Prev: D40 / Sigma lense question(s)
Next: Pic: Bretelen Anikaberg spotted in Miami
From: Focus on 4 May 2008 11:00

"Rita Berkowitz" <ritaberk2008(a)aol.com> wrote in message
news:d9WdnXZgb5IreIHVnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d(a)supernews.com...
> Focus wrote:
>> Boy, bad colors, no sharpness, useless IS and bad software; Sony has
>> a lot to learn.
>>
>> But what do you think of the pics?
>>
>> http://photos-of-portugal.com/
>
> I know one thing. Those wheels would look sweet on the old John Deere!
>
And trust me: it goes faster, but not more comfortable ;-)


--
Focus


From: Focus on 4 May 2008 11:04

"Smeeegles" <me(a)here.net.au> wrote in message
news:fvitb3$a4p$1(a)registered.motzarella.org...
>C J Campbell wrote:
>> On 2008-05-03 14:38:27 -0700, "Focus" <focus(a)home.pt> said:
>>
>>> Boy, bad colors, no sharpness, useless IS and bad software; Sony has a
>>> lot
>>> to learn.
>>>
>>> But what do you think of the pics?
>>>
>>> http://photos-of-portugal.com/
>>
>> Nice car. Too bad about the terrible lighting conditions. Even shading it
>> with a bed sheet would have helped.
> looks like a typical point and shoot quality camera picture.
> composition is excellent so it makes up for the poor quality equipment.

Thanks.
That's all I wanted to know: how are the pictures, or better, the
composition.
Too bad other, better camera's don't have that tilting screen. It works
great for these low shots!


--
Focus


From: Frank ess on 4 May 2008 12:17


Focus wrote:
> "Rita Berkowitz" <ritaberk2008(a)aol.com> wrote in message
> news:d9WdnXZgb5IreIHVnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d(a)supernews.com...
>> Focus wrote:
>>> Boy, bad colors, no sharpness, useless IS and bad software; Sony
>>> has a lot to learn.
>>>
>>> But what do you think of the pics?
>>>
>>> http://photos-of-portugal.com/
>>
>> I know one thing. Those wheels would look sweet on the old John
>> Deere!
> And trust me: it goes faster, but not more comfortable ;-)

I always learn something of real value in these discussions, even
though some acrimony and brand-zenophilism sometimes creeps in.

Automobile photos: See, I'm old and experienced enough to know all
the stuff that makes a good car picture. It's just that when I get out
there in the field some of it escapes me, so when I get home I realize
the difference between me and a photographer: he remembers it all and
practices it. I get part of it right, some times, all of it right
rarely, and none of it right quite often.

See what I mean:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fyougitive/sets/72157604879969909/

We're coming to the part of the year that offers this kind of diffused
lighting, some days until (like these) high noon or cleose to it, here
in San Diego, California, USA. On a couple of the pictures I
remembered the polarizer. On none of them I remembered fill flash. In
spite of its shortcomings, I do have a favorite; can you imagine which
one?

Respy,

--
Frank ess

From: Focus on 4 May 2008 13:40

"Frank ess" <frank(a)fshe2fs.com> wrote in message
news:SdGdnetxf443fIDVnZ2dnUVZ_rCtnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
>
> Focus wrote:
>> "Rita Berkowitz" <ritaberk2008(a)aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:d9WdnXZgb5IreIHVnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d(a)supernews.com...
>>> Focus wrote:
>>>> Boy, bad colors, no sharpness, useless IS and bad software; Sony
>>>> has a lot to learn.
>>>>
>>>> But what do you think of the pics?
>>>>
>>>> http://photos-of-portugal.com/
>>>
>>> I know one thing. Those wheels would look sweet on the old John
>>> Deere!
>> And trust me: it goes faster, but not more comfortable ;-)
>
> I always learn something of real value in these discussions, even though
> some acrimony and brand-zenophilism sometimes creeps in.
>
> Automobile photos: See, I'm old and experienced enough to know all the
> stuff that makes a good car picture. It's just that when I get out there
> in the field some of it escapes me, so when I get home I realize the
> difference between me and a photographer: he remembers it all and
> practices it. I get part of it right, some times, all of it right rarely,
> and none of it right quite often.
>
> See what I mean:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/fyougitive/sets/72157604879969909/
>
> We're coming to the part of the year that offers this kind of diffused
> lighting, some days until (like these) high noon or cleose to it, here in
> San Diego, California, USA. On a couple of the pictures I remembered the
> polarizer. On none of them I remembered fill flash. In spite of its
> shortcomings, I do have a favorite; can you imagine which one?

I have no idea, but I would choose the first: 7483. It has the least
distracting background and shows the car the best, I think. The turned
wheels gives a little extra: if you forgot the parking brake....
BTW: I'm old too, so I tend to forget a lot also. But flash is not and
option for me: I don't like it, it ruins the atmosphere.


--
Focus


From: Wolfgang Weisselberg on 5 May 2008 03:01
Focus <focus(a)home.pt> wrote:

> But flash is not and option for me: I don't like it, it ruins the
> atmosphere.

Flash properly done doesn't ruin the atmosphere. A good flash
photo is one where you don't see flash was used.

-Wolfgang
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: D40 / Sigma lense question(s)
Next: Pic: Bretelen Anikaberg spotted in Miami