Recent content by RevOnline

Fair enough.

The reason the bed is so famous (which is the real cause for value) is because it was involved in a famous award - the Turner prize, which garners as much attention for those involved as possible. But she had done a lot before that to make herself known, her tent was already very famous. That...

There is no way without a time machine I can make an edit after reading your post when it was made 3 minutes later, is there? If you can't understand that, I feel calling you an idiot is entirely factual.

If I edited it at 1518, and you posted at 1521, how did I read your post before changing it? Are you an idiot?

Or drop your trousers, do a poo and then throw it at them.

It's not really, it's a different construction. The back of the lens is closer to the image sensor - if you did manage to put one on a FF camera you'd be ramming the end of the lens much too deeply inside the camera body. It makes wide-angle lenses cheaper to make, which are a much bigger...

Millions of times. Patience (and Photoshop) is the only solution. Photoshop is pretty good for that though - take two shots from a tripod with the clutter in different places and it is 2 seconds work to cut them out.

And no-one laughed at Emin's bed? I think you'll find they did. Isn't it a strange coincidence that the person that put something out there and didn't mind receiving the negative attention it created is the famous artist and you're at home failing to work out art?

Definitely not shopped. Bit of PP sharpening is responsible for the white line around the rear tire (probably from heat in the first place, but its neatness is sharpening and then scaling).

The Guardian has had some fantastic stuff about her, they've really done a good job in their four or five articles: http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/corinne-day

I'm just doing it to an external hard-drive at the mo (although the best pictures which are being sold, a small percentage are on another one too). Looking at Blu-Ray though...the problem is with the longevity of the format. But it seems a better solution than DAT, which is the only real...

Might not have been a bad idea, eh?

Sadly for your smartypants act, that isn't the cause. Did you really think I'd never tried a single photograph without recomposing? Or that I hadn't thought to check if the focus was accurate before moving it? It makes exactly the same mistakes clamped to a tripod.

WIDE as in 2mm narrower than the Sigma? :P

Obviously you still need to buy the same equipment beyond the lights. But the lights are the major cost, so if a consistent natural source is available it's sensible to make use of it.