Xavier

Nice Some bits I do find a bit distracting, if I may say so: I like the expression and lighting in the first, but there's hardly any contrast between the wallpaper and the bra so it looks like someone's taken an axe and chopped a bit of ribs off, just above the left elbow. Really like the second . It's only how the light catches her left hand's fingernails that make it look a bit monster / vampiresque. But hey, with the slight "man hands", makes it more interesting

I cannot thank you enough, Fluff. Just what I needed tonight. Quality rock and quality pr0n, what more could one ask for?

Good point, Iain. Another thing to bear in mind using older lenses - I'm not sure what bodies this applies to with Canon, but the real low end Nikon bodies don't have a screw drive in the body to drive the focus mechanism in the lens. Only the newer AF-S lenses will autofocus on the low end Nikon bodies. AF lenses can still be used, and they can still be focussed manually, just not auto. Any mid-range body upwards will have the screw drive in the body enabling autofocus on AF only lenses. Not sure if this is also the case with Canon Having said that, with Nikon, you can use just about any old lens that's F mount. "Ai" lenses (which aren't autofocus) work great and it's brilliant to use a 40-year old lens and get that "old" quality to it Although again, with these lenses, you don't get light metering on the low end bodies. Not that it matters too much with digital as you can always take the shot again

Thanks Lee. 2, 7, 12 & 13 were taken with 24-70/2.8 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 & 10 were taken with vr 70-200/2.8 8 & 11 were taken with 85/1.4 Cheers Andy. A few more... 14. Heavily photoshopped to remove an arm on the left... 15. 16. 17. Taken with flash off camera and cheap wide angle Tamron at 17mm 18.

Love the war art and that Verhees is cool. Kind of like a Smart aeroplane although with the sound of its two-stroke engine, I would probably want to fly-swot it at some point

I'd be coming along, but I have a Christening I've been commissioned to shoot :(

Thanks mate D700, D200, AF-S 24-70/2.8, AF-S VR 70-200/2.8 and the AF 85/1.4D I took some wide angle stuff with a cheap Tamron 17-35 which are good (finding a cheap wide angle lens compatible with full frame camera isn't easy!), but didn't post any of the photos

Good stuff. Love the flying dolphins

Ahhhh, nice pics, Loz. Reminds me of our Skoda trip there

As Buster said, there are many manufacturers and models out there. Don't be hung up on a Canon. I'm not saying Canon are bad, all models and manufacturers have their pros and cons. If it's not a "surprise" and she knows she'll be getting a camera, I'd go to your local photo store / Jessops, and have a play. The ergonomics and feel mean an awful lot in terms of usability and satisfaction. Of course, there are technical elements, but whilst a entry level dSLR from any manufacturer will have similar features and performance, one might feel fantastic to hold, yet another may be terrible.

Still haven't ditched my day job... But... Last Saturday saw my first ever proper paid photoshoot - a work colleague was having her daughter's 4th birthday party at her house. Knowing her well through work was a big courage booster, but when I turned up, I hadn't realised quite how many people were going to be there. The back garden had been transformed into a playground with a trampoline and a huge bouncy castle :eek: Still, took around 400 odd photos over the afternoon and spent a good few hours on Sunday going through them all, deleting ones I didn't like and tweaking those I deemed acceptable. Finally posted about 130 online and after an initial scare because I hadn't had any feedback, it turns out the whole family is delighted and they can't choose which ones they like, so may well get a whole load of 5x7 and then select a smaller number of big prints... So very happy. link to pics in photo/ps area: http://briskoda.net/photography-photoshop/my-first-paid-photo-shoot-4-year-olds-birthday-party/157408/

A few from my first proper assignment. Other thread here: http://briskoda.net/roadside-hotel/i-survived-my-first-pro-photo-session-4yo-birthday-party/157409/ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Ahh no problem Rob. Just checked my price list, and it would have been hard to compete with that Samsung

The reason I'd chose something not apple is not because I'm a "hater", it is purely because ipods sound carp I'd happily chose an ipod if (a) they actually were good quality MP3 players and ( I didn't have to resort to using itunes. OK, there's a workaround for (, but I just don't like having to jump through hoops. FWIW, Sony used to be the same But they've finally cottoned on that versatility and openess is better than bible-bashing atheists

Rob, I'll have a look at what I can get you

Buster, I suppose you've fully familiar with the basic variables you have to play with when taking photos - shutter speed and aperture. Play around with the camera, taking your time to shoot in aperture priority and shutter priority. Learn how to quickly adjust the settings and changing from one mode to another. Taking full control of what the camera is doing is what will get you learning fastest and seeing improvement quickly As for landscape, I'm no landscape photographer by any means, but I would take photos stopped down a fair bit (more closed aperture, higher f stop number). Not only will this give you a longer depth of field, but will also give better sharpness. A tripod can help and will be essential if you want to do night time stuff. But my belief (again having zero experience apart from some night time stuff) is that the most dramatic landscape shots are achieved with some post processing to give you more extreme levels of colour, contrast, etc. HDR is a simple example So in that sense, a good photo package is rather handy. If you don't want the expense of PS up front, you can get Gimp which is 100% free and the interface is similar. If you want PS, you can get a trial version for 30 days I think it is. Loz, thanks for the compliment, but I'd still tip my hat off to Scuff first

Not trying to stir things up here but is there any reason you'd want itunes if you didn't have an ipod? Every time I've tried to use it, it's taken control of my PC and I just can control how it manages my music :(

I also hate ipods. To be fair, I haven't used one in ages, but the last time I did, the sound quality was awful. The old HDD-based Sony player I had at the time was just sooooo much better. However, you had to use Sonicstage and then later Connect to use it. And, well, that software was even more abysmal than itunes Fortunately, Sony and other brands have recognised this and also realise that some people such as a few here and myself have allergic reactions to itunes and so have developped their players to act as mass storage devices. Nothing better than just having a drive appear where you can drag and drop your music. With the latest gen Sony walkmans, you still have the choice of synching with WMP too, so best of both worlds I'm glad to see that sound quality is still pants :P Now I have my new Sony, I just love it to bits. The interface is maybe not as good as the jog wheel on the ipod, but I spend more time listening and appreciating the quality of the music than I do spinning the frikkin jog wheel I find it interesting that the "inferior" product has the market share...

Worked a treat, thanks! Also good in that you can make the distinction between what hasn't been filled in and what's incorrect

I've set up a table to check that a number in cell A1 is the same as the sum of all cells A3 to A10. If that it so, then A2 says "OK". If A1 <> SUM(A3:A10), then A2 says "ERR". So in A2, I have the formula: =IF(A1=SUM(A3:A10),"OK","ERR") So far, so good. However, it also says OK if row A1 and A3 to A10 are empty, i.e. those cells haven't been filled in, which I want to avoid because it's a long table, and far too easy to have missed a row out. So I've been looking at ways of checking whether cells are empty, etc, and there are functions such as ISBLANK, but I can't seem to get that checking for a range of cells. So, how would you do it?

Great stuff Ian Please let me know next time you go to one of these. I'll want to come along

I bought a dirty thirty a year or so ago and have been immensely pleased with it. The focus is spot on and it's really sharp, even at f/1.4. And they have nice bokeh - good guitar shot, Andy The only downside of it is that it is a DC lens, so no good for full frame 35mm or FX sensors and that's why I'm not using it much at the moment. I've been toying with changing it for the 50mm f/1.4. The Sigma has better bokeh than the Nikon, but probably not as sharp at the edges IIRC. KR is like marmite. You love him or hate him

No worries. Just had a PM back from him. He's checking things out and will confirm either way tomorrow BTW, do you know what italic usernames mean on scn? You're in italic and I'm not :grumpy:

Jason, I got a PM from a chap on seatcupra.net who's really interested to go with a mate of his, so that would fill up the two spaces. He's asked for more details, but I did post a link to the threads here so confused what more he'd want to know, unless he needs to sign up to see this section :confused: Anyway, will reply to his PM and let you know if any more happens

Apparently, Make your own photo book with Blurb is very good, but may be a bit pricier than photobox. I haven't used either for book services, but have read about of loads of others who've used blurb and have been pleased with the result.