SgD's "Mods-only" Photography Session by the Bay [19/3/07]
-
thank you for your comments regarding the old supreme court. like i have mentioned. we are amateurs. and we are trying to improve. SLR's are expensive. but we're working in that direction. thanks nonetheless for your opinions.Originally posted by inextremo:though i dont really like digital photography and photo manipulation,
i must say that the pictures of the old supreme court look pretty good.
as for the so called 'macro' photography, it could have been pushed further with a macro lense.
i would really suggest you guys to start out with a slr using b/w film first before moving on to these fancy gizmos.
you got to get your basics right. -
Of course it could be pushed further with a macro lens.Originally posted by inextremo:though i dont really like digital photography and photo manipulation,
i must say that the pictures of the old supreme court look pretty good.
as for the so called 'macro' photography, it could have been pushed further with a macro lense.
i would really suggest you guys to start out with a slr using b/w film first before moving on to these fancy gizmos.
you got to get your basics right.
That alone, costs upwards of $200. And a macro lens would require some sort of slave flash. Slave flash costs maybe $20?
A DSLR costs minimum $1.2k. So that's about... I don't know, $1.6k? I'm using a $600 camera (which was the price, about 4 years ago). I'm trying my best, and pushing my limits. I just started photography for about a week. Thank you.
As for film SLRs - I don't have money to spend on cameras which I would rarely use.
If you want to criticise other's work, you definitely can.
In fact, I welcome you to do just that. But criticising borders close to flaming.
Perhaps you could put it in a nicer way, then I'll get it into my head.
Until then.
-
I remember starting off with an old Sony S50 P&S camera back in 2001, that time was the start of the digital trend in photography.Originally posted by binarynwitz:Of course it could be pushed further with a macro lens.
That alone, costs upwards of $200. And a macro lens would require some sort of slave flash. Slave flash costs maybe $20?
A DSLR costs minimum $1.2k. So that's about... I don't know, $1.6k? I'm using a $600 camera (which was the price, about 4 years ago). I'm trying my best, and pushing my limits. I just started photography for about a week. Thank you.
As for film SLRs - I don't have money to spend on cameras which I would rarely use.
If you want to criticise other's work, you definitely can.
In fact, I welcome you to do just that. But criticising borders close to flaming.
Perhaps you could put it in a nicer way, then I'll get it into my head.
Until then.
As far as my experience goes, cheap equipment only restricts photography in terms of difficulty, not ability. If you were to take my DSLR away and give me the Sony again, I think the only difference it would make is to affect the quantity of great shots, or "keepers", rather than affecting the quality of my "keepers".
So I don't think what inextremo says is true. Basics begin not with the type of equipment, but the mastery of your creative eye.
Anyway, the Writers' and Photographers' Haven is where all critical photography topics should be in sgForums, so head down there if you like. -
That I definitely agree with.
It's not the camera, but the person behind the camera.
As for W&P... It looks almost dead, the last time I've been there.
And I've like.. dug up 10 pages of thread to read.
-
my dad always tells me.Originally posted by binarynwitz:That I definitely agree with.
It's not the camera, but the person behind the camera.
As for W&P... It looks almost dead, the last time I've been there.
And I've like.. dug up 10 pages of thread to read.
"it's not what the camera does, it's what you do."
-
Originally posted by binarynwitz:That I definitely agree with.
It's not the camera, but the person behind the camera.
As for W&P... It looks almost dead, the last time I've been there.
And I've like.. dug up 10 pages of thread to read. 
kinda like my fault right? -
join us then. >:3Originally posted by PointBlue: kinda like my fault right?
merge with us lor. photography topics can go here. and you can be in charge of it? -
Originally posted by Keii:join us then. >:3
merge with us lor. photography topics can go here. and you can be in charge of it?
I cannot betray my Master jOhO 
-
i'm not trying to say that you need a good equipment to take good photos.
but by starting out using a manual camera, you can learn more about shutter speed, appecture, iso, blah blah.
you can head down to the camera workshop at penisular shopping centre to get a cheap slr to tinker with, for 60 bucks you can get a nikon with a pretty decent lens.
i'm really sorry if i offend anyone,
but in an actual critque session, comments are much much harsher. -
Yes that's true. Such basics are necessities in photography. Constructive criticism is always welcomeOriginally posted by inextremo:i'm not trying to say that you need a good equipment to take good photos.
but by starting out using a manual camera, you can learn more about shutter speed, appecture, iso, blah blah.
you can head down to the camera workshop at penisular shopping centre to get a cheap slr to tinker with, for 60 bucks you can get a nikon with a pretty decent lens.
i'm really sorry if i offend anyone,
but in an actual critque session, comments are much much harsher.