spent FOUR DAYS to get that shot of the osprey making its catch? I got about 15 like that in 2 hours one casual afternoon by just sitting around where some ospreys were fishing, no elaborate camouflage hide required. (One was especially clumsy and kept dropping his catch, no doubt a juvenile learning its trade.) The osprey could have cared less if I was there, they were focused on getting their dinners. This guy's just a talentless tech-head cityboy hack. ZERO talent. Totally unimpressed. I think some of them are pretty cool. The fact that he did most of them in a studio is, IMO, kind of strange but pretty impressive for the technical side of it. Not that you would bother, but would you be able to set up some of those shots? Easily. But the more important question is, why on earth would I or anyone want to? When I can get much better images using available light alone outside of any contrived artificial setting. You people are easily entertained and amused by tech-head bull****. In case you doubt, here's an example of a tight macro shot of an insect in flight taken with a hand-held camera with flash. The ONLY time I'll make an exception for available light is for nocturnal species where there is no time where you can capture them with available light. No electronic triggers or other tech-head crap required. Just skill and talent. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4117/4817084851_5b403f812f_b.jpg Oh, did I forget to mention this was also taken with a 2002 year model of SLOW SHUTTER-LAG superzoom P&S camera that doesn't even have image stabilization too? Thought you might like to know that. So don't any of you crapshooting trolls give me any bull**** that I don't know what I'm talking about. Haven't any you ever heard of the word "talent" before? Of course not. It's not a label on any of your camera buttons nor in the index of your camera manuals. So this is your excuse for showing a shot that is much less appealling than the ones you are complaining about. -- Neil - reverse 'ra' and delete 'l'. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creatures frozen in time
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 03:43:58 -0500, Neil
wrote: On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 02:00:57 -0500, Russ D wrote: On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:44:54 -0500, Russ D wrote: On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:27:58 -0700 (PDT), Nervous Nick wrote: On Jul 21, 5:33*pm, Russ D wrote: On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:24:24 -0700 (PDT), Val Hallah wrote: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear...eries/7902773/ Scott-... What a shame. So many images ruined by too shallow DOF and eye-offending artificial lighting. I shoot many macro images of small insects in flight in available light alone, handheld, without all that DOF blur and garish fake lighting. I was just browsing through one folder of mine where in only one afternoon I amassed about 150 tight macro shots of bees hovering near their intended flower-targets. And who hasn't shot a bird coming in for a landing before? Or similarly a crane flipping a fish into the air and capturing a shot of it just before the catch. Or an osprey making its catch. He spent FOUR DAYS to get that shot of the osprey making its catch? I got about 15 like that in 2 hours one casual afternoon by just sitting around where some ospreys were fishing, no elaborate camouflage hide required. (One was especially clumsy and kept dropping his catch, no doubt a juvenile learning its trade.) The osprey could have cared less if I was there, they were focused on getting their dinners. This guy's just a talentless tech-head cityboy hack. ZERO talent. Totally unimpressed. I think some of them are pretty cool. The fact that he did most of them in a studio is, IMO, kind of strange but pretty impressive for the technical side of it. Not that you would bother, but would you be able to set up some of those shots? Easily. But the more important question is, why on earth would I or anyone want to? When I can get much better images using available light alone outside of any contrived artificial setting. You people are easily entertained and amused by tech-head bull****. In case you doubt, here's an example of a tight macro shot of an insect in flight taken with a hand-held camera with flash. The ONLY time I'll make an exception for available light is for nocturnal species where there is no time where you can capture them with available light. No electronic triggers or other tech-head crap required. Just skill and talent. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4117/4817084851_5b403f812f_b.jpg Oh, did I forget to mention this was also taken with a 2002 year model of SLOW SHUTTER-LAG superzoom P&S camera that doesn't even have image stabilization too? Thought you might like to know that. So don't any of you crapshooting trolls give me any bull**** that I don't know what I'm talking about. Haven't any you ever heard of the word "talent" before? Of course not. It's not a label on any of your camera buttons nor in the index of your camera manuals. So this is your excuse for showing a shot that is much less appealling than the ones you are complaining about. So this is your excuse of being unable to show either? Ain't you heard yet? Dimwit. I *NEVER* post any marketable shots to the net. ****, are you ever a dense and useless **** of a TROLL. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creatures frozen in time
"Outing Trolls is FUN!" wrote in message
... Ain't you heard yet? Dimwit. I *NEVER* post any marketable shots to the net. We agree on that. My odds making instincts tells me that you have taken few, if any marketable shots. -- Peter (slightly bored this morning) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Linstead's high-speed photographs capture creatures frozen in time
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:38:53 -0400, "Peter"
wrote: "Outing Trolls is FUN!" wrote in message .. . Ain't you heard yet? Dimwit. I *NEVER* post any marketable shots to the net. We agree on that. My odds making instincts tells me that you have taken few, if any marketable shots. My odds making instincts tells me that you have NEVER produced ANY photograph even worth printing. Show me just ONE shot of yours that displays some technical skill or talent in ANY area of photography. But you can't. I already have. Dozens and dozens of times, all in different areas of photography. From micro and macro to astro to artistically solemn to fast action under all manner of lighting and all conditions . Applied altogether it means that I have all the skill needed to produce any photograph I desire in any venue for any purpose. Where's just ONE sample of your exemplary talent and skill? We'd all hold our breath but we know that would be a waste of effort, now wouldn't we. You useless **** of a ****-hole pretend-photographer TROLL. LOL! |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Some Of The Best Photographs Of Our Time | medianext05 | In The Darkroom | 2 | August 2nd 06 02:41 AM |
Northeast Autumn High Resolution Photographs | Jules Vide | Digital Photography | 0 | July 1st 06 11:45 PM |
Is X-Sync speed a "big deal" anymore - now that we have High-speed synch on powerful flash units? | C J Southern | Digital SLR Cameras | 39 | December 29th 05 03:24 PM |
Nikon Capture download speed | claus | Digital Photography | 4 | April 7th 05 05:19 PM |
Nikon Capture download speed | claus | Digital Photography | 0 | April 6th 05 11:54 AM |