[Gorian]

aaaand.... now that's stuck in my head all day. Thanks B9, people be looking at me like I'm even MORE crazy...

[modi123_1]

This is my snowflake carpet. There are many like it, but this one is mine. My snowflake carpet is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my snowflaklaiasm.

Also.. this kid is now mine. There are many like it, but this one is mine...

[ge∅]

OK, I understand the feeling. Photographers feel the same about amateurs saying that with enough megapixels and auto-settings anyone can take a good photograph...

I was talking to ArtificialSoldier (I always open hundreds of tabs before actually reading the pages XD)

This post has been edited by ge∅: 27 April 2015 - 11:21 AM

[NeoTifa]

Picture quality-wise, yeah, but artistically, no.

[jon.kiparsky]

ge∅, on 27 April 2015 - 01:18 PM, said:

OK, I understand the feeling. Photographers feel the same about amateurs saying that with enough megapixels and auto-settings anyone can take a good photograph...

Speaking as a photographer, people who talk about megapixels are not taking photographs. Photography requires a darkroom.

[depricated]

I like screwing with photographers by mispronouncing photography as "photo-graph-y"

also, the speedometer is "speed-o-meter"

also elect-ro-meter, odo-meter (I imagine this a thing that measures Changelings - my car seems to attract them), etc.

[ge∅]

It's frustrating, I have no idea how you pronounce those words and why it's funny

In French we call "fauxtographe" ("faux" means "false", it's pronounced the same as the proper word for photographer) people who pretend to be photographers and convince girls to remove their clothes for the sake of art

The thing about megapixels is that even quality-wise, the more is not necessarily the better : if you have many tiny pixels (as in an iPhone) on your sensor, they are very close to each other so it produces interferences, they are not as sensitive to light as bigger photosensors, so you have to amplify the signal, which produces noise that you need to smooth out, and the very small size of the photosensors also causes diffraction...

So really, even quality-wise, it's a misconception ; a lot of megapixels can actually mean a terrible image quality that looks great on a retina display but rubbish on paper and on desktop screens. Moreover, if you don't know how to manage the shutter speed and aperture, you can lose a lot of light, which will require amplification to balance the exposure and make things even worse.

Not to mention as you said the artistic value, the way you compose your image, your understanding of lights, shadows, colours, the way you lead your model, etc.

I never blame beginners for saying such things because there is no way they can realise that. You need to have some experience, you need to see a real photographer working. It's the same thing for many professions. You don't know that you don't know.

This post has been edited by ge∅: 27 April 2015 - 02:49 PM

[hbn.developer]

I was inspired by seeing the movie "the social network".
from that day,i realized i am meant to code!

[depricated]

ge∅, on 27 April 2015 - 03:32 PM, said:

It's frustrating, I have no idea how you pronounce those words and why it's funny />

Don't mean to frustrate. It's just emphasizing the words in an unusual way. It's not like Faux<->Pho where there's a new meaning, just that instead of pho-tog-ra-phy it's pho-to-graph-y, spee-dom-eter becomes speed-o-meter, etc. It's just funny to me because it makes people double take the word and be like "no. yes. wait, what?"

It's also useful for identifying assholes who will try to take advantage when they think you don't know something. Refer to your Odo-meter and then see how the mechanic reacts.

hbn.developer, on 28 April 2015 - 06:02 AM, said:

I was inspired by seeing the movie "the social network".
from that day,i realized i am meant to code!

I'm glad the movie amounted to something then! I still haven't seen it. But I'm not big fan of "Zuck" so eh.

[cp24eva]

[/quote]
I'm glad the movie amounted to something then! I still haven't seen it. But I'm not big fan of "Zuck" so eh.
[/quote]

Not that I am going for or against Zuck, but what did you have against him?

[astonecipher]

I dislike him because, like many other successful projects, he wasn't the only one involved. But, he took the credit.


Kind of like Jobs, he didn't create Apple, just marketed it very well.

[no2pencil]

Never seen it myself either.

[hbn.developer]

You should check it out.the hacking scene where zuckerberg created facemash is the best one!
Download it,you won't regret it!

[depricated]

Not liking something is not the same as disliking it.

[hbn.developer]

astonecipher, on 28 April 2015 - 06:02 AM, said:

I dislike him because, like many other successful projects, he wasn't the only one involved. But, he took the credit.


Kind of like Jobs, he didn't create Apple, just marketed it very well.

He was smarter than the others.
if he continued working on "harvard connection",facebook would've never been created.
if you think about it,you will know that he made the right choice.