PLUS

womble

Joined: 11th September 2008

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

womble
I noticed that and wondered why but have always been too lazy to ask. The website's reporting of EXIF data is whacky, e.g., shutter speeds of 33333/100000 sec and so on.

K.

Comment by womble posted on f. stop V. Aperture value at 04/02/2010 - 20:10

womble
Sadly, I missed the focus back in 1982. The cat didn't hang around for a second attempt, I remember. I still have Mum's cheese plant!

Comment Image

Comment by womble posted on Slides to Digital. at 04/02/2010 - 09:13

womble
Thanks John, I should have noticed that. K.

Comment by womble posted on just bought a spotmatic at 04/02/2010 - 00:06

womble
Hot fuzz had me weeping with tears of laughter. Utterly ridiculous and hilarious.

Comment by womble posted on Top ten films at 03/02/2010 - 23:28

womble
hefty1 wrote:
Hyram wrote:
...something rare that hefty1 might own such as a Ferrari 275 GTB...
How I wish that were true!
I'm waiting to see Hefty's entry featuring his favourite Sonnar...

Comment by womble posted on Discussion on Fortnightly Competition # 35 - "Design Icon" at 03/02/2010 - 23:26

womble
It isn't always F8. On my Dell it is F8, on my netbook it is F4... Usually the symbol is a little screen like thing, or CRT/LCD.

Cheers, Kris.

Comment by womble posted on Slideshow Presentation at 03/02/2010 - 23:17

womble
The moon moves it's own diameter every two minutes hence the oval problem. In this picture the moon was behind me and I wanted the star trails to add to the night-time look. I actually had a problem finding a viewpoint where my shadow wasn't in the foreground!

For shots with the moon actually in the photograph, I think the only real way to get a decent shot is to create a composite with one image shot for all the foreground etc., and one with the moon correctly exposed. I have some shots from my night time walk home across the fields taken with that idea in mind but haven't had time to try my composite idea. It might just be pants LOL...

Best wishes, K.

Comment by womble posted on Long exposures, noise and cloning at 03/02/2010 - 23:14

womble
HP5 is a classic film, been around for an age (since 1976 in its original form) as has various incarnations of FP4 (since 196. TMax isn't grainy really, just not as fine as the Delta 100.

I've not used BW enough to really get a feel for the character of the various films. I used to use XP1 years ago which has the same developing process as colour print film so you can take it to the local snappy snaps. It also had the advantage of being able to push it to 1600 or above and still not be too grainy. It was replaced with XP2 (in 1991 I discover!) but I have never used it. At college when I was developing my own I stuck with FP4 and HP5. More recently, at the recommendation of the photographer at work, I have been using Delta 100 on site. (I just loaded 4 double sided dark slides with 5x4" Delta 100 so it will be interesting to see how they turn out.)

K.

Comment by womble posted on just bought a spotmatic at 03/02/2010 - 23:08

womble
Technoblurb wrote:
Boy that's a hard one to reduce to ten

1 North by North west
2 Leon
3 Lord of the rings
4 5th Element
6 Any Wallace and Gromit
7 The Mummy
8 Indiana Jones and the last crusade
9 Thunderball
10 The Dark Knight
Even more difficult if you leave out No. 5.

Comment by womble posted on Top ten films at 03/02/2010 - 22:49

womble
If you PM me your address I can send you a roll of Delta 100 as I have some spare.

K.

Comment by womble posted on just bought a spotmatic at 03/02/2010 - 22:33

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo