Author Topic: Funniest Forum of All Sites! (Read 6361 times)

fred1963 · « **on:** November 01, 2006, 22:35 »

I've been spending some time today reading the forum on Shutterstock. Between the 1600 ISO conversation and the guy whining about rejections I couldn't stop laughing. Another fun destination added to my web surfing.

Bateleur · « **Reply #1 on:** November 02, 2006, 04:39 »

The guy who started the '1600 and no noise' thread kills me.

He has the most brilliant ideas. A while back he was suggesting that night-time firework shots should be taken at 1/60 of a second.

Then he has developed the fascinating ... and, I believe, unique ... technique of creating an infinitely variable ND filter by putting two (yes two!) polarising filters in front of your lens and rotating them in different directions.

Un - bel -eeeeevable! I love his posts.

Lizard · « **Reply #2 on:** November 02, 2006, 05:04 »

Yes ,I know , i actually had an argue wit the man who claims ISO has absolutely nothing to do with noise. He posted some samples overloaded with noise and claims he made his point and the have no noise at all. Then he shoot a gray card with also with ISO 1600 , and blurred that , you can clearly see the artifacts that are left after hard blur. But more interesting is that the man never uses raw format , he finds it unuseful.

chellyar · « **Reply #3 on:** November 02, 2006, 05:10 »

FYI... The two polariser filter idea is really, really old.

As for his other advise/posts... Some of it seems to be quite sound, and some of it is really left field weird.... I 'spose I shouldn't pick holes, he's a felllow Kiwi and all, but I'm just not sure if he's two different people or not. :-).

And that thread with the guy whinging about rejections was like a train crash, I wanted to look away but just couldn't stop reading. Not to forget Rinders ever so polite first reply which was classic stuff..

Bateleur · « **Reply #4 on:** November 02, 2006, 05:48 »

Quote from: chellyar on November 02, 2006, 05:10

FYI... The two polariser filter idea is really, really old.

Ah ... right. He made it sound like it was his own idea.

But, apart from that, I've always been taught that the object is to have as little glass as possible between the object and the light-sensitive medium. Every piece of glass you add degrades the image a little.

FunkMaster5 · « **Reply #5 on:** November 02, 2006, 07:04 »

can someone link to this guy - could do with a chuckle

FunkMaster5 · « **Reply #6 on:** November 02, 2006, 07:44 »

Quote from: Lizard on November 02, 2006, 05:04

Yes ,I know , i actually had an argue wit the man who claims ISO has absolutely nothing to do with noise. He posted some samples overloaded with noise and claims he made his point and the have no noise at all. Then he shoot a gray card with also with ISO 1600 , and blurred that , you can clearly see the artifacts that are left after hard blur. But more interesting is that the man never uses raw format , he finds it unuseful.

I saw this image - it is so clearly faked that it cracks me up, there is no noise what so ever, they guy should learn to fake things better it would not be hard to shoot something at ISO 100 and claime it was 1600

Bateleur · « **Reply #7 on:** November 03, 2006, 08:50 »

Quote from: FunkMaster5 on November 02, 2006, 07:44

I saw this image - it is so clearly faked that it cracks me up, there is no noise what so ever, they guy should learn to fake things better it would not be hard to shoot something at ISO 100 and claime it was 1600

Actually, I don't believe it is a fake. If you look at the bottom corner of the teddy bear photo at 100%, an image he finally posted (after a bit of faffing about and trying to fool everyone) you can see it's howling with noise.

The guy's obviously a troll.

Well ... at least he's good at something.

Lizard · « **Reply #8 on:** November 03, 2006, 13:50 »

Quote from: Bateleur on November 03, 2006, 08:50

Quote from: FunkMaster5 on November 02, 2006, 07:44
I saw this image - it is so clearly faked that it cracks me up, there is no noise what so ever, they guy should learn to fake things better it would not be hard to shoot something at ISO 100 and claime it was 1600

Actually, I don't believe it is a fake. If you look at the bottom corner of the teddy bear photo at 100%, an image he finally posted (after a bit of faffing about and trying to fool everyone) you can see it's howling with noise.

The guy's obviously a troll.

Well ... at least he's good at something.

Betaleur , we are not talking about same photo. We are saing that the gray card photo was blurred and manipulated. The teddy photo is obviously original , its full of noise

fred1963 · « **Reply #9 on:** November 03, 2006, 16:30 »

The Teddy Bear was filled with noise in the corner at 100%. That was one of the funny things. After reading all the back and forth and then seeing that the guy was full of it.

Bateleur · « **Reply #10 on:** November 03, 2006, 17:19 »

Quote from: Lizard on November 03, 2006, 13:50

Betaleur , we are not talking about same photo. We are saing that the gray card photo was blurred and manipulated. The teddy photo is obviously original , its full of noise

Ooops ... sorry ... misunderstood you.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Funniest Forum of All Sites! (Read 6361 times)

fred1963

Bateleur

Lizard

chellyar

Bateleur

FunkMaster5

FunkMaster5

Bateleur

Lizard

fred1963

Bateleur

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors