HOME | DD

Sandy33311 — DIOBOLICAL by-nc-nd

Published: 2009-08-23 04:29:19 +0000 UTC; Views: 298; Favourites: 19; Downloads: 4
Redirect to original
Description Hehe! (Dragonfly, of course.)
Related content
Comments: 18

Lunawhite7 [2009-08-29 22:04:09 +0000 UTC]

WOWOWOWOW!! What a shot!

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Sandy33311 In reply to Lunawhite7 [2009-08-29 23:51:43 +0000 UTC]

Hehe! Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Lunawhite7 In reply to Lunawhite7 [2009-08-29 22:04:30 +0000 UTC]

P.S. I love the title

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ForgetfulRainn [2009-08-23 16:34:20 +0000 UTC]

I never comment on your work because I never know what to say, but I like this one a lot! I don't know the first thing about macro (although I know that it should be called micro, and have no idea why "macro" got to be the name), and I did try, but with regular material so all I got were blurry images...

This is awesome because you get to see details you can't see otherwise, and with all the time needed to observe those beings!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sandy33311 In reply to ForgetfulRainn [2009-08-24 06:10:27 +0000 UTC]

Thanks so much, Nicolas. Your comments and your fav mean a great deal to me.

I looked it up and here's part of the explanation for the word "macro" which I've always wondered about as well: "In recent years, the term macro has been used in marketing material to mean being able to focus on a subject close enough so that when a regular 6×4 inch (15×10 cm) print is made, the image is life-size or larger." (Wiki)

As far as your attempts, you really do need to use the right equipment. Or, you could reverse your lens if you use a camera with a removable lens. Just reverse it and tape it on so that no light gets through. That's the simple explanation. It'll thus act as a magnifying glass. I've been fascinated with microscopes and enlarging the view of tiny things since I was about five-years-old.

Thank you again.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

macrojunkie [2009-08-23 08:54:25 +0000 UTC]

lovely shot..a fav.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sandy33311 In reply to macrojunkie [2009-08-24 03:36:56 +0000 UTC]

Thanks, Scott!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

nunheh [2009-08-23 05:06:21 +0000 UTC]

Smile on his face, all the time he eats, the fly dragon, the fly dragon.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sandy33311 In reply to nunheh [2009-08-24 03:18:19 +0000 UTC]

Very clever there!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

nunheh In reply to Sandy33311 [2009-08-24 04:09:17 +0000 UTC]

If nothing else my memory of song lyrics is good, and applying them to any given case seems to be a relatively unappreciatd talent.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sandy33311 In reply to nunheh [2009-08-24 06:22:35 +0000 UTC]

My guy can recite and sing the lyrics to thousands of songs, in addition to knowing everything about the singer/bandmembers, etc. It leaves me in awe. His iPod library of songs is worth over $30,000.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

nunheh In reply to Sandy33311 [2009-08-24 10:04:17 +0000 UTC]

That's a lot of money! Could such a thing be sold? Just out of curiousity.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sandy33311 In reply to nunheh [2009-08-25 01:02:58 +0000 UTC]

I know. He has over 30,000 songs on it and they're worth .99 cents each. Now that I think about it, I think he has over 40,000 songs, not 30,000.

As far as selling the songs, I don't believe that's legal. I don't have an iPod. I just use iTunes on my laptop, so I don't know but from what I've read, you can't give, trade or sell the songs. I know I can't with mine.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

nunheh In reply to Sandy33311 [2009-08-25 04:44:55 +0000 UTC]

Now that I think of it, ...I'm not sure. I mean selling the device witht the songs on them. At fleamarkets you can buy old albums with the songs on them. It's sort of the same thing, but i've never heard of anyone suing someone who sold their record collection. It's an object which contains recordings of intellectual properties. To some degree it may depend on the contract, expressed or somehow implied, between the artists, the i-tune, the i-pods and the purchaser of the last two.
There is fair use in downloading recordings (for free), but not in selling them. Now the question I have is could you sell your laptop with the recordings still on them. Or the i-pod.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sandy33311 In reply to nunheh [2009-08-25 06:39:57 +0000 UTC]

I don't think so. After iPods came out, new laws were passed. But, I don't know all of the ins and outs of the matter.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

nunheh In reply to Sandy33311 [2009-08-25 15:54:32 +0000 UTC]

While I was indulging in being a black sheep, my brother was becoming a lawyer. I say let them decide, but ouside of corporate interests, I can't see an essential difference between ipods and other recording devices. I've never owned one or an mps player or the like, so I'm kind of ignorant. Also never had a credit card or a cell phone. It makes me feel....unusual!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sandy33311 In reply to nunheh [2009-08-26 02:20:01 +0000 UTC]

Yes, a little unusual the way the world is now. I've never gone the iPod, etc., route. I have iTunes because it comes with every Mac. And it's a ton of fun, Mr. Black Sheep, sir.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

nunheh In reply to Sandy33311 [2009-08-26 04:48:03 +0000 UTC]

'Course I ain't no kind of sir or nothin', being a black sheep and all in my past, but I believe you. For now, I get amusement beyond what I would have expected from the computer and internet world, so I'm open in general to most of technologial advances.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0