How about a Star Warz redux with Takashi Mike Directing with Janusz Kaminski (Saving Private Ryan) as director of photography???

Or how about Roman Polanski dir. with Peter Pau and Wing-hang Wong (The Killer-John Woo) cinematographers??

...anyone but Tattersal behind the fucking camera lens, please.

鼅 Even though Sam has since gone the way of the upside-down kiss, this will always be his epic thrill-ride of a trilogy of grind-house-style photography and content-Three cheers to the tracked-rolling-cam rig shot, I piss my pants every time!

There is a web site for her Self Evident Truths project, with thousands of these beautiful portraits. Worth a look if portrait photography is your thing.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'iO tillett wright, TED, fifty shades of gay' to 'iO tillett wright, TED, fifty shades of gay, photography, self evident truths' - edited by oritteropo

Look at all the naysayers who can't fathom how a system COULD work. It's called imagination and engineering, kids. Go ahead and laugh at CSI now..

http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/13/02/02/0027200/light-field-photography-is-the-new-path-to-3-d

Agreed! Great concept and excellent photography. Not really a time lapse because it looks like real time and having the climber walk the rope in front of the moon really gives you a sense of the motion of the moon that you don't normally get.

Looks like it was shot at the standard 30fps and then doubled-up in the editing room. Also known as "poor man's slo-mo". But great photography otherwise.

From the lounge:

oritteropo: This one looks like @lurgee would enjoy it - http://vimeo.com/55566188 - his sort of light painting photography only with girls and more cameras.

24x360 - http://vimeo.com/55566188

It's not just DOF. He appears to be using some kind of wide angle lens that is distorting the long straight lines in the field of view. Particularly the long vertical lines of the architecture are all somewhat concave to the centre of the scene while the "portrait on the wall" is distorted differently, probably from the top being closer to the lens than the bottom. So good concept but photography sucks.

Steve Buscemi is into bird photography? Sweet.

"A tenth of every still image recorded of our world was taken in the last twelve months."

Did he mix up the numbers? It doesn't quite fit with the 3.5T total, 4B last year (~0.1%).

No matter.

What I am interested in however is this: are pictures taken by the military included in the estimate of analog photography or did they use their own stock of film that was not part of the official production record?

Military reconnaissance must have been a noticeable portion of total pictures taken, at least up to the '50s or '60s, right?

No flash photography makes this thing useless.

>> ^TheFreak:

Now they need a version that will let me drive drunk and then one that will allow me to run over small children without consequences.


You realize that you're talking about a completely separate camera right?

There are 2 types

#1. Red Light Cameras: These camera's use flash photography to snap a photo of you
#2. Intersection Camera: These cameras are video cameras (IE No Flash)

Therefore your drunken pedophilia that you find so alluring will not be protected.

Case In Point:

http://videosift.com/video/Red-Light-Runners-Police-Video

From our own Videosift nonetheless. Watch that video you'll see that there are camera's that constantly record and then later on you'll see in the video several flashes that are from another camera.

>> ^WaterDweller:

2:50 - Four hour exposure? Seriously? Surely, ten minutes in the darkest of nights would overexpose any image unless you used a really narrow aperture (and possibly even then)?


I wish. Night time photography would be a hell of a lot easier if this were true.

It's not. Four hours on a dark night seems reasonable to me. Depends on the camera settings used, of course, but if you keep the ISO low and use a reasonable aperture for good depth of field four hours sounds reasonable. The main problem with this is sensor bloom from the heat of the batteries and circuit boards in the camera itself.

Hi Osama, i believe those photos were longer exposures, hence the lighting of the clouds and mountains by small amounts of light from either the near-by city or possibly the moon behind the camera. I think many of those shots are possible and only possible with constant long exposure shots put together into a sequence clip. With a good enough camera and lens, these shots can be achieved with 1+ sec exposure time, although with so much detail, I would expect longer exposures whilst the diaphragm can be less open so as to avoid overexposure.

On another note, doesn't the sequence of scenes seem like a modern version of the qatsi series?


>> ^osama1234:

I do like this video, but could someone with photography knowledge explain/verify to me that the kind of timelapse he's done is in many scenes impossible to see with the naked eye, or even a time-lapse consisting of (not two images meshed together) long exposure photos, without mixing together multiple pictures, and possibly pictures from different times (day vs night). (I find it impossible to imagine how he shot stars in daytime in between clouds (1:50), or the scene where the stars are visible in broad daylight while the mountain is also visible in daylight).