Jump to content

azrockitman

Life Member
  • Content Count

    620
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 of my posts have been liked

About azrockitman

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 1 January

Profile Information

  • Real Name
    Tim Frohock
  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Scottsdale, AZ, USA
  • Photographic Interests
    Photography
  • Edit my pics?
    Ask Me
  • Fav. Camera
    Nikon Z7
  • Fav. Editor
    Ps
  1. What a fantastic building. And a completely captivating interior photo. Very much enjoyed studying that photo.
  2. This is very nearly a silly question but it first came to interest me when I started investigating the many very old portrait photos I have of my family. When did people start smiling for photography portraits? It's not scientific, but google "portrait photos from 1890's"...then the 1900's, 1910's and so on up the decades and the earliest photos very rarely ever showed a smile. Fast forward to today and it's a far more toothy expression you typically see. Increasingly, you would see portraits of actors and actresses and they might be smiling but most others rarely cracked a smile until much later in the past century. Was this because a photograph taken 100 years ago was considered a much more serious event for the subject? Was it partly due to long exposure times (implication being that it's easier to hold a serious pose for a while, compared to holding a smile for a similar amount of time) Or were people just less happy?
  3. http://www.vivianmaier.com/film-finding-vivian-maier/
  4. From an amateur's perspective, this is also totally my experience. I sold my D700 to purchase my D800 and have had such a frustrating and varied ownership experience. In my "Studio", (my garage with white and black backgrounds and studio lights), I produce images i'm very happy with. With that controlled lighting, and often a tripod, I love the results I get with the D800. But carrying it around with me, and more specifically trying to get candid shots of people, I could almost go so far as to say I hate the D800. In hindsight I wish I could/would have kept my D700 and waited until I could afford the D800 as a second body. I will relish the day that I can afford to get a Df or equivalent to use to carry around.
  5. Discussions, such as these, make Nikongear so compelling.
  6. I believe I'll steer clear of rural Tasmania then.
  7. This concept makes my brain hurt, but sounds cool So what would the viewing experience be like? would it capture motion and you would view a constant stream of images, selecting those that you wanted? or would it simply alter the capabilities and eliminate current constraints in sensor performance?
  8. "Memo to self: make sure to clean next used Nikon body that I purchase with light alcohol swab."
  9. Yeah, the $10 per month is intriguing. The subscription thing does bother/annoy me, but since I own CS6, and since it's my impression that your hard copy of CS6 and earlier would not be affected by a new subscription to CC, I am also tempted to try the offer out. That way if the time ever came that I could no longer justify the ongoing life long subscription to use CC, I could fall back on CS6 I am not bothered by the $120 per year. I have likely spent that exact amount or more annually on upgrades to CSx over the years.
  10. I'll just say "ewww!"
  11. I guess this proves an age old theory: Any idea an average joe (me) thinks of, someone else has already thought of it. http://store.sony.com/smartphone-attachable-lens-style-camera-zid27-DSCQX100/B/cat-27-catid-All-Cyber-shot-Q-Series-Cameras?_t=pfm%3Dcategory
  12. azrockitman

    Hi all

    Since you are looking at the FX D610, It's understandably hard to resist the allure of the "new", but man, I when I see D700's on Craigslist used for $1000 to $1400, and D800's for $2000 to $2200, it's easier to justify at least considering a babied used body. Especially if you are moving up from D70. Now if you need or want video, the D700 would be out, of course.
  13. If you are not shooting raw, you certainly owe it to yourself to see the amazing amount of creativity and easy adjustments you can make post shooting. Like Dallas, I think Lightroom is a great balanced approach. In fact Adobe's new pricing scheme on Photoshop probably means that my CS6 was the last one I will purchase. Lightroom gets more features every release. That being said, Rags suggestion to try Picassa3 (or frankly, any other free software where you can get a taste for what Raw offers) is a very good suggestion. That way, you can see what can be done and if you find limitations that matter, you'll gain that knowledge for free. I really liked having the same tools available to me that "real" photographers used (Photoshop) but I can't justify renting software that costs that much. My CS6 still works great and I'll just keep Lightroom up to date, unless they change that pricing model as well.
  14. azrockitman

    Venice

    In some cases, more canals are on the other side. In other cases, some wonderful promenades, courtyards, shopping districts. Tiny streets with completely insane taxi drivers. In other words, a little slice of heaven.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By visiting this website you are agreeing to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy & Guidelines.