Windancer

Windancer

Lives in Canada Regina, SK., Canada
Works as a Photographer
Joined on Jan 1, 2003
About me:

My Nikon kit consists of:
Nikon D750. D700, D300, D200, D100, D70 digital bodies all c/w grips
F100, F3 and a FM Film bodies
Nikon 1 V2 c/w a 6.7-13, 10, 10-100 and a 70-300 lenses
Nikon FT-1
Nikkor 20/2.8 AF
Nikkor 24/2.8 AF
Nikkor 28/2.8 AF
Nikkor 35/2 AF
Nikkor 50/1.4 MF
Nikkor 50/1.8 AF
Nikkor 60/2.8 Micro AF
Nikkor 85/1.8 AF
Nikkor 105/2.8 Micro AF
Nikkor 180/2.8 AF
Nikkor 300/4 AFS
Nikkor 12-24/4 AF
Nikkor 17-35/2.8 AFS
Nikkor 17-55/2.8 AF
Nikkor 24-70/2.8 AF
Nikkor 70-200 /2.8 VRI AF
Nikkor 70-210/4~5.6 AF
Sigma 10-20/4.5~5.6 AF
Tamron 35-105/2.8 AF
Nikkor 105/2.5 AI
Nikkor 35/2.8 AI
Nikkor 70-150/3.5 Series E
Nikkor 20/3.5
Tamron 500/8
and several other lenses.

Comments

Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On challenge National Geographic (3 comments in total)

I do realize both sample images were horizontal, so as I said "Rightly or Wrongly" I may have interpreted the contest incorrectly.

Terry

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2016 at 23:06 UTC as 1st comment
On challenge National Geographic (3 comments in total)

With all due respect to every one that contributed here, there was many great images that were either Square or Landscape Orientation and rightly or wrongly I interpreted this to be a magazine cover shot, which would mean a Portrait Orientation, so my personal voting reflects this, which is not to say there wasn't an impressive array of horizontal shots.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2016 at 22:07 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

Windancer: This is such a controversial subject and whether you might be for or against it, I'm sure the results will be offensive to one side or the other.

Not at all just wondering why you chose this subject.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2016 at 03:39 UTC

This is such a controversial subject and whether you might be for or against it, I'm sure the results will be offensive to one side or the other.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2016 at 00:38 UTC as 8th comment | 3 replies
On challenge Dog challenge - Crop photo to a SQUARE (5 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom248: The beginning of 25 April GMT has come and gone, and can't enter!

I agree, try again, at this moment there is only 27 entries.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2016 at 17:55 UTC
On photo Aah... Refreshing! in the Macro - Taste challenge (3 comments in total)

Very good shot IMO....

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2016 at 17:17 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Reflection in the Abstract Tree Photo challenge (4 comments in total)

Awesome shot.......

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 00:06 UTC as 2nd comment
On challenge Lanscape Photo with a Minimalist Composition (6 comments in total)
In reply to:

LeeBic: Way to many entries in this challenge

I myself would agree but I am not the host. As someone else mentioned I also tend to view the entries full size so it is very time consuming. In this case I feel the first entries are at a bit of advantage because by the time you have reached 75 you are probably just looking at the thumbnails to vote. But here again I am not the host therefore I do not make the rules.

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 22:48 UTC
On challenge Kodak Ektar 100 (15 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photography201: Winddancer is not correct

learn to spell

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2016 at 01:59 UTC

Great shot.....

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 04:17 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On challenge Kodak Ektar 100 (15 comments in total)
In reply to:

Windancer: Just a small historical point, Kodak Ektar was originally released in 1989 but was re-released in September 2008 under the name Kodak EKTAR 100. I used it all through the '90's and was certainly a great film.

I don't think it is the same formulation, I'm pretty sure it has been improved. Just wanted to make you aware this film was around in the late 80's and early 90's. Shouldn't have said anything sorry.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2016 at 16:15 UTC
On challenge Kodak Ektar 100 (15 comments in total)
In reply to:

Windancer: Just a small historical point, Kodak Ektar was originally released in 1989 but was re-released in September 2008 under the name Kodak EKTAR 100. I used it all through the '90's and was certainly a great film.

Actually Kodak Ektar was available in both ISO 25 and 100 in 1989. Please refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ektar. I used it in one of my bodies for prints while the other one had slide film in it. I do not want to start an argument over something as trivial as this but I do know what I used. It has been rereleased in 2008.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 03:14 UTC
On challenge Kodak Ektar 100 (15 comments in total)

Just a small historical point, Kodak Ektar was originally released in 1989 but was re-released in September 2008 under the name Kodak EKTAR 100. I used it all through the '90's and was certainly a great film.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2016 at 18:08 UTC as 6th comment | 5 replies
On photo Old One Room Schoolhouse in the Abandoned Building challenge (6 comments in total)

Thanks everyone for voting and all the kind words, this one room schoolhouse is located about 16 miles west of Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada. Go to: http://www.pbase.com/windancer/image/133637887 and click on view map and it will show you.
Unfortunately a roof and glass in the windows will probably never happen as this building is left as is.

Link | Posted on Mar 23, 2016 at 19:28 UTC as 3rd comment
On challenge Abstract Silhouette Photo (18 comments in total)
In reply to:

Windancer: So please explain to me and everyone else, why "Valencia's Albufera" (sorry to the OP to use this photo) is different to my photo. I realize this is your challenge and you make the rules but IMO you lack any sort of integrity.

It really isn't and do admire the people that come forth and host a contest because as you said it is a no win situation. I agree very few are abstracts, I guess what I am trying to get across is the definitions and rules need to be laid out better. I will say thank you to Bill Thoo and hope he continues.

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2016 at 15:19 UTC
On challenge Abstract Silhouette Photo (18 comments in total)

So please explain to me and everyone else, why "Valencia's Albufera" (sorry to the OP to use this photo) is different to my photo. I realize this is your challenge and you make the rules but IMO you lack any sort of integrity.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2016 at 16:59 UTC as 2nd comment | 2 replies
On challenge Abstract Silhouette Photo (18 comments in total)

I do agree with you, Bhimaprasad Maiti probably shouldn't of posted in this thread, but his point is quite valid, you choice of disqualifications is iffy at best. As I am typing this I am looking at a photo that is so similar to mine, it is uncanny, yet that photo is not disqualified. All I am saying is use some common sense in your challenges.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2016 at 16:52 UTC as 3rd comment
On challenge Abstract Silhouette Photo (18 comments in total)

Hmmm.......my entry of silhouetted posts against the ocean was disqualified, yet several other images that are very similar weren't. Not sure I understand the host's logic. I certainly understand this is only for fun and there is no prize for a winning shot, just the same a host of a challenge should have some integrity.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2016 at 04:34 UTC as 6th comment | 9 replies
On challenge Macro - A Sharp Point (4 comments in total)

Just so every one is on the same page, this is gleaned fro the Wikipedia site:

Macro photography, is extreme close-up photography, usually of very small subjects, in which the size of the subject in the photograph is greater than life. By some definitions, a macro photograph is one in which the size of the subject on the negative or image sensor is life size or greater. However, in other uses it refers to a finished photograph of a subject at greater than life size. The ratio of the subject size on the film plane (or sensor plane) to the actual subject size is known as the reproduction ratio. Likewise, a macro lens is classically a lens capable of reproduction ratios of at least 1:1, although it often refers to any lens with a large reproduction ratio, despite rarely exceeding 1:1. In the digital age, a "true" macro photograph can be more practically defined as a photograph with a vertical subject height of 24 mm or less.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 17:00 UTC as 1st comment
On challenge Macro - Colours! (6 comments in total)

Just so every one is on the same page, this is gleaned fro the Wikipedia site:

Macro photography, is extreme close-up photography, usually of very small subjects, in which the size of the subject in the photograph is greater than life. By some definitions, a macro photograph is one in which the size of the subject on the negative or image sensor is life size or greater. However, in other uses it refers to a finished photograph of a subject at greater than life size. The ratio of the subject size on the film plane (or sensor plane) to the actual subject size is known as the reproduction ratio. Likewise, a macro lens is classically a lens capable of reproduction ratios of at least 1:1, although it often refers to any lens with a large reproduction ratio, despite rarely exceeding 1:1. In the digital age, a "true" macro photograph can be more practically defined as a photograph with a vertical subject height of 24 mm or less.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2016 at 16:44 UTC as 2nd comment
Total: 56, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »