The (Un)official Royal Carnage forum picture page

Ignore that. I just looked up the lens you use. I don't have $2500 spare right now, but when I do... I might buy a car instead.

Good luck with that.
 
It's not even my camera (though lenses are mine), still waiting for mine to come. The first series of photos are taken with simple digital shit.
And probably my luck is that I'm not interested in cars, so I buy photo stuff (though, considering that all this shit is goddamn heavy to carry - I'm afraid I might need one soon =\ ).
 
Well that's just it. The necessary gear to take amazing photos VS. the means with which to get to the amazing photographs. God knows public transport won't take me to where I need to be.
 
Well that's just it. The necessary gear to take amazing photos VS. the means with which to get to the amazing photographs. God knows public transport won't take me to where I need to be.

Photography really doesn't have that much to do with your gear today, just like guitaring doesn't require a $10.000 axe even though it's nice and in a way helps. Location is important depending on what you want to photograph of course, but you can take good photos of pretty much anything anywhere really. A good eye is the most important part!
 

cool i barely know who you are but i'm adding you as a flickr buddy
icon14.gif


here's mine for the record http://www.flickr.com/photos/erikgj/



p.s. THE CAMERA DOESN'T MATTER (AT ALL)
 
Photography really doesn't have that much to do with your gear today

actually "today" it has more to do with gear than it used to, but still, digital has gotten to the point where it doesn't matter what camera you buy because they're all mostly identical

back in the day though you could buy any camera and get a super sharp 50/1.8 in the kit and the camera had no effect on the picture (only the LENS and FILM and most quality lenses are good enough) because it was just a light tight box that opened a shutter, none of this sensor and demosaicing and aa filter and white balance fucking rubbish
 
actually "today" it has more to do with gear than it used to, but still, digital has gotten to the point where it doesn't matter what camera you buy because they're all mostly identical

back in the day though you could buy any camera and get a super sharp 50/1.8 in the kit and the camera had no effect on the picture (only the LENS and FILM and most quality lenses are good enough) because it was just a light tight box that opened a shutter, none of this sensor and demosaicing and aa filter and white balance fucking rubbish

There was cheap and crappy stuff back in the day too, but noone bothered with saving it 'til now, plus you needed a fuckload of stuff to get the pixx off the film and onto a good watching media. Some stuff is more practical today, some is less, but good photography can still be done with a $50 camera.
 
There was cheap and crappy stuff back in the day too, but noone bothered with saving it 'til now
the point is unless the lens is crappy (and i will concede that there have always been crappy lenses) quality-wise the camera LITERALLY does not matter, at all, when it comes to film

today if you have a really crappy camera the results will be visibly worse even with the best lens attached

so yeah there were crappy lenses but you can still take good photos even with crappy lenses so whatever
 
have you considered that different printing papers give very different results when printing different films to them and so forth

you'd better rethink your position
 
have you considered that different printing papers give very different results when printing different films to them and so forth

you'd better rethink your position

after the exposure = doesn't count. Also, if that's the case you can change paper and try again.
photoshop isn't gear either
 
all this doesn't mean squat unless you have a great subject ... like a willing naked chica with breast augmentation.