Bill Gass wrote:
Barely, .
We had these little drive up to photo booths downtown, yellow with Kodak on them, like the size of a 5 x 10 trailer, you'd drop your film off and pick it up in a week or two and hopefully had enough for another roll of film to do it all over again.
They had a great one in Grants Pass Bill!
Kodak had a developing plant right here in my hometown. I would send all my slides or film to them in mailers from SE Asia and my dad would go pic them up.
Not many survived the extreme heat and humidity during the monsoon season. Mold and mildew ruined many a roll of film for me! And cameras!
Film at the PX was cheap...if and when I could get there. I had a great company clerk who would pick me up a few rolls when he picked up our mail.
Just FYI...was rambling on for some reason.
Ray Swindle wrote:
I would buy my film from Skylark Camera in Pasadena. Sure, I could get it from discount stores like Globe or Sage, but I was told Skylark kept a fresh inventory.
I remember when I switched from film to digital. My wife wanted every minute of the Christmas holidays documented on film. January, 2002, after all our Christmas expenses I spent $400 on film and processing. The next month I bought a Canon G2, then later the 40D. I saved many $$$ with that G2.
The 40D was another story. I had my Canon AE-1 for twenty years and it worked great, no matter what lens I put on it. If I recall I spent about $500 for the camera in 1976, including a 50mm lens, case and speedlight. The G2 was a couple of hundred more. With digital, the improvements were so impressive, I found myself buying new cameras every couple of years, so much for saving money using digital instead of film......Show more →
I STILL have my AE-1 Edie Wrei and my TLb!!!!! And they STILL take a fine photo!
Photographed this Challenger 850 last week for a charter client. Never had the pleasure of photographing one, until this one. I actually photographed two of these. Basically, it's a glorified Canadair CRJ-200 that Delta Connection and many other commuters used for so long, before upgrading to larger aircraft.
https://www.rayswindlepix.com/img/s/v-10/p3681465849-3.jpg
Clean looking cameras there Eddie.
Nice bellows one and a video one back there as well I see.
I'd like a K1000 tho, that's what I borrowed from my sister and took about 10 years to give it back,
Ray Swindle wrote:
And now our friend Danpbphoto gets the first image on the City, Street & Architecture content page. You guys rule!
Go Dan,
Gotta brag tho, I had 2 on top here for most the morning, the truck and the harvester and on the animals I had 2 as well, eagle and hawk. Toot, Toot...There ya got Dan ?
Thanks Ed! It was a god send for close combat operations! You could hear the drone of its engines as it approached and the FAC on band with pilot.."where do what it HawkeyeOne-Actual?".. and that bought us some time. And it would rain hell down on "Uncle Ho's boys"!
Dan
Saw this in the local paper today. This was taken by a local photographer in the next town. Looks a little noisy to me. If this was a black and white photo it would have reminded me of the photos our high school photographs shot at our Friday Night Lights in the 1960's.
Ray Swindle wrote:
Saw this in the local paper today. This was taken by a local photographer in the next town. Looks a little noisy to me. If this was a black and white photo it would have reminded me of the photos our high school photographs shot at our Friday Night Lights in the 1960's.
https://www.rayswindlepix.com/img/s/v-10/p3688618178-3.jpg
Ray, I do not find "noisy" images much of a distraction anymore. As in your post...yes to many other categories but not here. If it is printed in a paper, it wont be a good image anyway. On line-well it is sports..the noise doesn't really effect the sport.
Now if your publisher requires a solid IQ image then you do "your noise thang" and clean it up! You are a master at that..so no problemo!
Dan
Danpbphoto wrote:
Ray, I do not find "noisy" images much of a distraction anymore. As in your post...yes to many other categories but not here. If it is printed in a paper, it wont be a good image anyway. On line-well it is sports..the noise doesn't really effect the sport.
Now if your publisher requires a solid IQ image then you do "your noise thang" and clean it up! You are a master at that..so no problemo!
Dan
It looks to me as if the photographer forgot to set his ISO to a proper setting. This looks like it must have been ISO 100 or 400. He must have shot the whole game without checking his settings. I am told he shoots Nikon, and I am sure Nikon cameras are not that noisy when the proper settings are used.
Ray Swindle wrote:
It looks to me as if the photographer forgot to set his ISO to a proper setting. This looks like it must have been ISO 100 or 400. He must have shot the whole game without checking his settings. I am told he shoots Nikon, and I am sure Nikon cameras are not that noisy when the proper settings are used.
Obviously I mistakenly assigned this photo to you Eddie Wrei! I apologize! I read your text but my mind just didn't absorb it! It is pure HELL getting olde!
YES!
Dan
PS I am still AMAZED that you and I have saved our exact same Canon film bodies to this day!
JWilsonphoto wrote:
I think his front and or rear element was a bit dirty based upon the light flare. All in all, not a "Swindle" original...............
I didn't think of a dirty filter. The guy is a pro and has held high positions in the print media, sports and otherwise. Very strange he would have let this get printed.
A friend sent me an iPhone capture and asked if I could do anything with it in Photoshop, it was very diffused. I recognized the problem immediately and asked her to clean her lenses with lens solution and an appropriate cloth and reshoot the image. She sent me a shot of her lenses, between the fingerprints, general grunge, makeup, etc. I was surprised there was any image on the sensor at all.
In the "old days", before they made softening filters, portrait pros would run their index finger along the side of their nose to gather natural skin oil, then lightly smear it on a UV filter to gently soften a portrait. Hasselblad had a series of "Softar" filters that ranged from barely noticeable to who is in that portrait. I used to shoot Mary Kay Ash's portrait every year and, as she aged, she demanded that I use stronger and stronger softening filters on the Blad. She was very sensitive to the fact she was aging, and, of course, her beauty products we supposed to all but halt those effects, so she was caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. The last couple of years she had me take the "Doris Day" effect to it's outer limits.
.
