File :-(, x, )
heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Took some more museum shots today at the Dallas Museum of Art...

Decided to post'em since they're a little strange.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeRICOHCamera ModelGR DigitalMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.3Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:05:18 01:51:33Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/2.4Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.4Brightness-2.3 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.90 mmExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormal
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeRICOHCamera ModelGR DigitalCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.3Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:05:18 01:51:41Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/2.4Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.4Brightness-3.3 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.90 mmExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormal
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
they're listening to self-guided tour device thingos

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeRICOHCamera ModelGR DigitalMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.3Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:05:18 01:51:36Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/2.4Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.4Brightness-3 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.90 mmExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormal
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeRICOHCamera ModelGR DigitalCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.3Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:05:18 01:51:40Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/2.4Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.4Brightness-4.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.90 mmExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormal
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
     File :-(, x)
art teacher discussing Turner's Peace- Burial at Sea

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeRICOHCamera ModelGR DigitalCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.3Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:05:18 01:51:38Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/2.4Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.4Brightness-5.6 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.90 mmExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardSharpnessNormal
>> Anonymous
You should have added vignetting to these photos, it would make them look really awesome!!!
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>184016
I added to the vignetting that was already there, granted, but there's a lot of falloff in the gallery space anyways, not to mention I'm shooting wide-open.
>> Anonymous
is this a joke? nice saturation
>> Anonymous
Those are some noisy fucking photos man! But I know what it's like trying to shoot indoor events, one PJ to another. That's why ISO quality's one of the top things I'm looking for in my next body.
>> Anonymous
>>184017
Wide open is f/2.3 on your lens? Cute. Why not shoot with a normal DSLR camera instead of wasting your money on a gimmick when you're going to turn your pictures into overprocessed tripe anyways?
>> Anonymous
>>184021
F/2.3 is fast for 28mm equivalent. There's a few 28/2s, and two 28/1.8s I know of, but most 28mm lenses are f/2.8, let alone 28mm equivalent ones for a crop DSLR.

Also, a silent shutter is far from a gimmick if you've ever shot with one.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
lol, much love /p/, much love
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
oh also, there's no photography allowed in this space. I shot all of these from the hip in snap focus, so the thing was completely silent and inconspicuous.
>> Anonymous
You could probably get exactly the same thing with a 100 dollar point and shot and some photoshoop.
>> Anonymous
>>184027
>You could probably get exactly the same thing with a 60 dollar point and shot and some photoshoop.
Fixed.
>> Anonymous
>>184023
>Also, a silent shutter is far from a gimmick if you've ever shot with one.

hey guys, ever point and shoot i've ever owned has a silent shutter. they must be really technologically advanced eh
>> Warren !!JL+uuUHRNlZ
OP: Do you work at all with commercial photogs in Dallas? Totally unrelaated thought, btw.
>> Anonymous
>>184042
You obviously don't know what you're talking about, so please GTFO instead of knowing it better.
>> NatureGuy !se3A3TwzdY
>>184013
>>184015
good photos, terrible noise ah gad my eyes
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
Some totally silent mode on dslr's would rock.
>> Anonymous
>>184092

no, i know exactly what i'm talking about. it's the same thing, there's no clacking mirror and opening shutter on any point and shoot, therefore it takes pictures silently. you're just a faggot who ejaculates at the thought of owning a silent ricoh so that you can take loli upskirts in SUPER HIGH QUALITY without their fathers beating your shit.
>> Anonymous
>>184106

i forget which model but

activate live view, mirror is up

go do your ninja shit, focus, take shot and HOLD shutter button down

the picture is taken at the exposure you input but mirror doesn't come back down until you let go

move away from lolis

profit
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>184075
Yeah, some, very limited, but I'd always like to do more work. Know any?
>> Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM
There is no good reason that with main-sensor liveview permanent mirror lockup could not be enabled, and you shouldn't need any shutter actuations either...
>> Anonymous
>>184169

some are still phase detect focus

so the mirror does move
>> Anonymous
>>184042
>>184161
No, they're not technologically advanced. They're leaf shutters; they're simpler than focal plane shutters, and in this case, better.

I've shot in plenty of situations where mirror clap would've been totally unacceptable, but a good small-sensor camera with a good lens and a a leaf shutter will pull through excellently. The results are good, although noisy in low light, but that's fine. Bitching about there being noise or grain in a photograph is bitching about there being brushstrokes in a painting or commas in a novel.

>>184011
>>184015
These are the best.

>>184012
Almost makes it. Good subject, good blur from him, but the framing on him on the right side is just too tight. Admirable attempt considering you were shooting from the hip, but it doesn't make it.

Also, something that might help (though these are fine) is instead of snap focusing (that's Ricoh-speak for "setting it to the hyperfocal distance," right?) continually adjusting the manual focus distance to how far away you think your next subject would be. There's enough depth of field on the small sensor that these look fine, but it'd be good practice anyway for larger formats.
>> Anonymous
>>184182
>Bitching about there being noise or grain in a photograph is bitching about there being brushstrokes in a painting or commas in a novel

LOL WUT
>> Anonymous
>>184182No, they're not technologically advanced.

yeah.. i'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic
>> Anonymous
>>184199
Yeah, I know. I was acknowledging that, and using it as a springboard for the rest of the post.
>> Warren !!JL+uuUHRNlZ
>>184168
I work a lot at the JCPenney Studio in Plano and with Dan Sellers, Holly Kuper, Steve Hinds, and others.
>> Anonymous
>>184202
No, you obviously didn't know. You're just a dick.
>> Anonymous
>>184182
>Bitching about there being noise or grain in a photograph is bitching about there being brushstrokes in a painting or commas in a novel

Not when its a fucking digital camera you fucking faggot. Film grain is ok in moderation. Digital Grain is never ok.
>> Anonymous
bitch fight

BTW, OP, nice camera (not being sarcastic of anything, just that, unlike a couple of fags here, I appreciate a good cam)
inb4DSLRisbetter
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>184011
doesn't do a whole lot for me
>>184012
looks like he's DJ'ing, kinda killed it for me
>>184013
very nice, love this shot
>>184014
meh
>>184015
awesome!

little bit of hit and miss, but i like em overall
>> Anonymous
>>184523
There is no such thing as digital grain. There's noise in digital files, but no grain, unless you've taken a photograph of some wheat or something.

The only reason you find film grain OK but digital noise not is because you're more used to one than the other. In other words, you're trying to impose the aesthetic of one format you're used to onto another you're not. (This applies even if you've never shot a film camera in your life; you've still probably seen more great photographs taken that are grainy than are noisy because A) digital noise is less obvious than film grain at the same ISO and B) film's been around longer and more great photographs have accumulated from it. If somehow digital came along before film and Cartier-Bresson used an M8 and someone developed film processes a few years ago, you'd be whinging about grain.)

And look, either way, like Salgado pointed out, they're "part of the medium." Photographs have grain or noise. Paintings have brushstrokes, prose has punctuation marks, poetry has those and line breaks, music has notes, sculpture has the texture of the stone or whatever material. They're an inherent physical part of the medium. Accept them or GTFO of the medium. Minimize them, accentuate them, whatever according to taste and suitability for the content. But they are as much a part of the medium as the dimples on your face are a part of your body.
>> Anonymous
>>184528
I don't have dimples, and you suck at analogies.
>> Anonymous
>>184529
The original thing I had was a birthmark on an asscheek. Better or worse?
>> sv !!vC9KZM3Ch/H
>>184026

Was it just this exhibit they weren't allowing photography, or the whole DMA? I've shot at the Kimbell and Amon Carter in Fort Worth, and they didn't care that much (the Carter required you ask for a photo pass, though).
>> Anonymous
is it ugly on purpose?
>> Anonymous
>>184530
I think your post proves mine.