Photography Chat

Hi everyone. I found an interesting video about spectrometry. youtu.be/LxQmaJYMOAk?si=VQ8FmeUhHiKb90Pd

@uhoh I'm guessing off the cuff that the technological advancement was in the area of servo motors precise and smooth enough to move both axes of the alt-az mounts in a way that made them functionally equivalent to equatorial mounts moving only one axis.

meta.codidact.com/questions/74831

I am absolutely seething about that, Joanne. Unequivocally, you are enthusiastically welcome here with open arms. Anybody who purports to disagree, on the other hand, is most definitely not welcome here. I'm glad this hit Catija's radar quickly, and I'm sorry that I wasn't around earlier to catch that. It pisses me off that PSE has to work harder to earn back your trust that this is a home for you. It always was, and will be as long as I'm here.

^ I'm so resisting the temptation to say "Be careful you don't press too hard, or you will take out the first layer of bits, which can reduce your sensor from 14 bits of dynamic range to 13 or even 12. A friend of mine was really over-zealous, cleaning his camera every night, and now it only does black and white...."

And, well. In my experience with other sites relaxing standards to retain users just leads to poor content and poor culture.

every time I use a Mac, I wish the computer had a face so I could punch it

Disk space is cheap, but I found that the cost in not-culling is not the disk space, but the time when browsing old photos. I have too many of them. I expect I'm not the only one with this problem.

@uhoh it would be highly improbable, but perhaps an artificial satellite re-entering the atmosphere? Otherwise, another object entering the atmosphere is my first guess. Whatever it is, what a lucky and great capture!

Given that my own daughter is 10months...I think I need to start collecting some old things to blow her mind with...phone modem, fax machine, beeper, cassette player...

let me just sell a couple of organs

Apropos of nothing, I found an interesting project that aims to build a fully community-owned forum for information, Q&A, etc. Seems interesting, spotted some familiar faces there. forum.codidact.org/t/thoughts-for-a-new-photography-q-a-site/…

:( I don't think there's anything to regret. You've helped make it a better place, and nothing lasts forever.

@mattdm Yep. My advice to those younger than I is to choose carefully where you decide to make your mark. I'm beginning to wonder about/regret all the time I've devoted here when the entire network seems to be falling apart at the seams.

Oh neat! We can get Stack Exchange staff attention after all. My post photo.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7019/… got deleted by a "Senior Product Support Specialist".

@Belle-Sophie Being a successful pro photographer is about 90% marketing/social/business skills and only 10% about being an adequate or better photographer.

Anywho. I voted to undelete it. Would be more than happy to answer if it comes back from the dead

Dear Mint.com: I'm quite aware I've spent way too much money on photography lately. I'm quite happy about it

photo.stackexchange.com/questions/76640 - it's the 985th time we write an answer about focal length and crop factor and we became extremely efficient at it.

but the absolute #1 most important thing for product photography is the lighting

I admit that it's an experiment. But, no one has any better ideas and the site really needs it.

everything I do is met with my wife's disapproval

... should we have a "how do I choose a lens" in general question?

mmmm...in hindsight, I'm on the fence about the decision. Sure as hell not going to undo my edit though.

lol, one of the managers here just threw a keyboard out the door of his office

@AJHenderson Too late kid, I already installed 17 elevated programs onto your computer using images embedded from itmages.ru . All your RAW file are belong to us.

But I'm not an authority on the contest, I'm just trying to disallow choosing some of the really high quality photos from the internet that are already licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0 or a license convertible to that and reposting them there.

@YayaManisya There is the camera-basics tag. That might be a good place to start. Also, the exposure tag might be helpful to a beginner.

photo.stackexchange.com/questions/101414/… I am not patient enough to look through the documentation. sooo tempted to downvote for "This question does not show any research effort."

data.stackexchange.com/meta.photo/query/895738/…

wish we had more people who wanted to be admin... so I could sell my vote for an L lens

Whelp, some people sure are cranky about the free help they get from random strangers on the Internet.

@MichaelClark I think you're going to beat me to #1 rep user before I overtake Matt Grum. This is disappointing. I'll have to stop upvoting your answers. :)

But let's say you could copyright a car; even so, then that would only prevent someone from making a copy of the actual car. A photo is not a car, so a photo cannot be a copy of a car.

@MichaelClark "it's not you, it's your inability to properly handle the exposure triangle"

@Belle-Sophie It sounds like you need a new boyfriend a lot worse than you need a new camera system. LOL.

A reflection in a photograph is "less real" because it is light that is at least one further step removed from the object off which the reflection is bouncing. That is not a photo of Neil Armstrong on Buzz Aldrin's visor. It's a photo of Buzz Aldrin with a reflection of Neil Armstrong on his visor. The image we see of Buzz is where he actually stood in relation to the camera. The reflection we see of Armstrong is not were he was standing in relation to the camera. That's the difference.

@MichaelC I voted! But not for you, despite that feeling amusing ;-)

Just a reminder, the moderator election closes soon. Please vote for your choices if you haven't already done so.

But I don't think its beneficial to our community to go around editing everyone questions so much that they can't recognize them or that the existing answers no longer make sense.

Pick a weekly theme, set some criteria, and see what people come up with.

when meta information needs its own meta information, we have a problem

@Tetsujin sorry, late to the filter party, but perhaps another variable for consideration: filter body material. B+W filters for the most part (that I'm aware of) use brass, whereas I think Hoya uses aluminum. Al is prone to galling, which causes the dreaded Al-to-Al thread stickiness, even if the threads weren't tightened. Brass is much more resistant to galling (which is why it's often used as bushings and bearing surfaces). FYI.

all "i've got a business to run" ..."I need to make money"..."I have to feed my pregnant wife"

@Tetsujin The biggest issue with any of the major brands is being sure you aren't sold a counterfeit. It's a huge problem for the quality manufacturers. I got a fake B+W XS-PRO MRC nano HTC C-Pol KSM from amazon ("Sold by amazon") a while back. The problem is amazon co-mingles inventory they bought from the actual makers with product shipped to them by third party sellers. I returned it and got a real B+W from B&H.

The scary thought for me is that in a fire I would probably not only grab my camera, but I'd likely use it too... I may be getting weird in my old age.