^i dont like the negative color effect, however, i will say, that seeing the originals of your ex, she was gorgeous

-ZiP!-

7/2/2006 12:08:52 AM

thanks man- the original is a pretty decent shot as well just didn't know if it was fitting for this thread...

7/2/2006 12:28:09 AM

Damn...nice woman.
More fireworks pics! These are from July 4th 2005 in New Bern. Taken with a Kodak DX7590 (yes not a dSLR) and resized so that people wouldn't hate me here in the thread.

7/2/2006 12:31:47 AM

my neighborhood this afternoon:



-ZiP!-

7/2/2006 1:49:23 AM

some kids in my neighborhood:
(but im not happy with this shot)


-ZiP!-

7/2/2006 1:54:25 AM

7/2/2006 10:26:25 AM

[Edited on July 2, 2006 at 8:53 PM. Reason : *]

7/2/2006 8:53:00 PM

^^ You should have taken that in UV, since bees can see UV light...

7/2/2006 9:05:02 PM

UV? you mean IR?




btw, ~470 wedding pictures to edit tomorrow

7/2/2006 11:21:09 PM

I wanted to try messing with some of the colors on Photoshop, more or less to do some learning. This was a snapshot from the backseat of a Dodge minivan traveling west on I-40 at about 75 mph, so I was shooting at a disadvantage. What could I do to make something like this more visually appealing?

7/2/2006 11:32:17 PM

less blue

7/2/2006 11:34:18 PM

yeah, i'm not a fan of artificial colors in photographs unless there's some really good reason (if the photo is in an advertisement that calls for a particular post-shooting treatment).

for that shot, i'd say just play up the depth and density of the woods in the blue ridge area by making it as crisp and true as possible. had the shot been taken those few weeks where the leaves are changing in autumn, it could be cool.

-ZiP!-

7/2/2006 11:38:00 PM

at the present moment i do not have the capability to shoot UV or IR. or else i would have

and yeah i've been editing model and engagement pictures all weekend.

7/2/2006 11:38:51 PM

that mountain picture hurts my eyes

7/2/2006 11:40:09 PM

Thanks for the positive feedback, chief.

7/2/2006 11:40:28 PM

yeah, blue probably wasn't the best choice of color, but its all about the learning right? it took me a long freakin time to figure out the whole color overlay deal.

[Edited on July 2, 2006 at 11:54 PM. Reason : oh and GG..]

7/2/2006 11:43:10 PM

wedding last saturday


still working on yesterday's pictures.

7/3/2006 5:30:47 PM

random things from the past few days

turtle at shearon harris




mallard in that same pool, minus feet

7/3/2006 6:22:03 PM

7/3/2006 6:31:20 PM

I like the turtle shot a lot.

7/3/2006 6:58:17 PM

why thank you

7/3/2006 8:35:15 PM

i'm 99.9% convinced that I am going to go buy a Rebel XT tomorrow.... any suggestions/tips?

7/4/2006 12:20:15 AM

If you are pretty sure you're going to want nicer lenses sooner rather than later, think about perhaps not getting the kit lens, and just getting the body. (although, I don't know much about Canon, I'm a Nikon person)

-ZiP!-

7/4/2006 12:24:08 AM

These pictures are all so nice. I don't even have a regular point-and-shoot camera

7/4/2006 12:35:25 AM

my mom shoots w/ teh digital rebel XT...she says its WAY better than the non-XT version.
NO LAG TIME. is how she put it...as clsoe to film as it gets for now.

7/4/2006 12:37:15 AM

ZiP.... you use a Nikon D50, right? I mean I am just getting into photography and really have no idea bout SLR except what I have read online. Would you recommend the D50? I would be using the standard lenses to begin with.

7/4/2006 12:39:44 AM

i would recommend the D50, I've been happy with it. However, it may be possible to get a Canon with slightly more megapixels for the same amount of money. The D50 has come down a bit in cost, especially on sites like http://www.beachcamera.com (out of Jersey). I bought it with the 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses, but almost wish I had bought a 15-30 and 70-300 or something up front, however, I've still be happy with everything. I also picked up a fixed 50mm and a flash recently... but from what I can tell, sometimes Canon lenses run a touch cheaper across the board.

-ZiP!-

7/4/2006 12:42:35 AM

I was at Wolf Camera today looking at them both... the D50 is almost 250 cheaper... all I've heard is how great the Rebel XT is, though.


But as a complete amateur, i'm wondering if they both will serve my purposes (and as such, the D50 makes more sense cost wise)

7/4/2006 12:47:23 AM

the canon is the shit...just stick w/ canon lenses and flashes...my mom found out the hard way.
that being said, the canon shoots phenominal shots.

[Edited on July 4, 2006 at 12:48 AM. Reason : FUCK QUASAR]

7/4/2006 12:48:43 AM

As an amateur myself, I'm pretty happy so far with the D50 setup. Its a great camera to learn on, and not as pricey as its more powerful older brother, the D200. With buying additional lenses or other accessories (like filters + flash with difusers...), its not foolish, because you could upgrade the body (reselling the old one online or something) and then use all of your gear on the new one. (although yes, this can be done with a Canon too).

-ZiP!-

7/4/2006 12:50:01 AM

^ agreed. If you are ready to do it as a living, go with the extra canon cost, but for fun, the nikon is a great* camera.

7/4/2006 12:51:16 AM

this is without a doubt, my favorite thread on tdub. Thanks camera phreaks!

7/4/2006 12:51:46 AM

^^i hope you're not implying that canon is better for professionals... but regardless, i think that discussion happened a while back. if you're saying that rebel XT is better than the D50, you are probably right.

^cool man its great that new people continue to add their own shots

-ZiP!-

7/4/2006 12:53:19 AM

i am not quitting my job or anything for this.... just something that has interested me for a while, and something I'm ready to jump into.

Looking online, wolf camera has a couple of different setups for the D50, and not knowing anything about this stuff I want to get your opinions on what would be a good setup to start out with.


Nikon D50 Digital SLR Kit w/18-55mm AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom Lens

Nikon D50 Digital SLR w/Quantaray 28-90mm F/3.3-5.6 Lens

Nikon D50 Digital SLR w/Nikkor 28-80mm F/3.3-5.6 G Lens

7/4/2006 12:53:59 AM

btw:
took this with my 3.25 MP fuji finepix no flash, shutter on 'sport' mode

7/4/2006 12:55:30 AM

I actually would still go with the default 18-55 in that situation.

I find myself on the 18mm end of my 18-55 a whole lot because of how much you can get within the wide angle frame.

If its an option, the 18-55 AND 55-200 will give you a ton of options off the bat for not too much money

-ZiP!-

7/4/2006 12:56:02 AM

ZiP, can you give me a short explanation of the difference between those two lenses?

7/4/2006 12:58:43 AM

Nikon D50 Digital SLR Kit w/18-55mm AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom Lens
lightweight, good range, from 18 (wide angle) to 55 (portraits, zoomed in a touch)

Nikon D50 Digital SLR w/Quantaray 28-90mm F/3.3-5.6 Lens
not actually nikkor/nikon brand, the nikkor 28-80 may be better than this one

Nikon D50 Digital SLR w/Nikkor 28-80mm F/3.3-5.6 G Lens
perhaps a good lens, however you won't be able to get as wide shots, at its lowest, 28mm, it won't feel super wide.

The thing about digital SLRs is that there's a crop factor with most of them, this makes a 20mm lens not really 20mm but more like 28mm or so, meaning to get wider shots you have to use an even smaller length lens. this makes the 18-55 more appealing to me than the others. but, it all depends on your own shooting style and subject matter.

-ZiP!-

[Edited on July 4, 2006 at 1:03 AM. Reason : ]

7/4/2006 1:03:30 AM

so a lower mm lens is capable of wider shots.... and a higher mm lens is better for micro shots? is that basically true?

7/4/2006 1:06:03 AM

well, higher mm means more zoom, so you can be further away from the subject and it appear larger.

for true macro, its best to use a macro-specific lens, which i actually dont have experience with (ChocolateRVH and Ronny shoot macro fairly frequently, I believe).

you can take closeups with about any lens, but for that real macro feel, its probably best to get a fixed mm macro lens.

nikon doesn't have a whole lot of low mm options that are super affordable. the 18-55 is one, but the others (like the fixed fisheye 10.5 mm is over $500) are kinda costly. sigma makes a 15-30 that seems pretty nice (chocolateRVH has one), although, I've gotta say - the thing feels like it weighs more than the camera body, and its definitely large as well. for a beginner's walkaround lens, the 18-55 nikkor is super light and very compact.

-ZiP!-

[Edited on July 4, 2006 at 1:31 AM. Reason : ]

7/4/2006 1:28:01 AM

Before Randy gets in here and sucks Nikon's dick because he thinks the D50 is the best camera in the world , I'm going to go ahead and say that you should play with both cameras and see how they feel first. Feel/aesthetic is very important, because if you're not comfortable with a camera you won't use it.

I've used the D50 and owned the Rebel XT, and I've shot with Nikon's top of the line (D200, D2H) as well as Canon's (1D, 30D). I prefer Canon, but that is because I've used plenty of cameras, especially over the past few months, and made my own decision based on those experiences. I actually like the shape of Nikon cameras more then Canon, but I like the way Canons operate much better. Canons also don't have that awkwardly placed on/off switch that gets in the way of the shutter button.

Just be weary of what certain people in here say with regards to the whole Canon vs Nikon debate, because they just might not know any different. Use both of the cameras and make your own decision. One brand isn't any better than the other, it is simply a matter of personal preference. They are both capable cameras and you'd be happy with either one.


[Edited on July 4, 2006 at 8:19 AM. Reason : .]

7/4/2006 8:15:06 AM

^well put, good advice

-ZiP!-

7/4/2006 10:35:25 AM

well just went and picked up the Rebel XT, and the battery is charging

7/4/2006 11:07:34 AM

you will not* be disapointed.

7/4/2006 11:14:31 AM

i'd like to think nikon is more of a fine ass female... so i'm not sucking its dick... i'm bragging about how well it sucks mine.

and yes, i always say "nikon" because thats what i have and what i like. i'm not a big fan of canon's button placement and operations. i've even said in here that i've played with all of the cameras in nikon and canon's line up and i just like nikon's operation better. though canon normally has a jump in megapixels compared to nikons, its not big enough to really matter to me. you never seriously hear me knock canon... now i'll bad talk some of the other brands... lol

as for those lenses... 18-55 is a cheap light wide angle. not much on the higher end. fairly sharp for its worth. between the 28-80 nikkor and the 28-90 quantary... i'd actually choose the quant... its a better built lens. very strong... has macro mode on it... and not really any less sharp. the 28-80 isn't a bad lense per se... its just kinda like a junk nikon lens that they throw out there to be mega cheap. kinda like that 18-55 lens canon puts in their kits. when i first started i was all "i'm only gonna get nikkor lenses cuz they are better", but its not always the case. my next main lens is gonna be a tamron 28-75 f2.8. its very sharp from everything i've heard about it(compared it with the canon's version of it in many reviews and it came out on top in all of them that i saw).

either way. i honestly believe that between the nikon D#'s and the canon #D... you'd be pretty happy with the results in the long run. if you picked up the wrong one... you'd learn it pretty quickly and get comfortable with it.

[Edited on July 4, 2006 at 11:17 AM. Reason : oh, and i do believe that 15-30 does weigh more... its a beast of a lense on the 50]

7/4/2006 11:16:56 AM

if I could just figure out how to connect this damn neck strap lol

7/4/2006 11:43:51 AM

It's counter-intuitive.

7/4/2006 11:45:55 AM

any suggestions?

7/4/2006 11:46:14 AM

Just keep fucking with it.

[Edited on July 4, 2006 at 11:47 AM. Reason : That's about as good as it gets for me, one of the pros will be in here shortly. ]

7/4/2006 11:47:03 AM

which I have been.... i can't believe they dont put this shit in the manual

[Edited on July 4, 2006 at 11:52 AM. Reason : think I got it haha It is counter-intuitive]

7/4/2006 11:47:41 AM