Join 3,433 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Joe Reifer
November 20, 2007 11:23 PM   Subscribe

Some nice photos. More on Flickr.
posted by serazin (16 comments total) 3 users marked this as a favorite

 
It still amazes me how some people are able to see something and get that vision on film whereas I see something and completely miss it with film. I guess thats what separates us amateurs from the people that can do this well.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 11:30 PM on November 20, 2007


Oooo I love the creepy apocalyptic/urban decay feel to some of these. It's like an alternate reality where the Cold War got...hot.
posted by mayfly wake at 11:40 PM on November 20, 2007


Nice photos. I would like to repost them on a webpage that doesn't make me want to scour my monitor with a brick.
posted by gum at 11:42 PM on November 20, 2007


Great use of light, but I'm bored.
posted by HotPatatta at 12:03 AM on November 21, 2007


Not much new here, really. I don't see any real vision. There's definitely some nice technique exhibited in the night shots, but there's no drama in the compositions.
posted by wemayfreeze at 12:14 AM on November 21, 2007


Some of the stuff might be nice blown up real big, but that's true with most photography. And but he doesn't allow access to larger versions on the Flickr. Oh well.
posted by wemayfreeze at 12:24 AM on November 21, 2007


I like the night stuff. It's not easy to get those looooooong exposure times without getting stuff you don't want. I did some 2-second exposure times with nothing but a stack of books to rest the camera on -- and I still thought I was going to pull my hair out.

I can't even imagine how long it would have taken to make the night look like day in his photos. 30 minutes? An hour?

Good stuff.
posted by Avenger at 1:17 AM on November 21, 2007


Avenger - I just took some pictures by moonlight last night for the first time, and damn if it didn't look like daylight. I used this guide as a rough starting point and varied from there. Think I ended up with 2 minutes at f/4.5 with ISO 400. But stop down to f/22 for greater depth of field, and switch to ISO 100 for finer grain, and you could easily be up to an hour's exposure.
posted by kcds at 4:01 AM on November 21, 2007 [1 favorite]


I keep wondering, every time I am directed towards another photography website, whether I missed the memo that stated that all photography websites must have terrible navigation schemes.

Some good photos, though.
posted by tocts at 5:12 AM on November 21, 2007


I missed the memo that stated that all photography websites must have terrible navigation schemes.

Actually the memo states that all photography websites must have flash-based navigation; their terribleness is more of an inevitable side effect. Because every time you right-click-save, God kills a kitten.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 5:22 AM on November 21, 2007


Yeah, I like a lot of the night shots, but the other ones didn't really hold my attention.
posted by bassjump at 5:49 AM on November 21, 2007


I like his colors. and the sky.
posted by milestogo at 6:10 AM on November 21, 2007


Amazing!! Thank you!
posted by dead_ at 7:33 AM on November 21, 2007


From kcds's link:
"Night Shots: Don't shoot them at night..."
Brilliant advice!
posted by howling fantods at 8:03 AM on November 21, 2007


kcds's link alludes to shooting "day for night" methinks... a debatable technique, but a legitimate suggestion.
posted by butterstick at 8:10 AM on November 21, 2007


Joe was my official photographer for Urban Iditarod for a number of years. He also took some shots of me dressed as a Mob boss at the Albion Castle, but has since taken them down.

In the series shots show me arguing with my mafia wife, getting into a scuffle and then ended up floating dead in the underground water traps of the Albion.
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 1:26 PM on November 21, 2007


« Older Can you tell this photo was taken at 4:52pm, on ei...  |  Richard Paey Speaks... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments