![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
I'd like to see fellow audiophiles/photographers images.....I just found this forum (better late than never......). Cool.
Follow Ups:
Some of mine are online at the web site below. See 10/20/01, 04/28/02, 10/20/02 collections. Recreational amateur efforts, but I enjoyed taking them.
Mines is at http://www.vermillionstudios.com
Here's a link to my site. I'll make it a bit slicker soon.
Andrew
I don't have access to my site anymore, so nothing new, but here's a
few. I see a couple of the jpeg files aren't there. Scroll down to click to the black and whites. I used to do a photo of the week every week. That was fun.n
Excellent photo's Chris, what equipment do you use?
Sony SCD-777ES > Silver Audio SB 4.0 > AI M3A > Silver Audio Hyacinth > Odyssey Stratos > Tice 416A biwire > MG 1.6 QR
Chris, I really like your photos. I hope you don't mind that I am using your photos as backgrounds on my computers at home and work. I wish you had some higher resolution photos posted ...Thanks for sharing your work. :> )
Bob
Not in one place anywhere, but a few are tucked in various photo forums. This one is from the 'Windows 2000 Board', no relation to Macrostiff Corp...
nt
It's not fancy, but here is a link to a couple pages that have my work posted on them:
Jim Couch
Very nice. One thing I did notice is that your jpeg files are WAY to big for the size images you have posted. You might want to compress them down to about 40 kb so the page loads quicker. What kind of software are you using. Perhaps I can help?Some of my images: http://www.geocities.com/venhaus1/index.html
Just got done looking at your images, very nice as well!Were the B&W shots taken with B&W film or converted after scanning?
Jim Couch
Hi Jim. Thanks. These shots were converted after scanning. Originally shot on Fuji Provia F and channel mixer in PS was used to convert to B&W.
Thanks!I am using Adobe Photodeluxe 2.0. I am rather new to the digital image thing, so any help you could provide would be great. Feel free to contact me via e-mail.
Jim Couch
Gimme email, I can point you at some.
JJ
I see you boys don't pay much attention to the systems pages.
What cave is that? Thanks.
I said y'all, NO TEXT.
Chris,Alas, no "fun stuff" online though all the photos from the CES/T.H.E. Show, the 43 Annual Grammy Awards and also the nyNOISE were taken with the new Canon D30. CAVEOT: Used the on-unit flash for the CES/T.H.E. Show and Grammys, and the Canon 550EX for the nyNOISE. Saddly, no time for fun photography... A pity as i live in one of the most photogrphically friendly parts of New England :-( . Show reports can be accessed at the link below. i DO have some killer NONPUBLISHED photos of Smashmouth at the Hard Rock Cafe. To me this is where the fun is at :-) . If there is enough demand i may post a few of the Smashmouth photos on the web.
Enjoy the music,
Steven R. Rochlin
nt
Steve, by all means post the Smashmouth photos! The Grammy Awards photos at your site look very nice, by the way - I especially liked the performance shot of Blue Man Group, whose contibution to the Moby number knocked me out. And I usually don't like Moby at all!
Dude,Ok, i have BRIEFLY posted a page with some photos. The page will "self-destruct" in about a week. ALL photos are NOT "retouched" other than to make them more "web friendly" as the raw files are HUGE and at this time it best not to release full resolution photos. What you are seeing is therefore a bit smaller/compressed though NO image editing (other than some small cropping on a few photos, but not all).
Enjoy the music,
Steven R. Rochlin
nt
.........make them more "web friendly" as the raw files are HUGE.....
Your photos at 2160x1440 pixels are what us Aussies would call huge on our little 17" monitors. I would have thought 800x600 pixels were more web friendly. After scrolling the photos around in my web browser to see it all, the sharpness is incredible for a stage lit shot the camera & lenses must be really good (as is the photographer, but I'm not going to tell you that, if you're from Texas) hehe.
What size lens did you use? I'm told that digital cameras have a large depth of field; does this apply on 300mm & above?
Great photos Steve thanks for posting them
regards rod
Rod,> > > ..Your photos at 2160 x 1440 pixels are what us Aussies would call huge on our little 17" monitors. I would have thought 800 x 600 pixels were more web friendly. < < <
Well, those are 100% pixels on the 2160 x 1440 BUT have nasty ol' jpg compression (level 7 or 8 on Adobe Photoshop). (Said in good humor) If ya want i can send you the 4+ MB EACH raw files :-)
> > > After scrolling the photos around in my web browser to see it all, the sharpness is incredible for a stage lit shot the camera & lenses must be really good (as is the photographer, but I'm not going to tell you that, if you're from Texas) hehe. < < <A most humble thanks. Actually i am from norther US, though have travelled so much guess i am not "from" anywhere as am ALWAYS going TO somewhere else. US, UK, Germany, Italy, Singapore, South America, Switzerland, France... It's all good dude so long as there's food, women and cigars AND MOST IMPORTANT... fast cars and music.
> > > What size lens did you use? I'm told that digital cameras have a large depth of field; does this apply on 300mm & above? < < <As the Canon D30 is now my mainstay, there are two key lenses employed. The 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM and the 70-200 f/2.8L USM. Needless to say, the 70-200L is an awesome lens. While it lacks IS (image stabilization) the lower f allows for a faster shutter speed. The 28-135 gives GOBS of depth in the 28 region of course... then again so does the 70-200. All depends... It comes down to the lighting and subject matter and effect/depth/etc desired, your shutter speed, the lens opening... This separates those "point n' shooters" from those looking for a more flexible solution.
> > > Great photos Steve thanks for posting them < < <BTW: i left some of the photos large as a friend who i gave permission to print out at 5x7 and also 8x10. He said at 8x10 it was still very usable, though 5x7 is where i'd peg the jpg COMPRESSED photos at MAXIMUM. Some OTHER photos of the Grammy Awads not seen anywhere yet will appear in the next issue of Ultimate Audio magazine.
Enjoy the music (Godsmack "Whatever" at kinda loud volume levels right now. NOT directed to you, just feel like rasing a bit of h-ll today. End of the month and all)"
Steven R. Rochlin
"And I wonder day to day
I don't like you anyway
I don't need your sh-t today
Your pathetic in your own way
I feel for you
Better f--kin' go away
I will behave
Better f--kin' go awayI'm doing the best I ever did
I'm doing the best that I can
I'm doing the best I ever didI don't need to fantasize
You are my pets all the time
I don't mind if you go blind
You get what you get
Until you're through with my lifeI feel for you
Better f--kin' go away
I will behave
You better go away
I feel for you
Better f--kin' go away
I will behave
You better go away
I'm doing the best I ever did
I'm doing the best that I can
I'm doing the best I ever did
Now go away
I'm doing the best I ever did
I'm doing the best that I can
I'm doing the best I ever did
Now go away..."
PS: Please be kind as there is no luxury for studio lighting, outdoor lighting and proper reflectors to reduce/eliminate showdowing, scene choice by me nor stationary objects (usually) in my "fun" photos. These are on the go, hard lighting conditions (usually), movin' n' shakin' folks. Under perfect studio conditions (or at least outdoor lighting and filters) things would be better. The photos are "as is" and no real editing (as stated in my previous posting).Enjoy the music,
Steven R. Rochlin
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: