The Weekly Collegial Show Your Photos Starting 24 June 2024 Any Brand

Steve,

Those are pretty flowers. I particularly like the second one. The evening or early morning sky picture looks good with the tree silhouette.

Steve,

A famous street photographer said photography is an instant painting. In addition to taking pictures, he also painted. He must have appreciated that in less than a second he could capture something that could take hours to create with a brush.

Dig,

I think in photography, the photographer tries to convey, not only the scene that is facing him or her, but also how he or she feels about it,,. the thoughts and emotions and feelings they experience.

You ever look at a photo and it just seems flat and you go, "Meh", and with others, you go, "Whoa". The photographer has captured something and conveyed that to you the viewer.

People can look at one of your pictures and say, "That's a pretty picture", but it's more than just "Pretty". There is a "something" there that you've been able to capture and convey without using words.

Steve

Steve,

A lot of what you write about concerning thoughts, emotions and feelings depends on the what camera and lens is used, but most of it I believe is the subject matter that you have captured. A person can create that slowly with a paint brush or instantly with a camera.

Subject: Olympus E-500 Comparison

Here's a photo of three cameras and lenses, including the Olympus E-500 that took the picture of the car above. Is that car a Rolls Royce? It kind of looked like it but I could not see the RR emblem identifying it that way.

On the left side of the photo is the M-series Canon M50 Mark II with the Canon 55-200 lens (88 to 320 equivalent). On the right side is my Canon T7i (800D) camera with the Canon 18-135mm lens (29 to 216 equivalent). In the middle is the old Olympus E-500 with the Zuiko 40-150mm lens (80 to 300 equivalent).

I also found another Olympus E-500 camera with the Zuiko 14-42mm lens (28 to 84 equivalent). I charged up a battery yesterday. Early this morning I find that that one works perfectly too. In those days (as I still do today) is I would have a camera for every lens.

Anyway, here's the comparison.

Model - Canon EOS M50m2
ExposureTime - 1/15 seconds
FNumber - 6.30
ISOSpeedRatings - 6400
ExposureBiasValue - 0
FocalLength - 42 mm
Lens Model - EF-M15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM

I take it you mean the green car, which doesnt look at all like a Rolls Royce to me. It looks more like an American car.

David

David,

I'm not disagreeing with you, as it depends on what we mean by similar or like. 😀 To me, the green car does look similar to a Rolls Royce that was made from 1937 to 1939. But I don't think it is a Rolls Royce. So what is the make and model of the green car? Does anyone know?

By the way, I was looking at some of my old pictures taken with the Olympus E-500 this morning. Wow...they were terrible in poor lighting compared to what we can get today with our modern cameras. But now that I have more experience, it will be challenging to see if I can do better with the old cameras in 2024, about fifteen to twenty years later. I got both batteries charged up, modified the settings for aperture priority and cleaned out the CF cards of their old images. I put them in one bag. Maybe I can take a few pictures with them this weekend.

Have you taken any pictures today or yesterday with the old cameras you have? I bet you will be astonished (as I was) how poor the images turn out compared to what we get today. I knew there were these limitations (as we all do too), but to see them again...wow...what a difference 20 to 25 years makes in technology improvements. 😀

This is a 1936 Cadillac Fleetwood Convertable Coupe.
classiccars.com/listings/view/1196431/1936-cadillac-fleetwood-for-sale-in-morgantown-pennsylvania-19543

Sagittarius,

Thank you. That looks like it, from the pictures we have. The one I took a picture of had a spare tire on the side (and maybe another spare tire on the other side). That's a cool looking car. The price is $49,500 (USD).

Again thank you for taking the time to find this for us. 😀 If I see this car again, maybe I can talk to the owner about it. If I find out more information, I'll let you all know.

Edit: I looked at this again. The model I took a picture of, had four doors instead of two doors. But Sagittarius gave us all good information to fine tune our understanding of this car.

Edit the second time. I saw on the internet a 1937 Cadillac series 75 V8 convertible sedan with four doors and spare tires, but the bumper was slightly different. It's hard to find something exactly to what I found with my Olympus E-500 camera. The price asked for that 1937 car is $85,000 (USD). It's available in Arizona. A little interesting history: It was originally purchased in 1936 in Kingston, NY by Mrs. Emily Crane Chadbourne, daughter of the Crane Co. founder Richard T. Crane. Crane Co. is a huge plumbing company that you all may have heard of.

Digi,

My reaction was the same as how I recognise the music of certain composers. It is instinctive: like the music of Haydn doesnt sound like that of Mozart. Even though I may not know the piece playing on the radio I can often identify the ocmposer. To me there were things about the car that were not RR-like, but which said "designed in the USA". I cant even identify them; as I wrote, it was totally instinctive. 😀 I used to have a Riley RMA 1.5 litre which was a bit similar to the Cadillac.

I took some photos with an old camera yesterday which I will probably post tomorrow. I am impressed by your picture of the three Canons!

David

David,

The emblem (or whatever they call it) on the grill was like what I saw on Rolls Royce cars, but it was slightly different. I did not see the RR emblem, so I did not think it was a Rolls Royce. I did look at Rolls Royce cars on the internet. That's where I saw similarities, guessing that the car was probably made in the late 1930's. Your instincts were right that it was "designed in the USA". I really had no idea that it was a Cadillac until Sagittarius provided us with that information, where I could do further research.

I used a red cardboard (or thick paper) as a background for the two Canon cameras and one Olympus camera. Since I took it indoors without a flash I had to keep the camera very steady at that slow shutter speed. It took me a couple of attempts before I got it right.

I look forward to seeing your photos. I was going to test the Olympus E-500 cameras some more this evening, but I knew the lighting was not going to be very good. It's best to find good uniform lighting for these older cameras.

Subject: Rose In the Rain with the Olympus E500

Today we had rain. I also wanted to play around with the old camera again. With about 20 year old technology this is what I got. With such low ISO levels the shutter speeds were low as well. So that made it challenging. I also concentrated in not wasting pixels with sloppy picture-taking, where cropping becomes necessary later. But I have to admit this one was actually cropped a little for composition. But most of them I did not have to crop during post processing.

Model - Olympus E500
ExposureTime - 1/60 seconds
FNumber - 8.00
ISOSpeedRatings - 320
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
FocalLength - 128 mm
Lens Model - Zuiko 40-150mm

The sky had a lot of character this morning.

Steve Thomas

Steve,

Cool. 😀 I like your cloud pictures. I also took pictures of stormy clouds yesterday. One forecast said we were not going to get rain, but the clouds demonstrated that we were indeed going to get some rain.

Here's one of mine.

Model - Canon EOS M50m2
ExposureTime - 1/640 seconds
FNumber - 8
ISOSpeedRatings - 200
ExposureBiasValue - 0.33
FocalLength - 17 mm
Lens Model - EF-M15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM