Can you believe this is fuck'n digital? - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

AaronM · 03-19-2002, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PlanetContent
Aaron said...."You and I both know damn good and well that you did not do that on purpose."

How can you say that Aaron? Do you know what I was previsualizing when I made that photograph? I use limited depth of field all the time Aaron. It's a great effect when you want to control what the viewer is looking at. By keeping an area in focus and throwing other areas of the pic out of focus, you control where the viewers eye goes first. This is elementary stuff if you've studied photography for any length of time.

Get off it Dean... I edited that part of my reply out 5 minutes before you posted this.

AaronM · 03-19-2002, 03:09 PM

You are out of line Dean. There is no need to continually disrespect me or my work. It just makes you look worse.

Just my

Now, go ahead and post all you want to this board about me. It will not hurt me in the least. I have other things to do today so I will most likely not be around to respond to your childish attacks.

[Labret] · 03-19-2002, 03:23 PM

I dont know about you, but I dislike asshole shots. That is where poop comes from.

sexyavs · 03-19-2002, 03:26 PM

You know what is kind of funny..

Dean has been asked 3 times what camera he is using since the thread is supposed to about his digital camera and how great the camera is..

Yet.. he never has answered what type of camera it is..

Pimpshost.. use your new camera and post some picks of some buttholes so we can see how good your digital camera is..

I seriously need a good digital camera and was just wondering and I guess Dean dont want to say..

kush · 03-19-2002, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexyavs

I seriously need a good digital camera and was just wondering and I guess Dean dont want to say..

It's top secret info

Phiber · 03-19-2002, 04:07 PM

Damn it! Some one better say what camera was used. I have now read this whole thread and not got an answer. I want the truth!

AdultWire · 03-19-2002, 05:02 PM

Okay folks.. the secret is shooting with a big hole.

Nedder · 03-19-2002, 07:49 PM

>>You know what is kind of funny..

Dean has been asked 3 times what camera he is using since the thread is supposed to about his digital camera and how great the camera is..

Yet.. he never has answered what type of camera it is..
<<

He's using the Olympus Face-Out-Of-Focus 9000.

Nz

greentea · 03-19-2002, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexyavs
You know what is kind of funny..

Dean has been asked 3 times what camera he is using since the thread is supposed to about his digital camera and how great the camera is..

Yet.. he never has answered what type of camera it is..

Pimpshost.. use your new camera and post some picks of some buttholes so we can see how good your digital camera is..

I seriously need a good digital camera and was just wondering and I guess Dean dont want to say..

He wont tell you cos its a DISPOSABLE Camera

pimpshost · 03-20-2002, 01:44 AM

I'll post some pics in a couple days. Maybe K-Man will let me shoot his butt crack on the golf course tomorrow.

pimpshost · 03-20-2002, 01:44 AM

UnseenWorld · 03-20-2002, 02:13 AM

Depth of field. Who cares? Does the photo look okay? That's the question. Is there a law that a photo has to be this way or that, with everything in focus or with focus used to draw attention to something.

You both make some good points.

Planet, I think what pissed people off at you and got people on your case was that your post was an out and out spam. There are plenty of opportunities on this board to put up a shot, as we all know. I myself seldom miss a chance to show off my own material.

I find that photographers who have learned the esotericisms of shooting studio and magazine styles frequently fail to understand that we are in a market that is a bit broader than that. Not everybody wants to see photos shot in that style because when the Internet first got going (and even before that in the BBS era) magazine scans were just about all that was available, and people got sick of that style. I don't know if Charly has figured that out yet, but it's true.

This is why guys like Aaron and me can make a living. Shit, all my lighting is on my camera (combo of fill and bounce), and it keeps a lot of people happy. Many of my own (and Aaron's) customers wouldn't buy anything with an obviously studio or "slick" look on a dare.

The trouble with a lot of the guys who do the studio or magazine style is that they assume that anyone shooting any other style is either incompetent or aesthetically challenged. This is an egotistical and arrogant attitude, and quite ignorant as well. You and Aaron and I are doing commercial photography, and our sole goal is to please our customers with out content, not get into some museum of photography. We have different customer lists, that's all.

Before anyone makes a sweeping statement about photography, he should ask himself "is there a law that says this?" (and this includes Aaron's thoughts about depth of field, which I don't necessarily agree with 100%). Is there a law that says photos should have lots of depth of field? Is there a law saying the opposite? The answer is no in both cases.

On my artsy-fartsy photo site, I have a whole page devoted to "The Myths of Photography," and this sort of thing is discussed there. The site is at http://www.afterglow-photo.com (and this isn't a spam, because there is nothing for sale there which is likely to be purchased by webmasters).

UnseenWorld · 03-20-2002, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by UnseenWorld
Depth of field. Who cares? Does the photo look okay? That's the question. Is there a law that a photo has to be this way or that, with everything in focus or with focus used to draw attention to something.

You both make some good points.

Planet, I think what pissed people off at you and got people on your case was that your post was an out and out spam. There are plenty of opportunities on this board to put up a shot, as we all know. I myself seldom miss a chance to show off my own material.

I find that photographers who have learned the esotericisms of shooting studio and magazine styles frequently fail to understand that we are in a market that is a bit broader than that. Not everybody wants to see photos shot in that style because when the Internet first got going (and even before that in the BBS era) magazine scans were just about all that was available, and people got sick of that style. I don't know if Charly has figured that out yet, but it's true.

This is why guys like Aaron and me can make a living. Shit, all my lighting is on my camera (combo of fill and bounce), and it keeps a lot of people happy. Many of my own (and Aaron's) customers wouldn't buy anything with an obviously studio or "slick" look on a dare.

The trouble with a lot of the guys who do the studio or magazine style is that they assume that anyone shooting any other style is either incompetent or aesthetically challenged. This is an egotistical and arrogant attitude, and quite ignorant as well. You and Aaron and I are doing commercial photography, and our sole goal is to please our customers with our content, not get into some museum of photography. We have different customer lists, that's all.

Before anyone makes a sweeping statement about photography, he should ask himself "is there a law that says this?" (and this includes Aaron's thoughts about depth of field, which I don't necessarily agree with 100%). Is there a law that says photos should have lots of depth of field? Is there a law saying the opposite? The answer is no in both cases.

On my artsy-fartsy photo site, I have a whole page devoted to "The Myths of Photography," and this sort of thing is discussed there. The site is at http://www.afterglow-photo.com (and this isn't a spam, because there is nothing for sale there which is likely to be purchased by webmasters).

Nedder · 03-20-2002, 11:13 AM

Hey Unseen, Great "Myths of Photography" book! I, as a webmaster, was very interested I just bought 3 copies for myself and 17 more for my friends!!

Nz

4Pics · 03-20-2002, 07:35 PM

we going to get a reply as to what type of camera?

greentea · 03-20-2002, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 4Pics
we going to get a reply as to what type of camera?

tha_timinator · 03-20-2002, 11:36 PM

i totally agree at the spam & off topic things BUT I MUST SAY:

planetcontent - those pics are sincerely one of the best i've ever seen... great quality, great creativity, great lightning, great atmosphere, and last but not least; great focus

keep up the good work & you've got my bookmark

gregtx · 03-21-2002, 01:56 PM

How come no one brings up her butthole?

Just her pussy?

I thought I would ask.
=====================================

hmmm... is someone trying to come out of the closet???

http://www.freshgayphotos.com lol

Shaggy · 03-21-2002, 03:20 PM

I like that her face is out of focus. It's kinda like putting a bag over her head. The money is nice and clear and that's what counts.

AaronM · 08-03-2004, 01:26 AM

Hey Dean...How's it going?

Your photography still sucks.

Chrome · 08-03-2004, 01:30 AM

Focusing fluid?

Firehorse · 08-03-2004, 09:06 AM

That looks like most other red Xs to me, but maybe I am the only one not seeing the pic!

ATL_Ryan · 08-03-2004, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Firehorse
That looks like most other red Xs to me, but maybe I am the only one not seeing the pic!

No, I certainly agree that the quality of those red X's is outstanding. You've come along way baby!

psyko514 · 08-03-2004, 09:13 AM

i can't believe it's not butter.

03-19-2002, 03:09 PM	#52
AaronM GFY Royality ;) Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: ┌∩┐ ◣_◢ ┌∩┐ Posts: 46,923	You are out of line Dean. There is no need to continually disrespect me or my work. It just makes you look worse. Just my Now, go ahead and post all you want to this board about me. It will not hurt me in the least. I have other things to do today so I will most likely not be around to respond to your childish attacks. Last edited by AaronM; 03-19-2002 at 03:11 PM..

03-19-2002, 03:26 PM	#54
sexyavs Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 615	You know what is kind of funny.. Dean has been asked 3 times what camera he is using since the thread is supposed to about his digital camera and how great the camera is.. Yet.. he never has answered what type of camera it is.. Pimpshost.. use your new camera and post some picks of some buttholes so we can see how good your digital camera is.. I seriously need a good digital camera and was just wondering and I guess Dean dont want to say.. __________________ <br> <a href="http://www.sexypassport.com/webmaster/webmaster.php?siteid=752359">Join the Highest Paying FREE AVS. </a><br> <a href="http://nakedpass.com/webmaster/webmaster.php">Naked Pass New FREE Avs Also Pays $20.00 Per FREE Signup!! </a><br> Have you checked out <a href="http://makefuckingmoney.com">Make Fucking Money!</a> Get Paid on FREE Memberships!

03-19-2002, 05:02 PM	#57
AdultWire Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 962	Okay folks.. the secret is shooting with a big hole. __________________ SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60.

03-20-2002, 01:44 AM	#60
pimpshost Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 1,052	I'll post some pics in a couple days. Maybe K-Man will let me shoot his butt crack on the golf course tomorrow. __________________ Jason (Vegas King Condo) Cell 702-371-8941 Web LuxuryinLasVegas.com - High Rise Condos

03-20-2002, 01:44 AM	#61
pimpshost Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 1,052	LOL __________________ Jason (Vegas King Condo) Cell 702-371-8941 Web LuxuryinLasVegas.com - High Rise Condos

03-19-2002, 03:23 PM	#53
[Labret] Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: Са́нкт-Петербу́рг Posts: 10,945	I dont know about you, but I dislike asshole shots. That is where poop comes from.

03-19-2002, 04:07 PM	#56
Phiber Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Location: Sweden Posts: 137	Damn it! Some one better say what camera was used. I have now read this whole thread and not got an answer. I want the truth!

03-19-2002, 07:49 PM	#58
Nedder Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 555	>>You know what is kind of funny.. Dean has been asked 3 times what camera he is using since the thread is supposed to about his digital camera and how great the camera is.. Yet.. he never has answered what type of camera it is.. << He's using the Olympus Face-Out-Of-Focus 9000. Nz

03-20-2002, 02:13 AM	#62
UnseenWorld Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Location: Portland, OR, USA Posts: 5,279	Depth of field. Who cares? Does the photo look okay? That's the question. Is there a law that a photo has to be this way or that, with everything in focus or with focus used to draw attention to something. You both make some good points. Planet, I think what pissed people off at you and got people on your case was that your post was an out and out spam. There are plenty of opportunities on this board to put up a shot, as we all know. I myself seldom miss a chance to show off my own material. I find that photographers who have learned the esotericisms of shooting studio and magazine styles frequently fail to understand that we are in a market that is a bit broader than that. Not everybody wants to see photos shot in that style because when the Internet first got going (and even before that in the BBS era) magazine scans were just about all that was available, and people got sick of that style. I don't know if Charly has figured that out yet, but it's true. This is why guys like Aaron and me can make a living. Shit, all my lighting is on my camera (combo of fill and bounce), and it keeps a lot of people happy. Many of my own (and Aaron's) customers wouldn't buy anything with an obviously studio or "slick" look on a dare. The trouble with a lot of the guys who do the studio or magazine style is that they assume that anyone shooting any other style is either incompetent or aesthetically challenged. This is an egotistical and arrogant attitude, and quite ignorant as well. You and Aaron and I are doing commercial photography, and our sole goal is to please our customers with out content, not get into some museum of photography. We have different customer lists, that's all. Before anyone makes a sweeping statement about photography, he should ask himself "is there a law that says this?" (and this includes Aaron's thoughts about depth of field, which I don't necessarily agree with 100%). Is there a law that says photos should have lots of depth of field? Is there a law saying the opposite? The answer is no in both cases. On my artsy-fartsy photo site, I have a whole page devoted to "The Myths of Photography," and this sort of thing is discussed there. The site is at http://www.afterglow-photo.com (and this isn't a spam, because there is nothing for sale there which is likely to be purchased by webmasters). __________________ SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60.

03-20-2002, 11:13 AM	#64
Nedder Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 555	Hey Unseen, Great "Myths of Photography" book! I, as a webmaster, was very interested I just bought 3 copies for myself and 17 more for my friends!! Nz

03-20-2002, 07:35 PM	#65
4Pics Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 7,952	we going to get a reply as to what type of camera?

03-20-2002, 11:36 PM	#67
tha_timinator Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Amsterdam, the Netherlands Posts: 590	i totally agree at the spam & off topic things BUT I MUST SAY: planetcontent - those pics are sincerely one of the best i've ever seen... great quality, great creativity, great lightning, great atmosphere, and last but not least; great focus keep up the good work & you've got my bookmark __________________ CELEBRITYSTART.COM

03-21-2002, 01:56 PM	#68
gregtx Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 1,929	How come no one brings up her butthole? Just her pussy? I thought I would ask. ===================================== hmmm... is someone trying to come out of the closet??? http://www.freshgayphotos.com lol

03-21-2002, 03:20 PM	#69
Shaggy Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: USA Posts: 570	I like that her face is out of focus. It's kinda like putting a bag over her head. The money is nice and clear and that's what counts.

08-03-2004, 01:26 AM	#70
AaronM GFY Royality ;) Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: ┌∩┐ ◣_◢ ┌∩┐ Posts: 46,923	Hey Dean...How's it going? Your photography still sucks.

08-03-2004, 01:30 AM	#71
Chrome Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Oregon Posts: 639	Focusing fluid?

08-03-2004, 09:06 AM	#72
Firehorse Desire it and have it!!! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: www.fuckwithfire.com ICQ 512915 Posts: 30,767	That looks like most other red Xs to me, but maybe I am the only one not seeing the pic! __________________ MySweetEbony

08-03-2004, 09:13 AM	#74
psyko514 See sig. Join Epic Cash. Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Montreal, Quebec. ICQ: 214702014 Posts: 22,366	i can't believe it's not butter. __________________ Bad Girl Bucks - 50% Revshare through CCBill. Promote BrandyDDD, Pixie's Pillows, Action Allie and more! Phoenix Forum Pics \| Webmaster Access Montreal pics email: psyko514(a)gmail.com \| icq: 214-702-014