'Bag for life' reinforced with corn husks and gorilla tape.
Think 'what would Behr Grylls do'
iPh0to: Why somebody would pick this up over a similar priced proper daypack like the f-stop Guru is beyond me. All those straps hanging ready to get snagged by a branch. Judging from the photo, there's no frame and hip support.
Guru looks to have mesh side pockets.Those catch things, too.If you are in an area with so many branches..
I just tuck in any extra of strap snugged down. When I have been in an area of tight branches (scrub tree or rhododendron) I find that all kinds of crap gets caught. Any top pocket on pack, space between me and pack... not just a strap.
I try to not go to places like that.Too scary thinking of the mandrake root.
Ozyxy: who took the photo in the #11 slide? It's a great photo!
Mama, don't take my henna hand away.
TSeiler: I do not see the problem with this move. SI will still offer fantastic photography from stock photos and the photographers will have no problem finding another job.
Likely ironical.I know I was being so :^)
Although.. honestly... I probably could be shown pictures from 2012, told they were the game last week, and never catch on :^|
The photographers are laid off but the magazine will still need photos.
By laying these guys off, the magazine pays no benefits/tax.The photographers become independent contractors and pick up their own health insurance and pay additional tax to be self employed.
The magazine will not sever business relations and start using mobile pics :^)This is about costs for benefits and travel expense.
The only way they will not continue doing business with SI is if they ask prices that are too much even for their well recognized work. They will still get the better shots (based on comments below) and sell them to someone.
Well, sure. Stock photos are fine. Sports Illustrated Lite for the people not really interested in sports.
One picture of a guy catching a ball could be used every several issues and I would never know. Flip it horizontal, rotate it a bit. Sell it to sports illumi-not-eh.
Deardorff: OK guys, show me where Steiglitz, Adams, Cartier-Bresson ever wrote that they photographed with "analogue" or "analog".It is as asinine as digIdiots who say their prints are "carbon" when hand poured carbon print are so far removed from what they produces as to be comparing horses and mosquitoes for herding cattle.
I did black and white stuff years ago. The only 'silver' I remember is silver halide treated with developer. I would need explanation of 'silver gelatin' as well :^|
I was offered this link by a.. confidential source. :^)Carbon print: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl5FK7PTkFw
I don't recall seeing a winning photo that has no 1/2 or 1 star votes.
That says as much, or more, than winning.
yonsarh: I only use filter when using expensive lenses, but for lenses under 500$ or 300$, I don't use filter. If it is high quality lens, lens protection is needed. I don't use lens hood because of vignetting.
Lens hoods on expensive lens vignette ?All lens hoods vignette ?
Lens hoods are annoying.
BadScience: "pro" filters are to photography what monster cables are to hifi.
Argue the toss :^)
I have also used clear filter for sand in SW
Gesture: Or you can make your own for $5.
You know, I understand that is possible :^)
There was no need to differentiate between film and a thing that didn't exist at the time.
Growing up, I never specified a type of bulb for lighting household interiors. If it wasn't shaped like a long tube (or some circular tubes), it was just a 'light bulb'. Now, it isn't uncommon to call the same bulb an 'incandescent' to separate it from 'compact florescent' or 'LED' that are all found in houses. I knew the old bulbs were incandescent but no reason to call them that...
I get the point of your simile, but I wonder if a sufficiently thick cloud of mosquitoes couldn't herd cattle..? Maybe mosquitoes with nano-implants could be coordinated to corral cattle. Put the little buzzards to work :^|
+ what are carbon prints ?is that what some people call.. prints now?they are 'carbon' because they are on paper and can be held?
if so, that is silly. well, 'affected' more than silly. they mean to highlight the difference between the digital and carbon.. realms ?
Stephen123: Could be a way to sell Marumi filters to people who don’t know the name Marumi.
Except if they’re rebranded, why do they not have the rest of the sizes?
There is still a cost in changing things enough to change the appearance.
I figure they went with sizes they think most popular.Things go well and they can add sizes.
Tan68: Interesting that they want to try filters...I don't think they have offered filters before..?
The name may be more recognizable to some customers than other established filter providing companies. So, this should help them sell...? The names of their tiers is clear enough.
'Manfrotto' always makes me think of an Italian film star.'Bogen' was fun to say :^|
Mine was stamped 'Bogen by Manfrotto'
The two girls on the left appear more limber than the young fellow on the right. Still, looks like he is having fun reaching for the feet :^)
Deardorff: We use FILM, not 'analog'. Get it right. You have never in your life gone into a store and bought a sheet of roll of analog for a camera. NEVER.
For watches with hands, it is counter-intuitive to me the difference between the types that are digital and the types that are analog...
LensBeginner: Wow, so much hate without even having tried one, or seen some pics...
Sometimes I think I'm stupid because everybody else must be a real genius to be able to judge a product without having even seen it...
You're not stupid, of course. You do appear to be patient.This is very much a 'that -1' threadLots of negative here...
If the film can be considered analog.. okay.
The ad mentions the camera uses 'film'.They do not say the camera uses 'analog'.
They are targeting analog fans. Fans of film, in this case... Camera uses film, targets analog fans. This is not a conflict.
If anything, people should be up the ropes about being called 'analog'.
I figure they mean they are targeting fans of analog imaging but they, in fact, target analog fans. That is just wrong.
AstroStan tells us everything is is really digital in the end (forgive me the simplification; it is over my head) so calling the fans analog is the really silly thing that has happened here.
SeeRoy: "...high-end goods designed to appeal to the five senses..."Sic.
You don't taste your gear ?
RuthC: This is a great shot, but where are the leaves? The title and theme of this challenge is 'Autumn leaves and Water'. Here the subject is a boat, on water, with reflected colours from trees some distance away. No leaf is actually visible.
The water could have been more still and that would have helped, I think. I have seen some water still enough to be glass...
If Chris had focused on a still and glassy water, it is possible the leaves may have been each visible. Maybe if the day had less wind/breeze, the picture would be more suitable. Leaves reflected in a mirror (or suitably still water) should be okay for the challenge.
The trouble with individual leaf definition would still exist, but that is the same trouble found in the image of the valley.