Rebecca (Page 2): Thanks for taking a look! ---Jude...

jbirdmo Loc: Soon to be Chicago

pjreed wrote:

The eyes have it. This lady has very expressive eyes, and a nice belly button to store chewing gum.

Thanks for taking a look!

---Jude

jbirdmo Loc: Soon to be Chicago

Here are a couple more..

http://judevickery.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/20110616-IMG_2961.jpg

http://judevickery.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/20110616-IMG_3104.jpg

---Jude

dial316 Loc: North Florida

Hey Jude, Thanks for the info :thumbup:xxx-xxxx call me. :lol:

14kphotog Loc: Marietta, Ohio

Day one of 2012 and the perverts are already slobbering. This is a pix well done and the lighting is 100% on!

jbirdmo Loc: Soon to be Chicago

dial316 wrote:

Hey Jude, Thanks for the info :thumbup:xxx-xxxx call me. :lol:

Anytime! :thumbup:

---Jude

jbirdmo Loc: Soon to be Chicago

14kphotog wrote:

Day one of 2012 and the perverts are already slobbering. This is a pix well done and the lighting is 100% on!

Thanks 14kphotog! One of my favorite techniques is to blend ambient and flash. It came out pretty well on this one I think...

---Jude

photogrl57 Loc: Tennessee

jbirdmo wrote:

photogrl57 wrote:

I didn't get as far as her face. LOL.

Your deep contemplation of the lighting and composition intrigue me!

;-)

---Jude

Lighting and composition ...... yeah that's it only I spell them with different letters lol.

jbirdmo Loc: Soon to be Chicago

photogrl57 wrote:

jbirdmo wrote:

photogrl57 wrote:

I didn't get as far as her face. LOL.

Your deep contemplation of the lighting and composition intrigue me!

;-)

---Jude

Lighting and composition ...... yeah that's it only I spell them with different letters lol.

Well however you want to spell it, thanks for taking a look!

---Jude

pigpen

Nice shots.

I'm looking into this lens or the non-IS version.

Only advice I can give you, put down the camera and take her to dinner!

jbirdmo Loc: Soon to be Chicago

pigpen wrote:

Nice shots.

I'm looking into this lens or the non-IS version.

Only advice I can give you, put down the camera and take her to dinner!

If you can afford it go with the IS version. This is a heavy lens and so to hold it stead can be a challenge. Especially true if your working below a 1/200 shutter speed. With IS I can use the lens at 1/30 with out much of a problem. The IS is good for adding 4 stops if i remember correctly.

I hope that helps!

---Jude

pigpen

Thanx for the info.

1000 bucks is a big difference, like a whole nother lens!!

I have also read many reviews, by professionals not just consumers, who say the non-IS is a little sharper due to the fact the IS has extra glass/elements, though I don't think most people could tell the diff.

Also, most things I'll use it for will require fast shutter speeds, making the IS obsolete. But I know there will be times when I wished I had it.

jbirdmo Loc: Soon to be Chicago

pigpen wrote:

Thanx for the info.

1000 bucks is a big difference, like a whole nother lens!!

I have also read many reviews, by professionals not just consumers, who say the non-IS is a little sharper due to the fact the IS has extra glass/elements, though I don't think most people could tell the diff.

Also, most things I'll use it for will require fast shutter speeds, making the IS obsolete. But I know there will be times when I wished I had it.

Yeah I'm sure you'll run into it more than you think. Of course if you never have it, you won't know what your missing. I use flash most of the time, and many would argue that I don't need it much either. The thing is that the IS is engaged as soon as you start to focus the camera, making it much easier to just view the subject before taking the photo. I've turned the IS off a number of times just to play with it, and find the camera shake at 200mm to be annoying compared to having the IS on.
It's by far my favorite lens.

---Jude

RiverNan Loc: Eastern Pa

Hey Jude,
Dont think we met before?
Ok, so on my computer I have to scroll down on verticles unless I change up...so as it was I was scrolling.
I was happy, nice background, sultry smile, good lighting, maybe the face a little over exposed, blue and white shirt to match those eyes, soft belly...with lighting much better on this portion of skin, I can see arm fur and like it...still scrolling down, jean shorts...WHAT? NOT SHORTS? a crotch skirt with white denim pubic threads hanging from the skirt and exposed pockets... Thats where you lost me.
River NAN...not man.
Oh she looks great in blue with the guitar...

jbirdmo Loc: Soon to be Chicago

rivernan wrote:

Hey Jude, br Dont think we met before? br Ok, so o... (show quote)

Points taken rivernan.
I can see the point about the hanging threads, and the exposed pockets. But I'll have to ask about the skirt as a whole. Do you just not care about this kind of bottom, or is it more about the miss match of the daisy duke idea and that look is always with shorts and this is a skirt?

As far as verticals go, these photos are only 533 by 800 in pixels. If you have to scroll very far to see the whole photo, then I have to wonder if your screen resolution is off. A 15" monitor should readily display a 1024 by 768 resolution, and 17" monitor should be able to display 1280 x 1024.

I'm pretty sure we haven't met, I've only been posting a couple of days. Pleased to meet you though!

---Jude

RiverNan Loc: Eastern Pa

My goal was to focus on the positive...I wasnt really thinking about daisy duke...It was just shouting crotch too loud for me...It was nice and sexy I thought..then not so much.

I liked fall colors and pond!

Im not good with all those numbers. Im on a laptop and I control minus when I feel the need to see a complete verticle.

Glad to meet you and welcome. Lots of things to see and learn here...enjoy.