Join 3,417 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Oooo, pretty
July 27, 2007 5:19 AM   Subscribe

It's Friday, time to relax and look at pretty pictures [maybe nsfw in the banner ads]
posted by Brandon Blatcher (20 comments total) 5 users marked this as a favorite

 
Copyright infringement and no photo credits! Love it.

not to mention a NSFW banner ad!
posted by photoslob at 5:24 AM on July 27, 2007


You may want "NSFW". Not that I care, but people will.
posted by chuckdarwin at 5:36 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite]


I meant: *to add* the word NSFW
posted by chuckdarwin at 5:36 AM on July 27, 2007


Apologies on the NSFW. My browser (Camino) doesn't show the banner ad.

I flagged it so the admins could throw on a NSFW.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:42 AM on July 27, 2007


Love the underwater tiger shot. There's a lot of good pix here.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 5:51 AM on July 27, 2007


OK, I think it's reasonable to operate on the idea that literate adults using the web also use ad-blockers.

I enjoyed this exactly as billed. Thanks. Catching a rainbow and a lightning strike in the same shot? Patience required!
posted by imperium at 6:07 AM on July 27, 2007


OK, I think it's reasonable to operate on the idea that literate adults using the web also use ad-blockers.

...as long as they are reading from home or their workplaces allow them to install software.
posted by DU at 6:52 AM on July 27, 2007


meh, any idiot could have taken these photos. All they require is a digital camera, an extraordinary amount of talent, a knowledge of composition, lighting, and knowing how to tell a story with a picture.
posted by blue_beetle at 7:07 AM on July 27, 2007 [3 favorites]


meh, any idiot could have taken these photos

...and most important, the taste to omit the 99.99% of your photos that are worse than the remaining 0.01%

(In the ancient days of film, my photography teacher observed that you get about one usable picture from 80 square inches of negative, no matter what the format. An 8x10 camera hits on most every shot--35mm and roll film gets about one good picture per roll)
posted by hexatron at 7:27 AM on July 27, 2007


Copyright infringement and no photo credits! Love it.

Bears repeating. Don't do this, kids.
posted by sidereal at 7:32 AM on July 27, 2007


No Goatse?
posted by Optamystic at 7:36 AM on July 27, 2007


This post is useless without words.
posted by Deathalicious at 7:49 AM on July 27, 2007


90 year old, wrinkled Indian men - making photography a profitable career choice since the 1970's.
posted by fire&wings at 8:21 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite]


As if the sharks and jellyfish weren't doing enough to keep me on dry land, now I gotta worry about Tigers?!?
posted by billyfleetwood at 8:30 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite]


Typical photos you would find postered on dorm-room walls throughout the land. Now these are photos.

(Hate to snark, but this is photography, after all)
posted by KokuRyu at 8:30 AM on July 27, 2007


Sorry, here.
posted by KokuRyu at 8:31 AM on July 27, 2007


Susan Meiselas

posted by KokuRyu at 8:31 AM on July 27, 2007


TRULY INSPIRING
posted by Shakeer at 11:38 AM on July 27, 2007


I have to agree with sidereal and photoslob. I would love to use some of these (wonderful) pictures in a presentation or two - the tiger one would be excellent - but I can't because I don't know what the rights are.
posted by jamuraa at 2:19 PM on July 27, 2007


meh, any idiot could have taken these photos

...and most important, the taste to omit the 99.99% of your photos that are worse than the remaining 0.01%


There are two schools of photography:

1) take a hell of a lot of pictures and throw out the crap
2) take a hell of a lot of pictures and only keep the good stuff
posted by mazola at 10:38 PM on July 27, 2007


« Older I don't know what other people‚Äôs first thoughts ma...  |  Google goes to the dark side. ... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments