DSLRUsers.com

So ... I arrive at the studio this eveing to do my Sunday night show.

There's a nice gentleman waiting for me, it seems: He wants to take my photo.

Well I have a great face for radio, and, well, it's not as if we're ill-equipped for taking photos of me here.

So, I refused.

"But it's for the station's website" he protests.

In which case, (a) I can email a suitable image to the station's webmaster directly - he's a friend with whom I lunch regularly, or (b) I could just log in to the station's website myself and put a suitable image there myself, as I have the credentials and expertise to do this.

But I digress ...

Turns out he didn't actually have a camera, shooting images of me for the purpose of.

He had a Sony. Does anyone see a problem here?

Ok ... I have some Canon gear. And I have a Sigma lens.

But allow myself to be photographed on a Sony?

One's standards need to be maintained!

I think I need a drink!

gstark wrote::)

So ... I arrive at the studio this eveing to do my Sunday night show.

There's a nice gentleman waiting for me, it seems: He wants to take my photo.

Well I have a great face for radio, and, well, it's not as if we're ill-equipped for taking photos of me here.

So, I refused.

"But it's for the station's website" he protests.

In which case, (a) I can email a suitable image to the station's webmaster directly - he's a friend with whom I lunch regularly, or (b) I could just log in to the station's website myself and put a suitable image there myself, as I have the credentials and expertise to do this.

But I digress ...

Turns out he didn't actually have a camera, shooting images of me for the purpose of.

He had a Sony. Does anyone see a problem here?

Ok ... I have some Canon gear. And I have a Sigma lens.

But allow myself to be photographed on a Sony?

One's standards need to be maintained!

I think I need a drink!

Lol.... that reminds me of the time a 'tog' who had been sent out from a newpaper to do a story showed up with a similar camera... and a 10 mm lens..

I told him in no uncertain terms was he getting anywhere near me with that lens...

If i close my eye's I can still hear the poor man crying...

Makes me wonder how these people get those jobs. (Not the DJ, the Phot.)

Killakoala wrote:Makes me wonder how these people get those jobs.

In Gary's case it was a phone interview.

Killakoala wrote:Makes me wonder how these people get those jobs. (Not the DJ, the Phot.)

I think he may have been a voluntary recruit.

But still ....

And I still had most of my studio lighting setup in the boot. Given this was 9pm, and the studio isn't well lit, any guesses as to how well the Sony wuld have held up with available light?

It may have been worse than a drivers licence photo, and that would be grim.

Bob

C'mon Gary, it's not the camera, it's the photographer that counts.
Solution: Give the Sony to Wendell to take your photo.
That would accomplish 2 things
1. You would get a great portrait of you.
2. The Sony would be destroyed on conpletion.

phillipb wrote:C'mon Gary, it's not the camera, it's the photographer that counts.
Solution: Give the Sony to Wendell to take your photo.
That would accomplish 2 things
1. You would get a great portrait of you.
2. The Sony would be destroyed on conpletion.

Great suggestion, Phillip, except that I'm not sure that the Sony would be up to the task of lasting long enough in Wendell's hands.

Which, btw, I consider to be a good thing.

Bindii wrote:
Lol.... that reminds me of the time a 'tog' who had been sent out from a newpaper to do a story showed up with a similar camera... and a 10 mm lens..

I told him in no uncertain terms was he getting anywhere near me with that lens...

If i close my eye's I can still hear the poor man crying...

For a while, some newspapers used WA lenses for photographs on the social pages. Might be OK for groups, but the 'togs also used to stick them in peoples' faces for close-ups too. You sure end up with funny-shaped heads, noses and ears that way!

I can understand your reluctance.

You made the right choice Gary. I only trust one person to take a photo of me and that is Oneputt

Had a recent passport photo done by a wee slip of a lass in a Rabbit Photo store. It was on the way home from work and I was in a rush so I neglected to notice that she'd shot me with a Kodak P&S from about 1 metre away.

Customs' new Smart Gates are gonna have to be geniuses to recognise me from THAT photo.

Manta wrote:Had a recent passport photo done by a wee slip of a lass in a Rabbit Photo store. It was on the way home from work and I was in a rush so I neglected to notice that she'd shot me with a Kodak P&S from about 1 metre away.

Customs' new Smart Gates are gonna have to be geniuses to recognise me from THAT photo.

Yeah I'm a 70 year old man in my passport photo *nods*... (shut it you lot)

I swear they have lessons in how to make someone look as bad as they possibly can before you are allowed to take passport or drivers licence photos...

Manta wrote:Had a recent passport photo done by a wee slip of a lass in a Rabbit Photo store. It was on the way home from work and I was in a rush so I neglected to notice that she'd shot me with a Kodak P&S from about 1 metre away.

Customs' new Smart Gates are gonna have to be geniuses to recognise me from THAT photo.

Actually - if it doesn't pass the passport rules, it will be rejected.

I have a client who owns a post office licence, and bought the Polaroid camera gear a couple of years back. He regularly has to reshoot for people whose photos are rejected as the image isn't composed in line with the requirements.

There is a whole other story in how those LPO's that rent the gear get shafted by Aus Post though.

Manta wrote:Had a recent passport photo done by a wee slip of a lass in a Rabbit Photo store. It was on the way home from work and I was in a rush so I neglected to notice that she'd shot me with a Kodak P&S from about 1 metre away.

I took my last passport photo myself using a CoolPix 990 (in 2000) and printed on my Epson printer. The photograph itself wasn't too bad (considering it was of me) but by the time the passport processing people had put it into my passport it looks like I have Ebola.

one of my mates nephew has long hair and they spent 2 hours teasing it up so it all stood straight. It looked like he had been electrcuted, but he has the best drivers licence photo I have ever seen.

I know what you mean ATJ. I look very green in mine. Blends nicely with the paper

who wrote:Actually - if it doesn't pass the passport rules, it will be rejected.

It was certainly accepted - as I now have a ten year record of same - but that only proves the woman at the Post Office who accepted and signed off on it had as distorted a view of me as the camera did!

Manta wrote:

who wrote:Actually - if it doesn't pass the passport rules, it will be rejected.

It was certainly accepted - as I now have a ten year record of same - but that only proves the woman at the Post Office who accepted and signed off on it had as distorted a view of me as the camera did!

Think of it as a peek into the future: this is what you'll look like in ten years' time.

gstark wrote:Think of it as a peek into the future: this is what you'll look like in ten years' time.

Now THERE'S something to look forward to!!

I fear there's never a shortage of companies or brands Gary could bash. But eventually he'll become a buyer, and find other companies to bash. I can still remember the coke bottle/Sigma days, and now he's a self admitted Sigma owner.

Soon enough, he'll be willing to admit to being a Sony user too. :p