Wow. Just... wow.
No... they're flares.
I was more alarmed by the sight of what appears to be police tape across your front door. Have you got dead bodies in there or something?
Not really. I don't get why people keep making comparisons to Fonejacker.
Fonejacker is done with the consent of everyone involved, the calls done with filming on the street are personally set up by their mates, and the most it does is a bit of innuendo.
Compared to Brand and Ross, which involved:
- using Sachs' mobile number, given to Brand & his production team in good faith due to his absence, not for the purposes of making "entertainment" on the show
- made calls to it that were unsolicited, unwanted, abusive, and generally indecent. Remember that this isn't some mates calling you and leaving you a message full of abuse, this is somebody who Sachs doesn't know personally.
- later asking Sachs over the phone if they could use the segment, to which he didn't say "yes" because he couldn't hear it properly over the phone, then they went and broadcast it anyway.
- Brand's idea of an initial apology, which involved singing about how funny it was.
But I maintain that if you or I made such calls and the recipient complained about it, chances are you'd end up chatting to the police. What should have happened was that the complaint was made to the BBC by Sachs' agent, Brand and Ross should've immediately apologised and resigned for a gross lapse of common decency and judgement, then it's a private matter between Sachs/Bailey and Brand/Ross whether they make a complaint to the police.
Yes. What does fonejacker have to do with it?
Brand is certainly a legendary twat. Ross has rather more going for him, but that doesn't make any less awful what he did.
It's amusing that you're all saying the BBC is loving this in it's role of "state propaganda" broadcaster - yet it's only the BBc that refers to them as "prank" calls.
I can't be the only one to have noticed that making such phonecalls is actually illegal. If you or I did this we would get arrested under the Telecommunications Act 1984 or the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Why should it be any different for a pair of overpaid narcissistic twats?
I can't be the only one to have noticed that making such phonecalls is actually illegal. If you or I did this we would get arrested under the Telecommunications Act 1984 or the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Why should it be any different for a pair of overpaid narcissistic twats?
Sad? Why the sad banana? Did you actually think that it's in any way entertaining, interesting or unique to post "in before the lock" or "thread fail" images f*cking constantly, not to mention vomiting a slurry of spam and belligerent off topic shite nearly everywhere you go?
And yes, clearly Kev should be a guest moderator here for 24 hours. With admin privileges. Just for added comedy effect.
Awesome. I'm gonna have to start using that phrase.
Oh, and to those discussing the Union flag being part of the Oz flag, it was hardly their choice. It's called empire, mwuahaha. We owned j00.
If you're a mid-race joiner, the unwritten rule (outside of the likes of CTRA or DMR, where it is written) is that you shold by no means interfere with the race in progress. Keep well out of their way, off the racing line when necessary.
On the other hand if you started the race and are just getting lapped, you have every right to be there, and are expected to drive predictably and considerately so that the leaders can pass you safely and cleanly.
On the other hand if you started the race and are just getting lapped, you have every right to be there, and are expected to drive predictably and considerately so that the leaders can pass you safely and cleanly.
Yeah, Blackwood is just like this circuit. Everyone knows Blackwood is a semi-permanent racetrack in Argentina set in a spectacular location around a lake with what appears to be a brilliant track design that in parts is reminiscent of the Nordschleife.
Well, your shutter speed is fast enough to freeze the rotor blades in some of your shots. Generally it's nice to have some blur on props or rotors, so ideally a couple of them would've had a slightly slower slower shutter speed, but as you say, you can't drop too low due to the camera shake. So I'd say your shutter speed is fine where it is, and focus on reducing the camera shake. Very hard to do on a superzoom compact (unlike an SLR where you have the bulk of the camera and lens to absorb shakes and can adopt a good stance), but try bracing yourself against a wall or fence or suchlike, or even learn to control your breathing like a sniper does. Or buy a monopod.
Gotta love Fonejacker. The new series is a bit hit and miss, but there's some classics from the first series. My favourite is the "flat to rent" automated line.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VepbmLWPw3M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REqN2LREm1A (<-- absolute classic)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC5bZwXxfn0
The new series is a bit hit and miss, but there's some classics from the first series. My favourite is the "flat to rent" automated line. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VepbmLWPw3M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REqN2LREm1A (<-- absolute classic)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC5bZwXxfn0
Jayhawk, you're an arse. That statement has nothing to do with jealousy over the autumn colours you guys seem to get. Over here the trees just turn slightly yellow, then lose their leaves, and you can't photograph them anyway otherwise your camera gets waterlogged.
Seriously though - lovely shot!
Over here the trees just turn slightly yellow, then lose their leaves, and you can't photograph them anyway otherwise your camera gets waterlogged.Seriously though - lovely shot!
I'd use collections, one for each genre that you want a gallery for.
IIRC, the Mk4 Fiesta which I had weighed 970kg. The Mk5 version which I presume Niels has will probably weight slightly more since it has more airbags, but that's about the only difference.
It's not a heavy car - it's pretty damn light.
I used to drive a 1996 Fiesta with the 1.25 Zetec - great little engine.
Mine felt pretty nippy (at least, it did at the time - if I went back to it now it'd probably feel gutless) but naturally needed plenty revving. Despite that, when driving normally (eg. daily commute) I think I recall it getting pretty good economy. Mind you, 32mpg at a constant 75mph isn't all that bad, considering the short gearing and high revs of the 1.25 engine. Maybe I'd expect high 30s or low 40s on a perfectly healthy example - but I haven't driven one for 4 years so can't really remember. :-/
Mine felt pretty nippy (at least, it did at the time - if I went back to it now it'd probably feel gutless) but naturally needed plenty revving. Despite that, when driving normally (eg. daily commute) I think I recall it getting pretty good economy. Mind you, 32mpg at a constant 75mph isn't all that bad, considering the short gearing and high revs of the 1.25 engine. Maybe I'd expect high 30s or low 40s on a perfectly healthy example - but I haven't driven one for 4 years so can't really remember. :-/
Yes, Don uses a very shallow DoF extremely well and creates some superb shots. However I bet he'd still take some pretty great photos if you gave him a slower consumer grade lens (I'm guessing he uses either a 70-200/2.8 or a 200/2.8 prime).
But I'm just saying you don't have to run out and splash cash on a long, fast lens in order to shoot motorsports. In fact when you look at the pro pics of F1 Grand Prix from the likes of AP and AFP, you'll see (or rather, suspect) that they're not all shot at f/2.8 as the DoF would be too shallow from the distances they're shooting at from the side of a circuit. Don gets right up close with his rallies and motocross, but generally motorsport needs sufficient DoF to cover the car and any nearby competing cars, which a consumer grade 70-300 can give you (f/5.6 @ 300mm) while still having a blurred background.
But I'm just saying you don't have to run out and splash cash on a long, fast lens in order to shoot motorsports. In fact when you look at the pro pics of F1 Grand Prix from the likes of AP and AFP, you'll see (or rather, suspect) that they're not all shot at f/2.8 as the DoF would be too shallow from the distances they're shooting at from the side of a circuit. Don gets right up close with his rallies and motocross, but generally motorsport needs sufficient DoF to cover the car and any nearby competing cars, which a consumer grade 70-300 can give you (f/5.6 @ 300mm) while still having a blurred background.
Well I've heard that the Canon 18-55 kit lens is pretty crap, but... a good photog will still take good pics with it. A good photog won't take good motorsport pics with it though, as it's not long enough. Get the 18-55 kit, and add to it as soon as you can afford to with a basic grade 70-300 f/4-5.6 to give you the length. That should give you the range of coverage you need to see if you're any good and/or have the sustained interest to justify chucking more money at equipment.
Not when most motorsport takes place in daylight. A fast lens gives more creative control with the shallower DoF, and is more versatile should you need to do low-light shooting, but is far, far from needed to get good motorsport pics.
I agree - it's one of the most idiotic rules there is. What's the point in having two-car teams if teamwork isn't allowed on the track?
Because it's a disparaging remark (after all, he does have a name, it's Lewis Hamilton) that singles him out based on nothing more than his skin colour. It's not just a "description" of his skin. If that were the case, then would calling him "darky" just be a description of his skin?
Try addressing any coloured guy in the street that you you don't know personally as "oi, chocolate dude!" or "hey darky!" and see how well it's received. With any luck, you'd end up in an ambulance as a result.
Racism is more than the n-word, it's the mentality that leads someone to identify/label someone by the colour of their skin, and that's what's been displayed here.
But if that's all fine and dandy round here, then maybe we can refer to Eric as "the chocolate dev".
I guess there's one way of avoiding the racist c**ts round here should the mods not do their job...
Yeah. I mean, what does pretty much the entire hi-fi industry know about using connectors? :rolleyes:
But not when you factor in the shipping costs of getting a foreign built car to your own shores. Merchant shipping uses a lot of energy. Remember that a large ship will burn many tonnes of fuel per hour. In the UK, buying a Land Rover, built locally with local suppliers, will give you many years "head start" in energy saving compared to a stupid Prius coming all the way from America or Japan.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG