# December Photography Thread



## tom_craggs (Dec 3, 2008)

Here's a wintery one from Brighton taken yesterday.







Later in the day...


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 4, 2008)




----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 4, 2008)

stowpirate said:


>



Love this...


----------



## Paul Russell (Dec 4, 2008)

The Georgian splendour of Bath, yesterday


----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 4, 2008)

Paul - that cash machine shot is fantastic! what a bizzare perspective!


----------



## boskysquelch (Dec 4, 2008)

tom_craggs said:


> Here's a wintery one from Brighton taken yesterday.



I've an uncle that swims there every day of the year...consequently his son lives in Honolulu.


----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 4, 2008)

boskysquelch said:


> I've an uncle that swims there every day of the year...consequently his son lives in Honolulu.



Yeah I have seen pictures of the people who go out on Christmas day, and shots of people swimming when it's been snowing - pretty mamazing. I wouldn't want to swim off Brighton Beach in Mid July to be honest!


----------



## Paul Russell (Dec 4, 2008)

boskysquelch said:


> I've an uncle that swims there every day of the year...consequently his son lives in Honolulu.



Is he in any of these photos

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lomokev/sets/72154/

?


----------



## Paul Russell (Dec 4, 2008)

tom_craggs said:


> Paul - that cash machine shot is fantastic! what a bizzare perspective!



You like it? When I looked at it in the LCD thingy I thought it was all wonky, but I went back and looked at the scene, that's more or less how it is "in real life". Road on a slope, bin not straight, etc. Damn real life.

I was in the road to take it (death by prime?) so I didn't have too many attempts.


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 4, 2008)

tom_craggs said:


> Love this...



Thanks Tom  

It is a local landmark that I keep photographing. In this case I equalized the photo to bring out more of the sky detail unfortunately it also did strange things to the branches of the trees on the horizon! Looked awful in colour so converted it.


----------



## boskysquelch (Dec 4, 2008)

Paul Russell said:


> Is he in any of these photos



 I'll have a gander...but I doubt it...he's very solitary & a marine biologist who studies the flora & fauna of continental shelf eco-systems...tends to be out there local dawn time...more Black Rock end tbh.

Haven't spoke to him or seen him since a family debacle over an inheritance where I _lost_ a house to him...was on the market a couple of years ago fer 1.5 mill...he chucked it away for 40K 15 years back after getting it off me gran for 3K...rewriting her will thinking he was going to "look after" it until my own family were ready to relocate from Cornwall to Brighton... I'm not bitter.

His son is a World Authoriteh of the El Nineo effect. 


*draws further from memoirs... I learnt to swim at Black Rock...being taken out on horse back with gypsies, to float holding onto manes while the horse swam about...the amount of woolie swimming trunks I used to lose.


----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 4, 2008)

Paul Russell said:


> You like it? When I looked at it in the LCD thingy I thought it was all wonky, but I went back and looked at the scene, that's more or less how it is "in real life". Road on a slope, bin not straight, etc. Damn real life.
> 
> I was in the road to take it (death by prime?) so I didn't have too many attempts.



bath = hills


----------



## Paul Russell (Dec 4, 2008)

tom_craggs said:


> bath = hills



Yeah, I lived there for a few years. The RPS had a darkroom and gallery right in the centre of town that I used to use a lot but I was in my black and white statue photography phase then.


----------



## Paul Russell (Dec 4, 2008)

boskysquelch said:


> I'll have a gander...but I doubt it...he's very solitary & a marine biologist who studies the flora & fauna of continental shelf eco-systems...tends to be out there local dawn time...more Black Rock end tbh.



Maybe he still comes across your old trunks. He's probably written a paper about them.


----------



## boskysquelch (Dec 4, 2008)

with titles such as

_Basic Information for Serpula vermicularis reefs on very sheltered circalittoral muddy sand_

&

_Basic Information for Flustra foliacea and other hydroid/bryozoan turf species on slightly scoured circalittoral rock or mixed substrata _

you maybe right!


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Dec 4, 2008)

Stowpirate you often refer to _equalisation _.  Is that the Gimp equivalent of Photoshop _Levels_, or what is it?  Can you not get the result you want by doing a plus or minus or two on the exposure in the camera at the taking stage?  Down your way is known for its 'big skies' perhaps camera meters are not calibrated for that area.  I remember when I visited Sweden in another life with black and white film years ago I found exposure problems.  The light was completely different to grey old Britain.

Tom, I like those long exposure shots of the sea.  Obviously you are using a tripod and long exposure but can you give more details of your working method here.  Are you using a Neutral Density filter?


----------



## Paul Russell (Dec 4, 2008)

boskysquelch said:


> with titles such as
> 
> _Basic Information for Serpula vermicularis reefs on very sheltered circalittoral muddy sand_
> 
> ...



I spent many years subbing marine biology journals, so sadly I understand that sort of thing.

Anyway, pictures...


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 4, 2008)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Stowpirate you often refer to _equalisation _.  Is that the Gimp equivalent of Photoshop _Levels_, or what is it?  Can you not get the result you want by doing a plus or minus or two on the exposure in the camera at the taking stage?  Down your way is known for its 'big skies' perhaps camera meters are not calibrated for that area.  I remember when I visited Sweden in another life with black and white film years ago I found exposure problems.  The light was completely different to grey old Britain.



There are some before and examples here:

http://www.qualitysimulations.com/pe/

It is a bit of cheat really and depends a lot on how good the original image was. Meaning spot on exposure without any over or underexposed or even burnt out areas. It is seen by some as a cheat to increase the dynamic range. There is a good technical description here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histogram_equalization

Simply levels has more to do with mapping the lowest an highest RGB point on the histogram and setting the correct gamma point. There is probably a more detailed explanation in your photo editor help files. Here is an interesting site on the subject:

http://www.mediachance.com/pbrush/help/histogram.html

I am sure most photographic editing software have both equalization and level options.






It does strange things to colour images as on this film based photo taken with a Olympus XA3. Digital images tend to give better results.


----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 4, 2008)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Stowpirate you often refer to _equalisation _Tom, I like those long exposure shots of the sea.  Obviously you are using a tripod and long exposure but can you give more details of your working method here.  Are you using a Neutral Density filter?



This was taken just before sunset. I used a 10 stop B+W ND filter. I think this was originally developed for photographing industrial shots (welders etc). Basically you can't see through it at all. 

So camera on tripod, frame the shot and focus, then add ND filter. I also used a Lee ND grad to hold back the sky a little. Then take the shot using a remote release. This was a 115 seconds at f/16 (depth of field vs sharpness weighed up - sharpness given priority in this case). Clearly a light meter is no use on this length exposure so it's a bit of guess work but I am getting the hang of how long the shutter speeds should be in different light conditions. This was a little under exposed I think. 

This filter gives an overly warm/orange cast so I reduced the colour temperature from the RAW file in photoshop to give a more accurate colour representation. 

It's good fun playing around with the filter, not quite the same as taking long exposures at night though, but easier to frame the initial shot.

edit: Sorry I should add the above was in reference to the the Jetty shot, slightly different for the peir.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Dec 5, 2008)

Thanks Tom that was interesting.  Some of your shots remind me of Victorian photographs of the sea taken on the old plate cameras with an ISO equivalence of about 5.  A ten-stop ND filter sounds pretty dense.  I would think that you are well into the reciprocity failure area there.  I am not sure if reciprocity failure is the same with digital sensors as it is with film.  Film is only sensitive to anything other than blue light because of dye sensitisation in the emulsion.  Digital sensors I would have thought would be immune from reciprocity failure - I don't know, but your image looks to have a shift towards the red end of the spectrum which is typical of reciprocity failure.

You have a lot more patience than I do.  These shots are fabulous.


----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 5, 2008)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Thanks Tom that was interesting.  Some of your shots remind me of Victorian photographs of the sea taken on the old plate cameras with an ISO equivalence of about 5.  A ten-stop ND filter sounds pretty dense.  I would think that you are well into the reciprocity failure area there.  I am not sure if reciprocity failure is the same with digital sensors as it is with film.  Film is only sensitive to anything other than blue light because of dye sensitisation in the emulsion.  Digital sensors I would have thought would be immune from reciprocity failure - I don't know, but your image looks to have a shift towards the red end of the spectrum which is typical of reciprocity failure.
> 
> You have a lot more patience than I do.  These shots are fabulous.



Thanks Hocus Eye. Reciprocity failure is not a problem with digital becuase teh digital sensor stay consistantly sensitive to light and does not shift. The reddish tint comes from a reddish sunset but also a cast from the filter, I tried to crrect this a bit but prob didn't do far enough on this particular shoe. Most people who use this filter only do so in black and white for this reason. 

Reciprocity failure certainly does cause issues on this length exposure on film, but at the same time I much prefer the way film grain copes with this length exposure rather than digital noise (especially on my 20d - on which noise is quite a problem on long exposures).


----------



## Spion (Dec 5, 2008)

stowpirate said:


>


Like it. It's simple. It's got good composition. It works.

Less keen on the one above that one in your post. It reminds me of that photographer in the 30s (?) in the US (???soz, name escapes me) that took lots of sides of barns and things. 

Not directed at you, but there's too many people ape others' styles too much in photography. I've got a mate who takes amazingly technically fantastics shots, all effects and stuff, but I always think - "Really just stop trying so hard. It looks like you're trying to ape WH Smith calendars". Or maybe it's just my taste?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 5, 2008)

Can't afford to pay for my space on PBase at the moment, so these are taken from Facebook, sadly i think it compresses them rather poorly (and I'd already saved them for web for PBase) so the quality isn't that hot. Still.........

Kirkstall Abbey, Leeds.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 5, 2008)

Golden Acre Park, Leeds


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Dec 5, 2008)

Barking Mad 

I like the warm green of that final picture.  Did you tweak it at all?  Thanks to your comment above I just remembered to pay up my pbase account - I was down to one month service left.  I think it is time I cleared out a lot of my old pictures from that site though.  I don't bother with Save for Web, just do a Process Multiple Files to reduce the height of the pictures to 700 pixels to fit on peoples screens and save at maximum quality.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 5, 2008)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Barking Mad
> 
> I like the warm green of that final picture.  Did you tweak it at all?  Thanks to your comment above I just remembered to pay up my pbase account - I was down to one month service left.  I think it is time I cleared out a lot of my old pictures from that site though.  I don't bother with Save for Web, just do a Process Multiple Files to reduce the height of the pictures to 700 pixels to fit on peoples screens and save at maximum quality.



Hello,

Yes, i have Photoshop CS3 and I used the 'Sponge Tool' (on the same button as dodge and burn) to bring the green out (set to saturate). The B&W version of that photo works well too, but i can't decide which i prefer.

I regularly clear mine out on PBase, after a while photos i thought were ok to be on there look tired and not very good - so i bin them! 

re: saving - what's the 'process multiple files' on Photoshop? or where do i find the equivalent? Generally i saved mine for web as my hard drive was too small to save the originals and copies on my old computer - Although it's is sat dead as windows doesn't work at the moment.  (hope the hard drive is still ok!)


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Dec 5, 2008)

Maybe _Process Multiple Files_ only exists in Photoshop Elements which is what I use.  It is to be found in the File menu of course.  I can't really justify paying for the full on Photoshop because I scrap any pictures that look like they might be hard work to make presentable.  Back in the days of negatives I got into the habit of not wasting time processing while taking another picture was feasible.

I think you have _Actions _in the proper version of Photoshop so perhaps it doesn't come with Process Multiple Files.  You could create an _action _I am guessing.  Are _Actions_ a bit like Macros in Office?


----------



## neonwilderness (Dec 5, 2008)

Hocus Eye. said:


> I think you have _Actions _in the proper version of Photoshop so perhaps it doesn't come with Process Multiple Files.  You could create an _action _I am guessing.  Are _Actions_ a bit like Macros in Office?



Yeah, I think you record an action then use the batch automate command to use is on multiple files.


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 6, 2008)




----------



## idioteque (Dec 6, 2008)

neonwilderness said:


>



He/she is gorgeous 

(as is stowpirates doggy too )


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 6, 2008)

This morning at Tesco's


----------



## neonwilderness (Dec 6, 2008)

idioteque said:


> He/she is gorgeous


It's difficult to tell, but we think she's a she


----------



## cybertect (Dec 6, 2008)

A few of the boy at the park this afternoon.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 6, 2008)




----------



## stowpirate (Dec 6, 2008)




----------



## stowpirate (Dec 6, 2008)

cybertect said:


> A few of the boy at the park this afternoon.



Cybertect did you need to prove film is now dead in such a stunning way? Now I know why I need to be spending more on my digital kit - Canon EOS 5D? - they are wonderful photographs


----------



## neonwilderness (Dec 6, 2008)

cybertect said:


> A few of the boy at the park this afternoon.



He has rather striking eyes! 



stowpirate said:


>



I like this.  Have you edited it?  It doesn't look quite right, but I'm not sure why.


----------



## cybertect (Dec 6, 2008)

stowpirate said:


> Cybertect did you need to prove film is now dead in such a stunning way?





Thanks. Yes, a 5D, though a 50mm f/1.4 lens does much of the work.

Thumbnail links to bigger versions if you want to see them


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 7, 2008)

neonwilderness said:


> I like this.  Have you edited it?  It doesn't look quite right, but I'm not sure why.



Because the light was coming from behind the church it was in shadow which is always a mistake! I was more interested in the sky than the actual foreground and found equalization on some images does a wonderful job of enhancing lost detail in the sky but does some strange things in the area between bright and dark as in the trees. I will try doing the photo again with the foreground as a silhouette.






Picasa and Gimped with an over cooked sky!


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 7, 2008)

cybertect said:


> Thanks. Yes, a 5D, though a 50mm f/1.4 lens does much of the work.



This is the one that stands out as being special. 

I have a few similar shots of my kids when they were younger but unfortunately I was using either a Praktica SLR with its mediocre standard 50mm f1.8 lens or Olympus AM100 plastic compact. These are from the AM100


----------



## dlx1 (Dec 7, 2008)

http:\\cybertects.co.uk/galery2/d/77722-4/IMG_8087.jpg 

http:\\cybertects.co.uk/gallery2/d/77728-4/IMG_8092.jpg


----------



## cybertect (Dec 7, 2008)

stowpirate said:


> I have a few similar shots of my kids when they were younger but unfortunately I was using either a Praktica SLR with its mediocre standard 50mm f1.8 lens or Olympus AM100 plastic compact. These are from the AM100



I love the one of him peeking out of the tree


----------



## Sweet FA (Dec 7, 2008)

New Forest this morning


----------



## idioteque (Dec 7, 2008)

Those are great Sweet FA 

I wish I could get to the NF more, I'm stuck in Southampton


----------



## Sweet FA (Dec 7, 2008)

idioteque said:


> Those are great Sweet FA


Thanks 




idioteque said:


> I wish I could get to the NF more, I'm stuck in Southampton


No.56 bus goes from Central Station to Lyndhurst  The photos above were taken in that bit of the park on the left, just before you get into Lyndhurst. I took loads this morning but most were rubbish. I need to figure out how to take photos in really bright, sharp sunlight. It made all my pictures look washed out and colourless. In real life, everything looked really bright and colourful


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Dec 7, 2008)

Sweet FA

Those pictures pointing at the ground looked good.  The oak leaf in one picture had a bit of blocked highlight in it.  The cemetery one illustrated the point you were making about exposure more obviously.  

There should be an exposure compensation dial somewhere on your camera or in a menu.  If you can give it about one stop worth of reduced exposure you should be able to get rid of the bleached-out effect.  On my camera I have to routinely set it to minus 0.7 on glary sunny days.


----------



## Sweet FA (Dec 7, 2008)

Aha - thanks for that Hocus. I need to find time to experiment more really; haring around after a 3 year old, grabbing snaps as you go, doesn't give much chance to figure out the intricacies


----------



## Barking_Mad (Dec 8, 2008)




----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 8, 2008)

From the Horiman;


----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 9, 2008)

cybertect said:


>



Did you take these @ f/1.4?


----------



## Refused as fuck (Dec 9, 2008)




----------



## cybertect (Dec 11, 2008)

Out playing with cars in Hampshire last night


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 12, 2008)

Christchurch Park Ipswich taken this morning.


----------



## neonwilderness (Dec 14, 2008)




----------



## pogofish (Dec 14, 2008)




----------



## e19896 (Dec 14, 2008)

The other 60 Images..


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 14, 2008)




----------



## pogofish (Dec 15, 2008)




----------



## Hocus Eye. (Dec 16, 2008)

Hark, the Herald Angels...


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 16, 2008)




----------



## e19896 (Dec 16, 2008)




----------



## FunkyUK (Dec 16, 2008)

stowpirate said:


>


I like these... How have you processed them?


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 16, 2008)

FunkyUK said:


> I like these... How have you processed them?



I used equalization, levels and curves in Gimp

Here is one weird looking colour equalization


----------



## cybertect (Dec 16, 2008)

Pano of a gloomy December day in London, looking south from the Tower.





Click for the full sized image.


----------



## funky_sessions (Dec 16, 2008)

experimenting with smoke and a camera (plus some digital colouring in PS.)


----------



## LM17 (Dec 17, 2008)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lynne_mc/3114968493/

e2a: if someone can tell me how to make my picture appear like on the posts above, please PM me! Thanks


----------



## pogofish (Dec 17, 2008)

Just use image tags.

From Flickr when you are logged-in, click the "all sizes" button above the pic.  Choose the size you want to display then scroll down to "*2. Grab the photo's URL*" & copy the full adress in the box under that.

Now paste this addy into your Urban (or any other board's) post & stick an image tag at each end.  On here, they are simply *



* at the end.  Other boards may have a slightly different method - eg you might have to use caps but they are mostly similar

Then post it.


----------



## LM17 (Dec 17, 2008)

Cheers Pogofish! Here's some more...






and I took this one with my mobile, just as the battery died


----------



## Forkboy (Dec 17, 2008)

test shot with a home-made bokeh filter..


----------



## stowpirate (Dec 17, 2008)




----------



## Tankus (Dec 18, 2008)

HMS Belfast at dawn and night  








Charing cross bridge in the evening


----------



## neonwilderness (Dec 18, 2008)




----------



## e19896 (Dec 19, 2008)




----------



## cybertect (Dec 19, 2008)

Commodity Quay at St. Katharine Docks, London E1.

A planning application has recently been submitted to replace it with something more modern. 








A temporary hot dog stall doing business by Tower Bridge, London SE1. Possible entry in this month's compo


----------



## Forkboy (Dec 21, 2008)




----------



## stowpirate (Dec 21, 2008)




----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 23, 2008)

Buachaille Etive Mòr, Highlands


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 24, 2008)

]


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 24, 2008)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 24, 2008)




----------



## stowpirate (Dec 24, 2008)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 24, 2008)

The barbeque:


----------



## Herbsman. (Dec 25, 2008)

I shot this geezer with my professional studio setup and pro dSLR






















Then I woke up and realised I was shooting him with a Sony Ericsson k800i and a couple of tungsten lamps


----------



## pengaleng (Dec 25, 2008)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 25, 2008)




----------



## neonwilderness (Dec 25, 2008)

A few shots from today


----------



## Refused as fuck (Dec 25, 2008)




----------



## Dillinger4 (Dec 25, 2008)




----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 26, 2008)

neonwilderness said:


> A few shots from today
> 
> [ur


----------



## Dreadwear (Dec 26, 2008)

Here are some of my December photos:


----------



## TitanSound (Dec 26, 2008)

Took this from my brothers garden in Manchester earlier today on my N96. Lowered the exposure a bit an viola. Came out great for a phone camera methinks.


----------



## janeb (Dec 26, 2008)

Taken on Christmas day on Tynemouth beach, playing with new lens;


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 27, 2008)

I have to figure out how to lose that date...


----------



## Spion (Dec 27, 2008)

*On the beach today*


----------



## Spion (Dec 27, 2008)




----------



## Blagsta (Dec 27, 2008)




----------



## e19896 (Dec 28, 2008)




----------



## Herbsman. (Dec 28, 2008)

e19896 said:


>


Didn't you used to take shit photos? I've noticed yours are improving a lot


----------



## Herbsman. (Dec 28, 2008)

janeb said:


> Taken on Christmas day on Tynemouth beach, playing with new lens;


What lens is it?


----------



## ethel (Dec 28, 2008)

some of mine from this month...


----------



## ethel (Dec 28, 2008)

couple more:


----------



## e19896 (Dec 28, 2008)

Herbsman. said:


> Didn't you used to take shit photos? I've noticed yours are improving a lot



d20 cannon there all shit you fucker


----------



## Herbsman. (Dec 28, 2008)

no I remember when you first joined you posted some shit photos, then gradually they started to improve greatly. I noticed some really good ones on various photo comp threads


----------



## e19896 (Dec 28, 2008)

Herbsman. said:


> no I remember when you first joined you posted some shit photos, then gradually they started to improve greatly. I noticed some really good ones on various photo comp threads



But thanks a decent digital slr with good lenses helps..


----------



## Dillinger4 (Dec 29, 2008)




----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 29, 2008)




----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 29, 2008)

e19896 said:


> But thanks a decent digital slr with good lenses helps..



Nope I don't think it's this, it's about who's taking them - you have a really induvidual approach and a style that is definately yours.


----------



## snadge (Dec 29, 2008)

tom_craggs said:


>




Lovely, I've got one similar in mind when the weather and tides are up to it.


----------



## Herbsman. (Dec 29, 2008)

tom_craggs said:


> Nope I don't think it's this, it's about who's taking them - you have a really induvidual approach and a style that is definately yours.


A dslr definitely helps though - you dont have to wait til tomorrow to be able to see where you've gone wrong

I'm not saying dslr's turn people into good photographers, I'm saying people who have the mind and the eye to become good photographers will come good much faster with a dslr than an fslr


----------



## Herbsman. (Dec 29, 2008)

tom_craggs said:


>


fuck me. that's badd

print me an 18 x 12 man

seriously man get it framed and mounted and walled NOW


----------



## e19896 (Dec 29, 2008)

Not good with no flash or even with it, neither with people but i was asked by a friend to photo a singing workshop so with fear of i went and fuck i even surprised myself and i was hungover like a mother











This was a joy to do..


----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 29, 2008)

Herbsman. said:


> A dslr definitely helps though - you dont have to wait til tomorrow to be able to see where you've gone wrong
> 
> I'm not saying dslr's turn people into good photographers, I'm saying people who have the mind and the eye to become good photographers will come good much faster with a dslr than an fslr



Fair point, my percentage of decent ish shots has increased since using a dlsr more than film. Especially true on really long exposures where it can be a bit of trial and error to expose correctly.


----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 29, 2008)

Herbsman. said:


> fuck me. that's badd
> 
> print me an 18 x 12 man
> 
> seriously man get it framed and mounted and walled NOW



Thanks, and to you Snadge. To be honest it was a crap day for photography. I drove to Kilve on the North Somerset coast where there are some pretty amazing limestone pavements. Unfortunaely the sky was really flat and the tide was out meaning most of the pavements were about 100m from the water (not what I was looking for). I took two shots and went home. Just didn't feel right today.


----------



## tom_craggs (Dec 29, 2008)

Tried this in B&W, prefer the outcome I think;






and an old one from about 18 months ago, only just got around to processing it. FP4+, red filtered.


----------



## Paul Russell (Dec 29, 2008)




----------



## Blagsta (Dec 30, 2008)

*apols for the crossposting*


----------



## janeb (Dec 30, 2008)

Herbsman. said:


> What lens is it?



Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro Lens, an Xmas present


----------



## Padcore (Dec 30, 2008)

1st draft of a college Social photography presentation.  Shot outside and it was -4.  Bloody cold.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Dec 31, 2008)




----------



## Herbsman. (Dec 31, 2008)

I would have some pictures to upload from my new digital slr IF I had bothered to get out of bed when I heard someone knocking the door at 8:30 this morning. After staying up til 4:30 I wasn't in the mood to budge and besides I didn't actually believe that 7dayshop had sent the camera yet (they don't send confirmation e-mails). Now I'll have to wait 'til the 2nd of Jan to pick it up from the sorting office. FFS!!!!


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jan 1, 2009)

*FACE*


----------

