NOPI Pics : Cars

Rhoad Racing · Post by **Rhoad Racing** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 4:01 pm

CodyW · Post by **CodyW** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 6:09 pm

definately some badass shots!
out of curiousity, what was your ISO set on? for some reason i'm seeing a bit of extra distortion in a few shots (mainly the ones shot near dusk) and that's probably the cause. make sure you rock it out on 100 as much as you can and you'll be set

.
they still look good though, there are some really nicely composed shots in that set.

Eurasian · Post by **Eurasian** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 6:37 pm

sweet pics

charlie · Post by **charlie** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 9:34 pm

what a dumb fucking idea.

MTRLevolution · Post by **MTRLevolution** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:00 pm

what an awesome fucking idea.

charlie · Post by **charlie** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:06 pm

so what happens if somebody makes a cool ass lawnmower with two front ends??? then what happens?

the space-time continuum is gonna be pissed!!!

slidewaysgolf · Post by **slidewaysgolf** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:42 pm

Ahhh yes the space-time continuum I have been worried about this for years now. I have a theory about this if someone was to build a suupa dope double front end lawnmore it would indeed through of the space-time continuum. If scallywag ragamuffin was to build one of these it would make all the toilets in the world flush backwards, this would through the worlds rotation of and send us to a rather gloomy trip straight towards the sun. But we would probably hit mercury and send it sending of to nebula 913 were black hole number 7747583. When then planet inters the black whole and the earth hits the sun it will call it to supernova and the positive charged neutrons from the blast would mix with the negative neutrons from the black hole thus causing a rift in the space-time continuum. So people we must stop dope double front end lawn mowers now before the end of the universe comes.

Rhoad Racing · Post by **Rhoad Racing** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:54 am

CodyW wrote:definately some badass shots!
out of curiousity, what was your ISO set on? for some reason i'm seeing a bit of extra distortion in a few shots (mainly the ones shot near dusk) and that's probably the cause. make sure you rock it out on 100 as much as you can and you'll be set .
they still look good though, there are some really nicely composed shots in that set.

cool....thank ya sir

Through out most of the day I had the ISO set on 100 as normal. But towards dusk I raised it to 200 and 400 b/c my shutter speed was getting too low for me to hand hold the camera and at the time I didn't have my tripod on me. (<- seriously long run-on sentence

)

CodyW · Post by **CodyW** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 12:57 pm

ah, that makes sense

. i've tried the same thing but i usually end up regretting it so lately i've just been underexposing them and then rocking some major levels/curves in photoshop, but that's also kind of a shady idea.
if i could only find a way to eliminate all movement from my hands and body when shooting long exposures i'd be set

.

MTRLevolution · Post by **MTRLevolution** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 12:59 pm

what's that drug solid snake takes to calm his nerves when he's sniping? that might help.

slidewaysgolf · Post by **slidewaysgolf** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 12:59 pm

Wow yall take real pics with real cameras to. I though i was the only one sill buying film. lol I hate digital cameras.

CodyW · Post by **CodyW** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:00 pm

oh yea, i think it was pentazimin (?) or something like that. thank you metal gear solid!!!

CodyW · Post by **CodyW** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:00 pm

slidewaysgolf wrote:Wow yall take real pics with real cameras to. I though i was the only one sill buying film. lol I hate digital cameras.

nope, all digital. you can adjust stuff on good digitals too you know

.

slidewaysgolf · Post by **slidewaysgolf** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:05 pm

No i did not know you can adjust shutter speeds and what not on a digital camera. I am kinda digital cluless i guess lol. I may like one that you can use like a real camera instead of the point and shoot kind. I do like my digital camcorder though so there not all bad i guess.

CodyW · Post by **CodyW** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:43 pm

yea, digital is definately the way to go in my opinion. i respect film and think it's cool in it's own way, but as far as being practical goes digital is so much better. plus, using photoshop instead of the darkroom to get different looks is so much easier and you have way more control too. there are even tons of digital SLR's out right now that give you everything traditional film SLR's did plus more, and the prices are slowly getting affordable (i'm about to buy a canon 300D for $850 or so). if you're ever curious, browse around http://www.dpreview.com to check out some good reviews of all kinds of digitals.