Do you take pictures?

[Pengwuino]

So how many people here actually take a lot of pictures? It seems like EVERYONE has a digital camera and theres so much digital camera crap with printers and such on the market.... but I don't know anyone who actively takes a lot of pictures. Sure maybe a few a month... but no one seems to take a lot of pictures yet everyone has a digital camera (and many many newer 3MP+ cameras... not just ones they got back in the day and still have around)

[Moonbear]

My digital camera was one of the earlier ones, so it's big and clunky and doesn't take great pictures, and eats batteries like crazy, so I don't use it very often. Most times when I'm doing something that's picture-worthy, I'm having too much fun and forget to take pictures. I do want to get a new camera though. If I had one small enough to drop in my purse when I go places, I might take more pictures.

[Gale]

i have a webcam, and i take loads of pictures with that, sadly, i'm confined to my bedroom... or the reaches of my laptop. If i had a nice camera... wow, what pictures i could take then!

[Pengwuino]

If I had one small enough to drop in my purse when I go places, I might take more pictures.

Gosh your living in the stone age :D

They got ones that fit in the palm of your hands. My mother got a 6MP one thatsbasically a little bit bigger then a credit card and about as thick as those stupid cell phones EVERYONE has by motorola.... lil thinner actually.

Unless your purse is like, 3" wide.... therse a camera out there for you :D

[JamesU]

moonbear, get a new camera, trust me. :wink:

[mattmns]

i have a webcam, and i take loads of pictures with that, sadly, i'm confined to my bedroom... or the reaches of my laptop. If i had a nice camera... wow, what pictures i could take then!
Umm, ehh, hmm, let's see that thing live :tongue2:

[Moonbear]

Gosh your living in the stone age :D

They got ones that fit in the palm of your hands. My mother got a 6MP one thatsbasically a little bit bigger then a credit card and about as thick as those stupid cell phones EVERYONE has by motorola.... lil thinner actually.

Unless your purse is like, 3" wide.... therse a camera out there for you :D
Oh, I know they make them, that's what I want...well, not quite credit card sized; I'd worry I'd snap it in half. :biggrin: They're not exactly cheap, and I'm not one to drop a few hundred bucks on something like a camera (the one I currently have was given to me as a gift, or I probably wouldn't have that either). I'm really seriously thinking about it now though, but just need time to decide which one I want...with something that expensive, I won't just buy the first shiny new thing I see. I want one with a decent quality optical zoom, long battery life, and I think those 5 MP cameras are more than I would ever need, so I'm going to wait for them to come out with more 6 MP cameras and I'll buy a 5 MP when they're cheaper.

Oh, but I'm catching up with technology...I'm finally going to get cable TV. :tongue: Just the very basic broadcast service because I can't get decent reception on rabbit ears here. And I have my cable modem all ready to get my cable internet at the same time. :biggrin: Now if my neighbors would just keep their damned airport on just one channel so I can set mine to not get interference, I'd be much happier. I don't know what the heck they are doing that their airport blinks on and off every 10 min or so, and seems to find a different channel every time, so every few times they hit my channel I think and my connection slows to a crawl. :grumpy: I'm thinking of renaming my base station to "I'm on Channel 1" to see if they figure it out since I don't know which neighbor it is yet. :rofl:

[Moonbear]

moonbear, get a new camera, trust me. :wink:
Ooh, are you buying? :biggrin:

[brudally]

I have a camera, it is not digital but a video one.

[zoobyshoe]

I can't wait till they come out with The Enterprise Tricorder. This would be a phone/camera/video/radio/television/GPS/internet/movie/music thingy.

[moose]

Just remember, it's not the resolution that counts, it's the quality of the image produced. The only thing a 7MP camera would be good for is zooming in on your picture on your computer. I would much rather have a 2MP camera with really good optics and sensors than a crappy vivitar 7MP.

Fujifilm has came out with a new type of sensor which is really just awesome. They will start coming out with more and more cameras with them included. Before you buy any camera, make sure to look at pictures taken by that actual camera. www.dpreview.com is a really good website.

[Moonbear]

I can't wait till they come out with The Enterprise Tricorder. This would be a phone/camera/video/radio/television/GPS/internet/movie/music thingy.
Doesn't it also do some basic medical diagnostics? Yep, when they come out with one of those, I might finally decide it's worth spending my money on that. :biggrin:

[zoobyshoe]

Doesn't it also do some basic medical diagnostics? Yep, when they come out with one of those, I might finally decide it's worth spending my money on that. :biggrin:
Oh yeah, I forgot. It could easily be rigged to do blood pressure, pulse, skin conductance (a rudimentary lie detector) and prolly glucose level.

[zoobyshoe]

Maybe a little radar unit, too.

[Mk]

This summer I took about 200 I think.

[loseyourname]

I used to take a ton of pictures, but I never used a digital camera. In fact, I rarely even developed the pictures. I have bags of used rolls of film stuffed in my closet still waiting to be developed. It was mostly because I was living sort of a hobo lifestyle for a couple years moving around the country a lot, taking road trips all the time and seeing all these places, having these fun times, and I felt like I had to document it all. I really haven't had any desire since to revisit them visually, though - my memories are vivid enough that it didn't really matter.

[zoobyshoe]

Digital cameras rule (to indulge in an expression the young folks use) because they allow you to instantly view and delete any shot. No more are you lumbered forever with all the negatives of shots you don't care for. And a huge number of shots can be stored on a very small card.

[Yaaks]

i take a looot of pictures and amateur videos...(mostly wildlife and nature stuff)
My Dad influence on me has been very great..
i use use my 35mm and my digital handycam(with 1MG Pixel stills)..

[Tsu]

I take pictures for a living (xrays and CAT scans) so it's not something I usually do on the outside for enjoyment.

[Integral]

I have taken close to 1000 pics this summer, (850Mb@~2MB each in Ireland alone).

I have a 5MP camera with some reasonable optics. It does not make much sense to go over 5MP if you do not have decent optics to go with the resolution.

[matthyaouw]

I've recently rediscovered photography. I have a digital camera (not a particularly good one) but I prefer to use my ordinary camera as it's much better. I still have half a film that I'm looking for an excuse to use. I have some good shots of York Minster, a ruined church at Wharram Percy and some Yorkshire Wolds landscapes that I want developed.

[Astronuc]

Yes - I have several thousand pictures, mostly slides, but I am catching up with digital images.

I have thousands of pictures of locomotives and freight cars, since I love railroads and build models, some with a fair amount of detail.

However, I also take photographs of nature. For example,

Woodpeckers (http://www.everything-science.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,82/topic,6677.msg58915#msg58915)

Arctic Wolf (http://www.everything-science.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,82/topic,6584.0)

Praying Mantis (http://www.everything-science.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,82/topic,6549.0)

Butterflies (http://www.everything-science.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,82/topic,6325.0) mostly my pictures

Swallowtail Butterflies (http://www.everything-science.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,82/topic,6250.0)

Bees (http://www.everything-science.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,82/topic,6459.0)

Dragonflies (http://www.everything-science.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,82/topic,6252.0)

Hummingbird Moth (http://www.everything-science.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,82/topic,6249.0)

Grand Canyon (http://www.everything-science.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,82/topic,5159.msg58910#msg58910)

[Cyrus]

Someone buy me a Nikon SLR digital camera. I want one but its $800 bucks. :cry:
http://www.operationgadget.com/images/nikon_d2h_pro_digital_slr.jpg
Astronuc is a Bob Ross of photographs, just take the afro and translate it into a beard. :smile:

[moose]

When I bought my cell phone, I never thought I would use the camera as much as I do. I have over 120 saved pictures on my cell phone right now of random things I wanted to take a picture of.... Also, whenever I'm in school and I need to have the information from some page of some book, I can just take a picture of it! Woot.

[Chi Meson]

I just got the Canon Digital Rebel with a very sweet 28-105 Canon lens. 8 megapixels WITH fanstastic optics. I'm still delerious. 3 frames per second (1 per second with flash). So much better than film; you can fire away for a minute, then go back and delete all but the two or three good shots.

Only downside is...with this method, everyone will be a "good photographer" due to sheer luck and probabilities!

I used to be into slide photography and "Cibachrome" prints; 10 years ago I would have said (and I think I did say)"digital will never replace film photography; you just can't recreate the texture of the print."
Wrong!

I was gonna upload a great shot I just took of my son in Boston, but the attachments won't allow a 4 megabyte photo. There is that problem.

[Astronuc]

Someone buy me a Nikon SLR digital camera. I want one but its $800 bucks. I need to look into digital SLR's. The Kodak Easyshare DX6490 is OK for portraits and landscape, but closeup and long range zoom are problematic. The autofocus is not stable when zooming closeup, and taking the digital zoom is a problem if the exposure speed is too slow.

I have an old Canon F-1 from 1973, and a variety of zoom and telephoto lenses.

Astronuc is a Bob Ross of photographs, just take the afro and translate it into a beard. :biggrin:

[zoobyshoe]

I was gonna upload a great shot I just took of my son in Boston, but the attachments won't allow a 4 megabyte photo. There is that problem.
My camera is 5 megapixels and you just can't get stuff that size onto the web. Large images are also RAM hogs I discovered and trying to play with effects in photoediting programs quickly overloaded my RAM many times. (Caution: the action you are about to perform requires a large amount of memory. Are you sure you want to proceed?) I'm stuck with having to resize (downsize) them first.

Tha advantage of a huge image, though, is that you can crop out small sections as your finished image and those will still have an amazing amount of information in them. I feel like every shot I take is the equivalent of an 8 x 10 inch negative rather than a 35mm one. At some point I can upgrade my RAM, but you can't upgrade a 1 or 2 MP shot, just like you can't upgrade a 35mm shot to a poster sized print. Since you can delete any bad shot in a second freeing up that space with no expediture of money to speak of, the cost of film is just about eliminated.

The closeup feature on my camera is astonishing: I turned it around once and took a shot of my own eye from two inches away and every little bit of peach fuzz is visible. Here's a small section, actual size, cropped out of the overall image:

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b95/mrzshoe/ZoobEyeCrop.jpg

That was outdoors (lot's of light), and I'm sure I was lucky with not moving the camera as I pressed the shutter, but it clearly demonstrates what the camera is capable of.

[Chi Meson]

I'm just learning how to squeeze these shots down far enough so the attachments will upload them. Jeez, it takes forever, does anyone have a convenient resizing application for photos on Mac?

Anyway. Introducing: Ben, Nell, and Simon

[Moonbear]

Chi, they're adorable!

I finally got that new camera for my trip to Disney (of course that was just my excuse to finally buy it, since you all know I was already wanting a new one :biggrin:). I did get one that's small enough to fit in my pocket, now I just need to remember to bring it with me when I go places. Once I get more in the habit of taking it with me, I'll use it more...there are always photo-ops when someone is saying they wished someone had a camera along.

[zoobyshoe]

I'm just learning how to squeeze these shots down far enough so the attachments will upload them. Jeez, it takes forever, does anyone have a convenient resizing application for photos on Mac?
Possibly this:

http://www.yellowmug.com/easycrop/

but I don't have a mac myself.

[Cyrus]

Nell looks like a mini Bono with those glasses :cool: :smile:

[DaveC426913]

Tha advantage of a huge image, though, is that you can crop out small sections as your finished image and those will still have an amazing amount of information in them.

Yep. This was one of the primary criteria in my camera-buying. I got a 5MP so that could crop at will. Having a very high rez is a good substitute for a long zoom.


And I was blown away when I took a pic of a critter using my Macro!

[zoobyshoe]

Yep. This was one of the primary criteria in my camera-buying. I got a 5MP so that could crop at will. Having a very high rez is a good substitute for a long zoom.


And I was blown away when I took a pic of a critter using my Macro!
What brand you have? I got a Panasonic. 5 MP, 6x optical zoom. Through the lens viewing.

[russ_watters]

So how many people here actually take a lot of pictures? It seems like EVERYONE has a digital camera and theres so much digital camera crap with printers and such on the market.... but I don't know anyone who actively takes a lot of pictures. Sure maybe a few a month... but no one seems to take a lot of pictures yet everyone has a digital camera (and many many newer 3MP+ cameras... not just ones they got back in the day and still have around) In 5 days at Lake Tahoe, I took 120 pictures. I also use it a lot for work - documenting job sites.

[Chi Meson]

Nell looks like a mini Bono with those glasses :cool: :smile:
I thought more of an Elton John, but that's just how old I am.

[DaveC426913]

What brand you have? I got a Panasonic. 5 MP, 6x optical zoom. Through the lens viewing.
I deliberately picked a tiny camera, the Minolta Dimage X50 (http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/dimagex50.html).

I knew that, unless it was small enough to carry with me everywhere, it would not get used enough, and I would rue my choice. As it is, I have it with me at all times. I carry it in my "murse" (MANpouch).

My criteria, in order, were:
- 5MP (high enough to crop freely, and also substitute for high zoom)
- FAST power-up (<2s) and shutter latency (The camera I was borrowing before I bought my own was a Coolpix with a 6 second startup. You might as well not have a camera at all.)
- tiny (shirt pocket-sized)
- Lithium batteries (the best choice)
- large viewer
I have little use for most of the fancy bells and whistles that they try to stick on cameras these days. Other than flash and macro, I use two features: light balance and bracketing exposure.

[zoobyshoe]

I deliberately picked a tiny camera, the Minolta Dimage X50 (http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/dimagex50.html).

I knew that, unless it was small enough to carry with me everywhere, it would not get used enough, and I would rue my choice. As it is, I have it with me at all times. I carry it in my "murse" (MANpouch).

My criteria, in order, were:
- 5MP (high enough to crop freely, and also substitute for high zoom)
- FAST power-up (<2s) and shutter latency (The camera I was borrowing before I bought my own was a Coolpix with a 6 second startup. You might as well not have a camera at all.)
- tiny (shirt pocket-sized)
- Lithium batteries (the best choice)
- large viewer
I have little use for most of the fancy bells and whistles that they try to stick on cameras these days. Other than flash and macro, I use two features: light balance and bracketing exposure.

Sounds good. I didn't pay attention to the startup feature cause I didn't realize there were bad ones. I lucked out anyway since mine is about the same as the one you bought.

Yeah, large viewer is important. Zoom is only reliable with a tripod, but it's still a nice thing to have. I use it when photographing my drawings for instance.

Size doesn't bother me because it already seems "micro" compared to my old 35mm. I keep it in a case on my belt.

One nice feature I didn't realize it was going to have is the black and white option. They take beautiful black and white photos, and that's a nice option to have in various circumstances.

I didn't bother with rechargable batteries. I'm just using regular ones, and as long as I keep a spare set with me am fine. It seems the camera can only use the top third of the power out put of the batteries, and then it tells you they're dead. They aren't though, and I save them for other things that work OK with less juice. I stick to the big package deals: 36 AA's all at once. They're quite a bit cheaper that way.

[DaveC426913]

I use it when photographing my drawings for instance.
Yeah? Do you have a set up for that? I've taken pics of my work (http://www.davesbrain.ca/sketches03.html) but I have a terrible time with hot spots and uneven liggting (grnated becasue I haven't bothered making a proper balanced setup). I'd like to hear what yours is like.


One nice feature I didn't realize it was going to have is the black and white option.
:shrug : While I'd like to be a purist and do the bulk of my work in-camera, frankly, I'm a PhotoShop junkie.

I didn't bother with rechargable batteries. I'm just using regular ones, and as long as I keep a spare set with me am fine. You are luckier than most people I hear who burn through reg batteries at an unbelievable rate. (However, I will keep in mind your advice about not trusting the battery meter. I'll suggest that to the next person I hear with that trouble.)

[zoobyshoe]

Yeah? Do you have a set up for that? I've taken pics of my work (http://www.davesbrain.ca/sketches03.html) but I have a terrible time with hot spots and uneven liggting (grnated becasue I haven't bothered making a proper balanced setup). I'd like to hear what yours is like.
Those are great, Dave. You are a good modeler of shape. There's something about them that reminds me strongly of some of Van Gogh's pencil and pen and ink works, something about what things attract you to emphasize, although I don't think he did any nudes.

I don't have a special set up. I tape them to one wall of a garage and play with various arrangements of uncovering the windows and different degrees of opening the main garage door. All has to be done during the day, of course. I tried photofloods but had no luck, and they are touchy to work with.
:shrug : While I'd like to be a purist and do the bulk of my work in-camera, frankly, I'm a PhotoShop junkie.
Yeah, one click and they're black and white. (I'm going to pretend there is some advantage to snapping the originals in the black and white mode, though, even though I'm not aware of any.)
You are luckier than most people I hear who burn through reg batteries at an unbelievable rate. (However, I will keep in mind your advice about not trusting the battery meter. I'll suggest that to the next person I hear with that trouble.)
Don't know about meters. My camera just stops working when the batteries are too low, and gives the message to change them. Even though they are no longer powerful enough to operate the camera, they will operate many other things for a while yet. Clocks, of course, but even flashlights and tape players work on the batteries that don't have enough juice for my camera.

[DaveC426913]

Those are great, Dave. You are a good modeler of shape. There's something about them that reminds me strongly of some of Van Gogh's pencil and pen and ink works, something about what things attract you to emphasize, although I don't think he did any nudes. :blushing:

I don't have a special set up. I tape them to one wall of a garage and play with various arrangements of uncovering the windows and different degrees of opening the main garage door. All has to be done during the day, of course. I tried photofloods but had no luck, and they are touchy to work with.
Yup, that sounds familiar. When I was doing them proper-like, it was a pain.

Yeah, one click and they're black and white. (I'm going to pretend there is some advantage to snapping the originals in the black and white mode, though, even though I'm not aware of any.)
Well, I can think of one - I just don't like to admit it. In-the-field composition takes skill (mine's pretty rusty). But most anyone can improve a picture if they have PhotoShop and enough time.

Don't know about meters. My camera just stops working when the batteries are too low, and gives the message to change them. Even though they are no longer powerful enough to operate the camera, they will operate many other things for a while yet. Clocks, of course, but even flashlights and tape players work on the batteries that don't have enough juice for my camera.
Oh, my mistake. I thought you were saying that the batteries still worked in the camera even after the meter showed they were depleted. So yeah, it sounds like your camera eats batteries like I've heard.

[zoobyshoe]

Well, I can think of one - I just don't like to admit it. In-the-field composition takes skill (mine's pretty rusty). But most anyone can improve a picture if they have PhotoShop and enough time.
I can't compose a shot to save my life. I try hard, and always think they look as well arranged as possible, but something is wrong with my instincts in this regard. Some people have a natural eye for it.

I have Printshop Pro and have tried "improving" photos but have found that things like "sharpen" don't actually work, and manipulating histograms is, apparently, beyond me. I understand the principle, but can't get the effects I want. When ever I'm done working on a picture it always seems more degraded in general. I've had good results with a couple things like selecting an object and darkening the background behind it, and the blemish remover tool is pretty good: removed scratches and dust marks.

Are your drawings charcoal? Ever do pen and ink? Are those from life?

[DaveC426913]

I can't compose a shot to save my life. I try hard, and always think they look as well arranged as possible, but something is wrong with my instincts in this regard. Some people have a natural eye for it.
Me neither. PhotoShopping gives me the time and tools to plan carefully.

I have Printshop Pro and have tried "improving" photos but have found that things like "sharpen" don't actually work, and manipulating histograms is, apparently, beyond me. I understand the principle, but can't get the effects I want. When ever I'm done working on a picture it always seems more degraded in general. I've had good results with a couple things like selecting an object and darkening the background behind it, and the blemish remover tool is pretty good: removed scratches and dust marks.
You just gotta get PhotoShop.


Are your drawings charcoal? Ever do pen and ink? Are those from life?
Few are charcoal. I'm a tight, controlled sketcher, so I don't tend to go for that kind of loosy-goosy medium. Pencil is my fave, followed by chalk pastel. I do pen & ink too, but have less luck. Most of my illo work is done in pen (felt tip) though.

Those pics are from life, yes.

I had my very first show (http://www.davesbrain.ca/artshow.php)last year and submitted a bunch of pics (http://www.davesbrain.ca/miscpix/artshow/show.html).

There's some dregs of stuff on my website (http://www.davesbrain.ca) under the menu item called Dave's Art. And here's an older site with some illos (http://www.davesbrain.ca/davebrain/).

What about you? You have any stuff beyond what you posted earlier?

[zoobyshoe]

Those pics are from life, yes.
Drawing from life much more difficult to do than what I do (from photos) and you're really excellent at it. In the second bunch you linked to I especially like how you modeled the woman's back in the top left nude: alot of depth, shape, structure.
What about you? You have any stuff beyond what you posted earlier?
Just more of the same kind of stuff. No excursions into different media.

[DaveC426913]

Post some!

[AngelShare]

I did until my laptop went haywire...everything, including my pictures, was deleted and my camera's batteries died not long after that...need to get the good kind.:wink:

I'll probably start again once I get over having lost everything I've ever worked on, found, and loved more than life itself...:cry: :tongue:

[Astronuc]

Software like FileScavenger can recover lost files. Windows 'lost' a folder with over 2 GB of images. I used Filescavenger to recover about 97-98%. Fortunately, those I didn't recover were backed up elsewhere. So I have filescavenger on the PC's. I also use a minimim of 2 HDs per PC and use an external HD backup as well as CD or DVD backup. Laptops have to be backed up to other PC's.

[Astronuc]

http://static.flickr.com/39/110450995_c777c60e44_m.jpg

http://flickr.com/photos/geoffhandley/

Check out his photos from rural county of Shropshire!

[Bladibla]

I never take casual images. Any image i take has to be significant in some way.

[DaveC426913]

I never take casual images. Any image i take has to be significant in some way.
Significant to whom? I presume you.

Pardon my armchair psychology :rolleyes: but, is it possible that you feel the need to justify your choice in case anybody asks you "what it means"?

Consider taking pics just because they are pleasing - give your audience more credit.

[Astronuc]

Recommendations for a digital camera?

http://thegardenforums.org/viewtopic.php?t=1445

Some examples of backyard and nature photography. :smile:

[Astronuc]

http://www.coudy.com/Gallery/mccormick.htm

Cool webiste of Terry L. McCormick - Nature Photographer

See this image of a scissortail flycatcher taken in Arkansas. I saw them all the time in the Brazos Valley in Texas.

http://icons.wunderground.com/data/wximagenew/z/Zormsk/69.jpg

[Astronuc]

Some really amazing and otherwise incredible photographs in National Wildlife's 35th photography contest!

http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/article.cfm?issueID=79&articleID=1158

[Astronuc]

Some cool butterfly pictures.

http://forums.gardenweb.com/forums/load/butterfly/msg031420019447.html?10

[Astronuc]

All pics were shot with a Canon EOS 1D Mark II.

Check these pictures out!

http://nature.gardenweb.com/forums/load/bird/msg0517460527347.html?1

[SimplySolitary_]

All pics were shot with a Canon EOS 1D Mark II.

Check these pictures out!

http://nature.gardenweb.com/forums/load/bird/msg0517460527347.html?1


How beautiful!

I have an old Nikon FG-20 (I do believe) that I just adore. It was given to me this past Christmas - I've always wanted a camera that took 'real pictures'. If given the chance (And money to buy film), I'd take at least three rolls a day. I usually only take about a quarter of that, when I have money. I've got negatives lying around everywhere! :)

[Astronuc]

How beautiful!

I have an old Nikon FG-20 (I do believe) that I just adore. It was given to me this past Christmas - I've always wanted a camera that took 'real pictures'. If given the chance (And money to buy film), I'd take at least three rolls a day. I usually only take about a quarter of that, when I have money. I've got negatives lying around everywhere! :) I used to shoot 8-12 rolls/day, and most were 36 frames/roll. Of course, I too was constrained by money.

With a digital camera, I can easily shoot 200-300 or more frames in a day. I have two memory cards, or I take the laptop along to download one card.

[turbo]

I've gone digital (Olympus 3040 zoom) but still have one of my trusty old OM-1s. At one time, I had three of them and an OM-4 with a wide selection of single-focal-length lenses. I also used to have a Bronica ETR-S and ETR-C with some single-focal-length lenses. I processed my own film much of the time, to keep costs down. Film photography was expensive! I should buy a better digital camera - the lack of processing expenses makes digital photography a no-brainer!

[SimplySolitary_]

I used to shoot 8-12 rolls/day, and most were 36 frames/roll. Of course, I too was constrained by money.

With a digital camera, I can easily shoot 200-300 or more frames in a day. I have two memory cards, or I take the laptop along to download one card.

What kind of digital camera do you use?? I've been looking into digital cameras, and I do have one, but I don't want to get one that'll take extremely bad shots, or will die out quicky...
:)

[DaveC426913]

All pics were shot with a Canon EOS 1D Mark II.

Check these pictures out!

http://nature.gardenweb.com/forums/load/bird/msg0517460527347.html?1
Are YOU Dave in VA?

That GardenWeb is cool! I post lots of stuff there in the Name That Animal Forum.

[Astronuc]

Are YOU Dave in VA? No, I'm in the NY area. My wife browses Garden Forum, and I seem to remember you mentioning that you post pictures there.

What kind of digital camera do you use?? I use a Kodak EasyShare DX6490 (4 MegaPixel), with 10X zoom and 3X digital zoom for combined 30X, and auto-focus. However, one problem I've noticed is that the combination of low light and full zoom leads to blurry pictures because of long exposure. Zooming in with the digital zoom (> 10X total) for closeups requires fixing the camera to a solid base, which is not always practical.

I payed about $500 for the camera (and 128 MB memory card) when I bought it two years ago. Now, I would want to invest in a camera with the ability to change lens, i.e. a digital SLR. The camera is now about $250. Also, one should expect the rechargable battery to last about 1 year, afterwhich it seems to drain fairly quickly and the voltage seems to change because the camera performance (auto-focus) gets sluggish.

I have an old (30+ years) Canon F-1 with a variey of zoom and telephoto lenses. I would like to have the digital equivalent of that camera.

[Curious3141]

I hate taking pictures. I bought my first digital camera only after the birth of my kid, and that was after my wife and parents pestered me no end. And I've got nothing but baby pics.

I'm not the most sentimental person. The way I see it, I have a perfectly good set of eyes and visual cortex. Why would I need a camera?

[Astronuc]

I'm not the most sentimental person. The way I see it, I have a perfectly good set of eyes and visual cortex. Why would I need a camera? So you can share them with your parents. :biggrin: Baby pictures of course.

I enjoy taking pictures of nature and sharing it with people. I find nature very interesting, and sometimes it's just simply beautiful.

I like taking pictures of colorful sunsets and scenery, or colorful flowers, birds and insects. I post some of these in order for people who might be interested.

I also appreciate the effort and skill of others who take pictures. :smile:

[Astronuc]

Land of Oz - After seeing this, I am ready to go home and raise milk wallabies.
http://www.gardenbuddies.com/articles/may06/jeanne/jeanne.php


This is pretty cool too!
http://www.gardenbuddies.com/articles/march06/pom/birdseyeview.php

[SimplySolitary_]

I'm not the most sentimental person. The way I see it, I have a perfectly good set of eyes and visual cortex. Why would I need a camera?

To capture a certain beauty in something that someone might not find beautiful. To realize that everything can be simply wonderful. To see a sunset over the ocean, blue waves upon the sand, is truly a beautiful thing, but to capture it in a frame in such a way that someone else might find it as stunning as you did... well, that's just an amazing thing.

[turbo]

What kind of digital camera do you use?? I've been looking into digital cameras, and I do have one, but I don't want to get one that'll take extremely bad shots, or will die out quicky...
:)I have an Olympus Camedia C-3040. It does a real good job most of the time (I am more a manual 35mm guy) but the biggest gripe that I have is the time-lapse between when I press the shutter button and the time when the actual exposure is made. I love action photography and nature photography, and sometimes you just have to have an image of "NOW", not 1/2 second from now. That is a small thing if you are doing family portraits, landscapes, etc, but if you want to capture a hummingbird "dogfight", or a sport-biker doing a "stoppie", or a kayaker doing a perfect pirouette in an eddy, "NOW" is the standard that I want the camera to perform to. "Wait for it..." is not acceptible. In this one regard, the C-3040 comes up short. It is very conservative in power consumption, and I power it with Nickel-metal-hydride batteries that are available anywhere and recharge to much better strength than NiCads, without the memory problems (at least to date). The camera is small and unobtrusive. It takes a few seconds for the lens to extend to the using position on power-up, so it is not as handy as a film camera for spur of the moment shots. It is nice, though, to come back home, dump all the shots to the PC's hard drive, and later delete the clunkers and save the keepers. As with film cameras, the great shots often come unexpectedly, thus the admonition to just "keep shooting". The up-side of digital is that you don't have to keep buying film, processing the film (even if you do it yourself it gets expensive!) and printing the good prospects. Digital photography entails two real costs - the cost of the camera/lens(es)/batteries/memory cards, and the cost of the paper and ink to print out the images you want to keep. Photo-quality printers are a dead give-away compared to the cost of the paper and inks, believe me - that's where your hard-copy costs reside. I hope this helps.

[Astronuc]

Slow response is the one complaint I have with a digital that uses autofocus, especially as the battery ages.

I much prefer SLR, with manual settings and a relatively large f-stop for depth of field.

[turbo]

Slow response is the one complaint I have with a digital that uses autofocus, especially as the battery ages.

I much prefer SLR, with manual settings and a relatively large f-stop for depth of field.Yep. The digital cameras have taken away that "gut feel" certainty that I can get the shot I want, NOW. I used to set out with one or two of my OM-1s, fitted with great lenses and loaded with film that I could trust, and could shoot all day long and get lots of nice (not just usable) images. The sunny 16 rule and a feel for dispersion/attenuation by clouds/low sun angle could keep me pretty much in the zone most of the time.

I had a chance to buy a Leica M-6 with a Noctilux lens for $2000 quite a few years ago, and just didn't have the ready cash to pull it off, and lost the deal. Why, why, why? :cry: I should have sold my truck and hitchhiked to work until I could get another vehicle!

Oh, well.

[peejake]

i bought my cam about 2 years ago but i think i have only taken about hardly ummmm.....300Mb worth....that seems to little compared to the amount some of u people have taken...... :lol:

-jake

[Curious3141]

To capture a certain beauty in something that someone might not find beautiful. To realize that everything can be simply wonderful. To see a sunset over the ocean, blue waves upon the sand, is truly a beautiful thing, but to capture it in a frame in such a way that someone else might find it as stunning as you did... well, that's just an amazing thing.

To my mind, the beauty of a scene is mostly an internal construct based on external cues. In other words, it's my own mind that makes a scene beautiful. :biggrin: How can I convey that to anyone else? Not that I'd have the least interest in doing so, the only people I would be interested in sharing that sort of experience with are immediate family, and they'd probably be with me anyway. I'm exceedingly introverted, almost to the point of social apathy.

Also, I find that taking pictures seems to detract from my immediate enjoyment of a scene.

[Astronuc]

Volcanos!

http://volcano.und.edu/vwintl/vwintl.html

I imagine there is quite a risk in taking those photographs, but then it must be awesome to see eruptions in person.