|
Forum: Sold Items
02-16-2019, 03:02 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: General Photography
05-16-2018, 05:53 PM
|
| |
Full time Texas police officer here. Serial numbers are vital, unless you have something REALLLLLY distinctive to a lay person. SN's are very easy to track, for instance anything pawned will have it's SN checked. If you find what you believe is your stuff for sale on CL, etc. please do not go meet them in an attempt to setup a "sting." Call your case agent/detective as soon as you realize that it's your stuff, and let them handle working it. The self initiated sting never goes well. Followup in as timely a manner as possible with your case agent/detective if they need info etc. Be aware the odds of catching the actual burglar and prosecuting are minimal, usually you'll end up catching the 4-5th person down the line who bought stuff with very few questions intending to flip it.
Lastly if you have insurance, a lot of times the insurance company has some very weird clauses about what happens if they pay out and your stuff is recovered. It would pay to check that before you file a claim.
Feel free to shoot me a PM if you have any questions.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
05-15-2018, 07:08 PM
|
| |
I'd say unless you're bitten by the FF bug, or are going to be planning on doing large fine art prints the KP is probably a better choice. Additionally the form factor on the KP is a little different then the standard Pentax bodies (K1, K3, K5, etc) so you probably should get some hands on time with it before you commit to it. That is however just my two cents.
|
|
Forum: Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom
05-15-2018, 06:59 PM
|
| |
If you're smart about how you have things arranged in the bag then yes you can remove your arms. For instance you can place the film inside the tank without it being spooled on the reel, put the lid on, and you're good to go (over whatever you need to do with your tank to make it light tight). Now just yanking your arms out, that's a no go.
|
|
Forum: Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom
05-14-2018, 03:57 PM
|
| |
I picked up a Eastman Kodak Day-Load device a while back, it only does 35mm. Once you have the leader retrieved, you simply thread it in into a plastic spiral that's part of the device, and start turning. It even includes a cutter to cut the film from the cassette once it's loaded. You do have to turn the knob pretty much the entire time you're developing, but it's not a huge deal. I've thought about buying a lego mindstorm or kinetic kit and rigging up something to do it for me, but I try not to be that lazy.
Mine was mid century production (I want to say 1956), and worked great. If you only need to develop one roll, it works quite well. If you've got 4 or 5 to do, then not so much, but that could be said of small single or double roll tanks too.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-13-2018, 01:13 PM
|
| |
Several years before I got into photography, and back when digital point and shoots were still the option for "casual" photography, my brother in law got married. A relative of the bride is a rather well known NYC theater director (as in Broadway), and she pulled some favors and had a wedding photographer from NYC come up to Alaska to do the wedding. He showed up with what to my untrained at the time eye, looked exactly like my digital point and shoot, and I wondered what made him so special. Not gonna lie, the photos from the wedding were amazing. After looking up his website, he starts at $10K for weddings (and you pay travel and room and board for destination weddings). I to this day don't have a clue what he shot the wedding on, but it always makes me think twice when I see someone with a "casual" camera wandering around.
I think that with most (well in excess of 95%) of all photos viewed on mobile devices there isn't much incentive for the "casual" consumer to go FF. It's sort of like newspaper photography back in the day, I don't recall exactly what I read, but supposedly something like anything over 3 MP was useless as they didn't print in a resolution high enough for it to matter. Very few people when swiping through IG/FB/etc are stopping to zoom in on a photo, they are glancing and going. Sort of like when you flipped through 4x6's when you picked up your 35mm film.
For certain applications like advertising, high end digital rendering, etc, I can see there being a push for FF, same with digital medium format. However I think we're well past the point where the "average" photo viewer can't tell, and doesn't care about sensor size and resolution.
|
