HOME | DD

pearwood In reply to lyami [2011-02-25 18:12:59 +0000 UTC]

Thanks. There are more wintry views in my Webster Park gallery -> [link]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to janna10 [2010-09-21 01:55:17 +0000 UTC]

Thanks! (me, too)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to GloriaMae [2010-08-23 17:54:03 +0000 UTC]

thankee

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

GloriaMae In reply to pearwood [2010-08-23 17:58:23 +0000 UTC]

youre welcome and you got included in my journal feature thingy--just letting ya know

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

pearwood In reply to GloriaMae [2010-08-23 18:35:06 +0000 UTC]

So I see. I'll have to wait till I get home to do more serious editing.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to bainen [2010-07-21 17:07:59 +0000 UTC]

Thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to fat-pie [2010-06-22 17:51:02 +0000 UTC]

Thanks, Melanie.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to Walkinghost [2010-06-15 11:02:44 +0000 UTC]

Thanks, Duncan.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to Intergrativeone [2010-06-15 11:04:02 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to Nam-tar [2010-06-15 02:10:46 +0000 UTC]

I had this on the wall in 3:2 ratio and decided it wasn't working. I pulled it out of the frame and grabbed the paper cutter. I like it much better this way.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Nam-tar In reply to pearwood [2010-06-15 02:23:53 +0000 UTC]

Haven't seen the former version, but that one looks really great. Hmm, analog or print from digital (a print, sooo old fashioned - I love it!) Not so many people do that anymore, unfortunately

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

pearwood In reply to Nam-tar [2010-06-15 02:26:59 +0000 UTC]

This one is digital, but I am loving that 120 film camera.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Nam-tar In reply to pearwood [2010-06-15 02:34:50 +0000 UTC]

I'm a kid of digital age, so I'm stuck with my half 35mm frame digital sensor

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

pearwood In reply to Nam-tar [2010-06-15 02:39:23 +0000 UTC]

Your 50D is a couple of steps classier than my XTi.

The digital is certainly my workhorse, but I'm learning a lot about photography shooting with a camera with no built-in computer. It's about fifteen years older than I, young man.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Nam-tar In reply to pearwood [2010-06-15 02:43:31 +0000 UTC]

We're not talking about Kodak Brownie from 1900 here, are we? My 50D? Just a machine. Still it's better than my pictures, thought. But I'm working on it Besides I believe that presence of a photographer does the trick not all that fancy 'tekknology'

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

pearwood In reply to Nam-tar [2010-06-15 02:51:58 +0000 UTC]

[link]

In any case, it's the lens behind the camera that matters most.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Nam-tar In reply to pearwood [2010-06-15 12:27:47 +0000 UTC]

Really nice piece of equipment

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to BySaskia [2008-06-04 03:10:21 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to Ohno-moment [2008-06-02 14:07:53 +0000 UTC]

Slow shutter. I have another with the waves quite crisp, but I liked the feel of this one.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ohno-moment In reply to pearwood [2008-06-02 14:13:35 +0000 UTC]

yes
my first look i thought fog, then i went back to look at the stats because i had some doubts. I've seen a lot of fog, but not like that. cool effect

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

pearwood In reply to Ohno-moment [2008-06-02 14:14:22 +0000 UTC]

Thanks.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to mom-the-bomb [2008-06-02 14:08:10 +0000 UTC]

Agreed.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to akcattykit [2008-06-02 02:52:29 +0000 UTC]

Thanks. It's long-exposure blur.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood In reply to RepeatingYesterday [2008-06-02 02:53:05 +0000 UTC]

Thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0