Check out Billygoat!! She is a such a Diva here!
by Sparkplug 53 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
crankytoe
WOW!
Very Nice,
-
Sparkplug
BTT in hopes that BillyG comes on tonight and sees this. Might make her smile...You think?
-
free2beme
Your a very attractive woman, but seem to be related to ants. After all, you have there antennas.
-
Soledad
Your a very attractive woman, but seem to be related to ants. After all, you have there antennas.
*nudges f2bm hard in the ribs* knock it off!! No surprise, BG is very beautiful!
-
Midget-Sasquatch
Apologies SparkPlug! Didn't realize you were waiting anxiously. Sorry. I went to bed before I read your answer and I didn't get to the computer again till a few minutes ago.
I didn't laugh at all. In fact I'm very impressed at how you know how to get awesome quality outta your digital equipment (whatever the model).
I can only imagine what you'd be capable of with some very highend stuff. Medium format cameras are nice to use because you have larger negatives with them (like 56mm x 56mm) and so when you decide to blow images up for larger portraits the images are usually sharper (than if you were blowing up from a 35mm negative). Unfortunately I only can dream about that kinda outfit. I'm still stuck with a pathetic point and shoot 35mm film camera.
Looking forward to seeing some of your other compositions. Again I'm sorry for the delay....and I'll probably be going to bed soon.
I
-
Sparkplug
Mid- I am still watching. Kewl. How does it compare to digital? I cannot see my wallet allowing me to go back to film with my new skills. Need to fine tone them. For comparison to a Cannon 20d with the med format. Thanks for not ROFL-ing.
-
Midget-Sasquatch
Hi SparkPlug,
According to something I read on Kodak's professional photofraphy site, for a digital image to match the same amount of image detail as found on 35mm, it would have to be about 10 megapixels. I've seen 20 to 22 megapixel digital backs being sold for some medium format cameras. So I'd say the medium format is probably still a better choice (for the time being) if one plans on making poster size images.
But really good digital cameras (like that 8 megapixel Canon 20d of yours --- I'm oh soo drooling!) have very low noise in their images nowadays. Film still has its graininess. If we're sticking to prints of regular sizes like 6x4 or 10x8 I'd be hard pressed to subjectively see a difference between digital and medium format. Blowing them up though one would see better detail on the film but also at the same time it'll have a more grainy look to it.
Have a good night.
-
Billygoat
Thanks guys! I've never been called a diva before. Not sure what to think of that.
Sparky is a fabulous photographer and artist and makes a photoshoot a lot of fun. One of the shots (not the one posted) will be on my site someday soon. Maybe she'll let me post the shots I took of her and her girls. Cuties all three of them!
Midget, I got the honor and privelege of meeting the Texas State Photographer earlier this year, Wyman Meinzer. He uses a Canon Mark II, an amazing piece of equipment. He says he will never go back to film, now that he has the Mark II. It's WAY out of my and Sparky's price range, but for what we do, our equipment is sufficient and does a very good job. (She has her 20D, but I'm a Nikon girl. I have the Nikon D70 now, but drooling over the hopes of getting a D200 soon!)
-
Midget-Sasquatch
Billygoat,
The Mark II isn't even attainable for me in my dreams :) I'm with you -- that is one wicked camera. But that D70 of yours is one sweet SLR too. .I've always heard good things about the quality/price of the Nikkor series of lenses. I look forward to some of your own compositions with that, as well as any more from you SparkPlug. You don't take nature or lanscape shots by chance?
I personally was thinking replacing my film camera with an Olympus because their 4/3 system means lighter and smaller lenses. But who knows? I've got to find some testing on it to see how it compares with other SLRs.