A little nostalgia this morning
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Ugg! Ricoh 28-300mm superzoom module for the GXR (horrific at 800ISO)
Next: Ugg! Ricoh 28-300mm superzoom module for the GXR (horrific at 800ISO)
From: Frank ess on 2 Jul 2010 23:26 Savageduck wrote: > On 2010-07-02 19:38:20 -0700, "John Sisker" <jsisker(a)sprynet.com> > said: >> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >> news:2010070217590116807-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >>> For those who care, a 1948 Hudson Commodore, downtown this >>> morning. < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC3644w.jpg > >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> >>> Savageduck >>> >> >> >> Interesting picture of the car itself, but the photo looks like >> nothing more than my typical travel snapshots. A slightly >> different angle would have been much better, plus some serious >> cropping for a better composition, and if you actually intended >> that reflection, that could have been done much better as well. In >> this particular case, I would assume that you did have amply time >> in taking the picture, even with the possibility of using >> different lenses and/or special effects. John Sisker - Huntington >> Beach, California > > You are correct. It is nothing more than an opportunistic snapshot, > no cropping, I didn't care about the reflection. The reflection was > of my car which I had to park along side. This was not a > competition entry, just a shot of a car I haven't seen for some > time, and I thought some here might be interested. > > Another example might be something like this; > < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/_DNC3479w.jpg > > < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/_DNC3485w.jpg > There is a Hudson in here, too (If you are looking for "photography", don't look; it's just interesting cars, caught as catch could) : http://www.fototime.com/inv/D95D32BD9BAC223 -- Frank ess
From: John Sisker on 2 Jul 2010 23:31 "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:kv8t265i2q7o631mgss4h7isf0a4oo6317(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 19:38:20 -0700, "John Sisker" <jsisker(a)sprynet.com> > wrote: > >>"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >>news:2010070217590116807-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >>> For those who care, a 1948 Hudson Commodore, downtown this morning. >>> >>> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC3644w.jpg > >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> >>> Savageduck >>> >> >> >>Interesting picture of the car itself, but the photo looks like nothing >>more >>than my typical travel snapshots. A slightly different angle would have >>been >>much better, plus some serious cropping for a better composition, and if >>you >>actually intended that reflection, that could have been done much better >>as >>well. In this particular case, I would assume that you did have amply time >>in taking the picture, even with the possibility of using different lenses >>and/or special effects. >> > > Interesting critique, John. Feel free to offer a critique on my > recent photograph of an automobile. Note that there are no > distracting reflections. > > No special effects were used. While I could have used my Bondo or my > Turtle Wax filter, I didn't. > > http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/2010-06-30-003/919446485_6YMQ7-XL.jpg > > Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida Oh now you're just being sarcastic, or should that be sardonic. And I thought you could take as good as you can give. John Sisker - Huntington Beach, California
From: Savageduck on 2 Jul 2010 23:45 On 2010-07-02 20:26:00 -0700, "Frank ess" <frank(a)fshe2fs.com> said: > > > Savageduck wrote: >> On 2010-07-02 19:38:20 -0700, "John Sisker" <jsisker(a)sprynet.com> >> said: >>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >>> news:2010070217590116807-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >>>> For those who care, a 1948 Hudson Commodore, downtown this >>>> morning. < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC3644w.jpg > >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Savageduck >>>> >>> >>> >>> Interesting picture of the car itself, but the photo looks like >>> nothing more than my typical travel snapshots. A slightly >>> different angle would have been much better, plus some serious >>> cropping for a better composition, and if you actually intended >>> that reflection, that could have been done much better as well. In >>> this particular case, I would assume that you did have amply time >>> in taking the picture, even with the possibility of using >>> different lenses and/or special effects. John Sisker - Huntington >>> Beach, California >> >> You are correct. It is nothing more than an opportunistic snapshot, >> no cropping, I didn't care about the reflection. The reflection was >> of my car which I had to park along side. This was not a >> competition entry, just a shot of a car I haven't seen for some >> time, and I thought some here might be interested. >> >> Another example might be something like this; >> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/_DNC3479w.jpg > >> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/_DNC3485w.jpg > > > There is a Hudson in here, too (If you are looking for "photography", > don't look; it's just interesting cars, caught as catch could) : > > http://www.fototime.com/inv/D95D32BD9BAC223 Exactly. -- Regards, Savageduck
From: Peter on 2 Jul 2010 23:40 "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message news:2010070220041143658-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... > On 2010-07-02 19:38:20 -0700, "John Sisker" <jsisker(a)sprynet.com> said: > >> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >> news:2010070217590116807-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >>> For those who care, a 1948 Hudson Commodore, downtown this morning. >>> >>> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC3644w.jpg > >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> >>> Savageduck >>> >> >> >> Interesting picture of the car itself, but the photo looks like nothing >> more than my typical travel snapshots. A slightly different angle would >> have been much better, plus some serious cropping for a better >> composition, and if you actually intended that reflection, that could >> have been done much better as well. In this particular case, I would >> assume that you did have amply time in taking the picture, even with the >> possibility of using different lenses and/or special effects. >> >> John Sisker - Huntington Beach, California > > You are correct. It is nothing more than an opportunistic snapshot, no > cropping, I didn't care about the reflection. The reflection was of my car > which I had to park along side. This was not a competition entry, just a > shot of a car I haven't seen for some time, and I thought some here might > be interested. > > Another example might be something like this; > < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/_DNC3479w.jpg > > < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/_DNC3485w.jpg > You are really trying to make me feel older. Mine was tan with the suicide doors. -- Peter
From: Peter on 2 Jul 2010 23:47
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message news:2010070220160127544-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... > On 2010-07-02 19:19:40 -0700, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> said: > >> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >> news:2010070217590116807-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >>> For those who care, a 1948 Hudson Commodore, downtown this morning. >>> >>> < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC3644w.jpg > >>> >> >> >> Reminded me of my old 1952 Hudson Hornet. > > Well at least you had a "real" Hornet, not one of the AMC abominations. > Was yours a Coupe, sedan, or convertible? > Sedan, black. I traded it in for a Nash Rambler. (2nd worse car I ever owned) My Olds diesel being the worst, even though it was a tank and probably saved my daughter's life when she got sideswiped by a motorcycle. -- Peter |