Another one from Saturday.
Strait' outta Compt-- camera.
Strait' outta Compt-- camera.
One shot from earlier today with this fine lady.
Straight outta camera btw.
Straight outta camera btw.
If you enjoy HL2 it's cool.
However we populate the same world and my personal quality standards say that you shouldn't be drooling and celebrating when an obese dude craps out a turd that was supposed to be a sequel to a legendary game.
Besides, having no Looking Glass in the Top 3 pretty much shows that kids don't know nothing about good games or studios that lead the way.
However we populate the same world and my personal quality standards say that you shouldn't be drooling and celebrating when an obese dude craps out a turd that was supposed to be a sequel to a legendary game.
Besides, having no Looking Glass in the Top 3 pretty much shows that kids don't know nothing about good games or studios that lead the way.
I'm sorry but HL2 was just as much a linear experience. And worse, none of it made any sense what so ever. In HL1 you were on a mission to get out from a hostile place - that's it. In HL2 you arrived to a city overrun with idiotic, passive, please-Gordon-save-us-allies and enemies that posed NO threat and I'm suppose to care? HL2 was a snooze fest, end of story kiddies.
It had no 'story'. All HL2 told you were random places with either no connection to each other what so ever or stuff dropped from another game. Ravenholm ffs!! And the physics puzzle crap repeated time after time, pointless driving episodes and fighting against same stupid choppers or walkers that - once again - were just a backdrop you walked over. Combine super soldiers that died when you sneezed at them? HL1 had proper AI special forces that hunted and killed you much more easily.
Granted HL1 had no characters. But no characters is better than HL2 versions of stereotypical and flat as paper characters that were either annoying or instantly forgettable.
Wonder why HL2 plot was easy to follow?
Pro-tip: It had no plot, just random stuff happening.
If you honestly say HL2 was one of the greatest games of all time you pretty much admit you don't know much about video game history or dramaturgy.
I'm sorry, I'm an expert and your arguments are invalid.
Last edited by spankmeyer, .
Half-Life 2 was one of the biggest letdowns but of course the juniors never even played HL 1 in the first place.
Looking Glass was the best game house by the way.
Looking Glass was the best game house by the way.
Son, have you seen any streams here lately?
It's like Jesus walked in was like 'yo, woke up from the dead, here's a mixed grid for ya btw lol'.
Pffff check out what kind of head turners we have here in Finland.
That is pretty damn funky. The white body could maybe use some more highlights (couple of strobe blinks from the back?) but very futuristic indeed.
That is pretty damn funky. The white body could maybe use some more highlights (couple of strobe blinks from the back?) but very futuristic indeed.
Last edited by spankmeyer, .
Look what you made me do!
Promised myself not to write a blog but damnit let's try dis.
Btw here's some live shots from January. Had completely forgot ever shooting this night.
Last edited by spankmeyer, .
No, it's not that simple.
Try it, load a JPG into Lightroom and voilá - your colours do not change.
Loading a RAW into LR (or Bridge/PS as they all use the same ACR converter) first loads the camera-embedded preview image (on which camera histograms are based, some manufacturer displays histograms on RAW data for more accuracy but can't remember which one). Then ACR discards the preview and runs the RAW data through it's converter - this is when you see the dreaded 'my preview looked good and LR ruined it' symptom.
All third-party converters use the same method of discarding the embedded preview and interpreting the RAW data on their own own. Basically guessing what the image and colours might look like. Some converters interpret the data better or worse and often some converters work better on different colours and scenes than other.
The reason for this is that naturally the camera manufacturer wants to keep the upper hand and sell their own converter software by not disclosing their native RAW format details or documentation to third parties. Adobe wants their DNG to become the standard RAW format but so far no luck for them. I'd guess if Adobe allows for encrypted parts within DNG standard for camera manufacturers to insert their engineering-based magic fairy dust data, the DNG will not gain much ground.
Last edited by spankmeyer, .
I'm a cheap ass but yesterday evening...
+
x 2
+
x 2
Thanks!
Trick question but I say very little.
Now your definition of 'how much' and 'very little' might be different but if I end up with 20-30 usable shots from small shoots and they are often published on the same evening or next day, that isn't much time per image as I do have another day job eating away my life.
99% of my published stuff is edited some way or another. I try to do the fine tuning the crop, contrast curves, saturation and white balance to suit or enhance the emotional content that's in the shots the first place.
I do practically no pixel-based editing at all to my photos (apart from obvious image composites) as I have no PS installed on my home computer. I use LR2 for quick edits and NX2 when colour rendition and detail is critical. Compared side by side the NX2 shows just how bad the Adobe's ACR converter really is. Too bad the NX2 is such a chore to use.
Some rather random snaps from visitings my co-worker's kite-surfing practise day.
Hope you enjoy!
Hope you enjoy!
Some shots from my friend's little shop/artist marketing agency opening party. Didn't want to post too many faces on Flickr so here's sample of more anonymous mood shots. Light was nonexistant, ISO 12,800, f2.8 and shutter speeds in 1/30 and 1/15.
Because when someone's foundation of personal deliverance and purpose of life is under threat, human acts like a cornered animal.
I'd say we are just celebrating the fun of taking photos, giving feedback and suggestions.
That looked stupid as hell, clumsy and generic. The cover systems in all games is just 101% proof concentrated game development failure and should be put the rest.
Kit lens? If you're not into post-processing, maybe try experimenting with the Picture Control settings to get some more pop for macro stuff. Try tapping in some negative exposure compensation for deeper colours too, you don't have to leave auto mode.
It's actually compressed dynamic range. With cars it's simple to mask it out from background and process the subject and background separately and avoid the halo. Path tool and bezier curves is the best for high fidelity mask but quick selection tool with dicking around in edge refine works for quick and dirty masking but might choke your computer if the original pic is in the 4k range.
Had my first complete disaster shoot today as the weather threw a sucker punch. Relied on awesome sunsets we had on Monday and Tuesday and got thick, dull, gray, overcast with not a single break in the clouds. In addition to some rather heavy facepalming and mishaps in a couple of shoots lately I'm not really feeling the love so cheer me up with pics!
Looks funky but in the medium format territory 10k is pocket change.
EDIT: Shiiiiet they should DEFINITELY do a boat load of different colour options for the body! A pink-bright blue medium format camera would make me fondle my imaginary wallet.
Last edited by spankmeyer, .
Thanks mate, just rather random stuff so no big ambitions.
Imo I would have gone for a different lens lineup from the start (Nikkor 24-70/2.8) but I guess you're into primes.
Oh and I highly recommend the D3 battery for the grip. 8 FPS and couple of thousand frames with a single charge is nice (and you have a backup battery in the body also).
Enjoy and post pics soon!
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG