[13:47] <luisbg> hello all
[13:47] <luisbg> canon eos 400d vs nikon d40x?
[14:11] <luisbg> hey _MMA_
[14:35] <kwwii> hi _MMA_ , luisbg
[14:35] <kwwii> luisbg: personally I would buy the nikom
[14:40] <kwwii> erm, nikon
[14:42]  * _MMA_ is drowning in Ubuntu Studio artwork. (plans on killing anyone who bitches about it when its released)
[14:58] <kwwii> _MMA_: ever wish you could silence someone through email?
[14:59]  * kwwii thinks that ubuntu-studio should be green
[14:59] <kwwii> pink and green
[15:01] <_MMA_> Green? Ill just copy the Foresight theme and stick it in Ubuntu Studio. "pink and green" is for Hardy+1. ;)
[15:26] <kwwii> _MMA_: good to see that you have a long term plan :p
[15:28] <_MMA_> kwwii: Actually Ill probably just copy Ubuntu at that point and change small things. Colors, branding.
[15:31] <kwwii> _MMA_: you might want to wait until we know the exact design direction before you say that - there have been mumblings that we should stick with brown
[15:31] <_MMA_> kwwii: Im talking for H+1.
[15:39] <kwwii> _MMA_: yeah, so am I - looks like I will be flying to london soon to get final decisions on the art direction for the next whole lts cycle
[15:40] <_MMA_> Too bad the Black and orange thing looks nixed. Some cool shots came out of that.
[15:40] <kwwii> I am still pushing for it...we might have to phase out the brown slowly though
[15:41] <kwwii> the community really discussed it a lot and came up with some good ideas - I would hate to lose out on that
[15:42] <_MMA_> Yeah. Just walk Mark through the ML posts.
[15:48] <kwwii> I think he gave up on reading the list - paying me to do it instead
[15:49] <kwwii> I am just going to present him with stuff that I want and keep the brown to a minimum, see where that gets me
[15:52] <_MMA_> Sounds like a plan. So are you working on ideas or doing administrative work today?
[15:54] <kwwii> a little bit of both, had a couple of meetings, and am working on a wallpaper idea
[15:55] <kwwii> had to do an employee review thingy - what fun
[15:55] <kwwii> rating yourself
[15:55] <_MMA_> :)
[15:56] <_MMA_> "I'm awesome!!" (gimmie a raise)
[15:56] <kwwii> lol, no doubt
[16:01] <_MMA_> kwwii: On my iconset, I'm doin' a black stroke to the icons instead of the dark-gray. I think it's looking better. It's giving more contrast with the UI. They blended it too much before.
[16:11] <kwwii> _MMA_: do you mean the stroke on the outside?
[16:12] <kwwii> if it is not black, I would suggest making it black but quite transparent
[16:12] <kwwii> although black might just look nicer
[16:12] <_MMA_> kwwii: Ill send you a .tar in a little bit so you can take a look.
[16:26] <kwwii> _MMA_: sounds good
[16:36] <_MMA_> kwwii: On Inkscape SVN is there a way to make certain toolboxes always come up by default? ie: I would like to have "Fill and Stroke" and "Align and Distribute" com up all the time.
[16:36] <_MMA_> s/com/come
[16:49] <_MMA_> kwwii: Look at Richard Johnson's last post to Planet.
[17:05] <kwwii> lol
[17:08] <kwwii> I sent the guy who does those sites a heads up
[17:09] <_MMA_> :)

[17:19] <_MMA_> Not that people in here dont know but: The Ubuntu Studio project is still looking for community contributions. If interested look over: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/Artwork/OfficialHardyIncoming

[17:58] <kwwii> _MMA_: on that level, I am writing an email to the list encouraging people to keep working on Ubuntu ideas for Hardy and pointing out that there are a lot of other derivatives to work on, mind if I point them to that page as well?
[18:00] <_MMA_> Sure.
[18:35] <_MMA_> kwwii: Any ideas re: my Inkscape question?
[18:35] <troy_s> luisbg: Canon 5D
[18:35] <luisbg> hey troy_s
[18:36] <luisbg> long time no see
[18:36] <troy_s> luisbg: Yeah no kidding.
[18:36] <luisbg> troy_s, I wish I had the money for a canon 5d
[18:36] <troy_s> luisbg: What are you wanting to spend?
[18:36] <troy_s> luisbg: Everything else should be considered equivalent.
[18:36] <luisbg> around 1000 dollars
[18:36] <luisbg> in euros off course ;)
[18:36] <troy_s> luisbg: Largely because the CCD / CMOS size is the same (dinky 1.6 multiplier)
[18:36] <troy_s> luisbg: So don't break your budget.
[18:37] <troy_s> luisbg: If you want to spend 1000 dollars, your best bet in my opinion is to get an affordable body (All of the digital SLR contenders make ok ones Pentax / Nikon / Canon)
[18:37] <kwwii> _MMA_: going to pick up my kid from basketball, bbiab
[18:37] <troy_s> luisbg: Snap up one that will afford you the ability to buy two lenses.
[18:38] <kwwii> troy_s: I would suggest sticking to nikon or canon though
[18:38] <troy_s> luisbg: Or one (which will crimping your style)
[18:38] <kwwii> as they sell more quality lenses in any case
[18:38] <troy_s> kwwii: Matter of preference -- the good lens makers make for all...
[18:38] <kwwii> _MMA_: didn't see your inkscape question
[18:38] <luisbg> troy_s, what are you telling me... to ditch photography?
[18:38] <troy_s> kwwii: And affordable lenses are made by Tam for example.
[18:38] <troy_s> luisbg: God no.
[18:38] <troy_s> lol
[18:38] <luisbg> troy_s, LOL
[18:39] <luisbg> troy_s, "affordable body" <- canon eos 400d
[18:39] <troy_s> luisbg: The best thing from someone who wants to take photos is a tool that will let them do so and achieve the best variety of looks.
[18:39] <luisbg> but yeah... a second lense is out of my budget if I buy that one
[18:39] <troy_s> luisbg: Yes... I would think the Canon line is quite cheap.
[18:39] <luisbg> cheap for the quality it has
[18:39] <troy_s> luisbg: Let's put it this way, there is at least one photographer out there who has made more than 10 million dollars with broken lenses.
[18:40] <troy_s> luisbg: And don't worry too much about features
[18:40] <troy_s> luisbg: The bodies in the Canon line are all very similar for example, with multimetering and shit to bulk up the price
[18:40] <troy_s> luisbg: Bugger metering -- learn how to use a meter or the spot meter in the camera.
[18:41] <troy_s> luisbg: Stills photography comes down to fundamentally the same three elements as art -- Content / Composition / Lighting
[18:41] <luisbg> troy_s, I agree (about the three concepts)
[18:41] <troy_s> luisbg: Do you have a style / look that you 'like'?
[18:41] <luisbg> troy_s, vivid color portraits and macros
[18:41] <troy_s> luisbg: Have you shot much 35mm still photography before?  Do you have a light meter?
[18:42] <luisbg> troy_s, in black and white with no light meter
[18:42] <troy_s> luisbg: So let's assume the vivid colour portraiture (along Floria Sigmondisi's styling) is art direction) is more or less outside of the camera body discussion (nerf the semantics of ccd / cmos)
[18:43] <troy_s> luisbg: If you want to do macro photography, then you will need a cheap macro lens or at least have the 'macro' mode included on your default.
[18:43] <luisbg> troy_s, I can wait for macro
[18:43] <troy_s> luisbg: And even then, what type of macro photography are you thinking of?
[18:43] <luisbg> I need some field experience before that ;)
[18:43] <troy_s> luisbg: Get the lens with a macro -- there are more than a good number of standard SLR lenses (say in the 30-70 range with a macro flip on the 70 mm end)
[18:43] <luisbg> troy_s, http://www.flickr.com/photos/leightphotography/1987698385/
[18:44] <luisbg> troy_s, favorite portrait ever
[18:44] <troy_s> luisbg: Pretty simple stuff to shoot... and that looks like the levels may have been slid slightly in post.
[18:44] <troy_s> luisbg: The general rule for photography is exactly what most mooky amateurs do
[18:45] <luisbg> and that is?
[18:45] <troy_s> luisbg: Put your subject when in direct sunlight such that the sunlight is directly behind the subject
[18:45] <troy_s> luisbg: So that it is you, subject, sun
[18:45] <luisbg> that makes a high contrast shadow
[18:45] <troy_s> luisbg: Not at all
[18:45] <troy_s> luisbg: it is called backlight
[18:45] <troy_s> and is exactly what you see in that photo
[18:46] <troy_s> the 'fill' comes from two places -- either expose for the ambient light (sometimes blowing out background but if you notice the trees are in shade)
[18:46] <troy_s> or by laying something white in front / to the side of your subject
[18:46] <troy_s> and the sun will hit it and fill the face
[18:46] <luisbg> true
[18:46] <troy_s> the _only_ way to shoot direct sunlight on skin
[18:46] <troy_s> is using diffusion
[18:46] <troy_s> the rest looks like shit
[18:47] <luisbg> yeap
[18:47] <luisbg> got confused
[18:47] <luisbg> troy_s, so this are my two options
[18:47] <troy_s> it creates a hideous rakey light with no 'core'
[18:47] <luisbg> canon eos 400d with EF-S 18-55mm lense
[18:47] <troy_s> let me see a link to the lens
[18:48] <luisbg> or nikon d40x with 18-55 mm and 55-200 mm
[18:48] <troy_s> i am 100% certain that you can get a decently fast lens with a macro for under 1000 with body
[18:48] <troy_s> luisbg: the high end is easy to get to with a doubler if you don't mind losing some autofocus and such
[18:48] <luisbg> doubler?
[18:48] <troy_s> luisbg: a doubler is deadly cheap and useful to someone who wants to experiment with looks
[18:48] <troy_s> luisbg: it is a
[18:49] <troy_s> luisbg: small 'barrel' that is basically a 'bellows' between the lens and the body
[18:49] <luisbg> ahhh ok
[18:49] <troy_s> luisbg: it doubles the effective lens length
[18:49] <luisbg> so it doesn't have to be the same mount type
[18:49] <luisbg> ahhh no... I see
[18:49] <troy_s> luisbg: yes... it does.
[18:49] <troy_s> luisbg: you will be able to get canon doublers for cheap
[18:49] <troy_s> luisbg: let me see if i can find a cheap macro combination pack
[18:49] <_MMA_> (conversation interrupting comment)
[18:49] <luisbg> cool! any links meanwhile I look for links to the lenses?
[18:50] <troy_s> luisbg: yeah link for body again?
[18:50] <luisbg> _MMA_, (that's all?)
[18:50] <luisbg> troy_s, body A http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/
[18:51] <luisbg> body B http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40x/
[18:51] <troy_s> luisbg: another thing to remember is that like light, the ccd size is not linear.  for example, going for 'twice' the resolution of a 6mp camera is not 12, its 36
[18:51] <troy_s> erk
[18:52] <luisbg> yes
[18:52] <troy_s> rather the square of the original dimensions... so like 2k by 3k would be 4 by 9 i guess
[18:52] <troy_s> 4x6 24
[18:52] <troy_s> lol
[18:52] <troy_s> bad math today
[18:52] <troy_s> lol
[18:52]  * _MMA_ wants Troy to install Warsow so he can shoot Troy in the face.
[18:52] <troy_s> luisbg: i bring that up because there is no sense in going completely bonkers on price to get the extra 4 mp and some crappy 1200 point metering
[18:53] <luisbg> troy_s, lense A http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_18-55mm_lens
[18:53] <troy_s> luisbg: the best photography will be achieved using your eye and figuring out how you want to expose the image -- the 'frills' are a little bit of a waste in the bang for buck category.
[18:53] <troy_s> luisbg: is that the bundled lens?
[18:54] <luisbg> troy_s, yes
[18:54] <luisbg> camera A goes with lens A canon eos 400d with ef-s 18mm
[18:54] <luisbg> 18-55mm*
[18:54] <luisbg> lense B1 http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1855.htm and...
[18:54] <troy_s> luisbg: also bear in mind that if you avoid buying the shitty digital lenses
[18:54] <troy_s> luisbg: your money will go further
[18:55] <troy_s> luisbg: as when you potentially upgrade to a full 1:1 body, you won't get vignetting.
[18:55] <luisbg> 1:1 body?
[18:55] <troy_s> luisbg: a 1:1 body is a body with a ccd/cmos censor the same size as 35mm film.
[18:55] <luisbg> ahh ok
[18:56] <troy_s> luisbg: it effectively opens up wide angle photography via lenses without using silly adapters like the 'fixed lens' cameras flog.
[18:56] <troy_s> luisbg: more importantly, the depth of field is the same as a 35mm camera
[18:56] <troy_s> luisbg: which is of huge importance to look
[18:57] <luisbg> lens B2 http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55200.htm
[18:57] <luisbg> so... wrap up
[18:57] <troy_s> yikes that's a slow lens
[18:57] <luisbg> option A: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_18-55mm_lens
[18:57] <luisbg> or
[18:58] <troy_s> How much is the Canon body?
[18:58] <luisbg> option B: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40x/        http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1855.htm     http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55200.htm
[18:58] <luisbg> troy_s, where I'm buying I can't get the body alone (I need financing)
[18:58] <troy_s> luisbg:  that 2nd lens would be effectively useless at 5.6
[18:59] <luisbg> lol
[18:59] <luisbg> so it's not worth it
[18:59] <troy_s> luisbg: not the 2nd.
[18:59] <luisbg> the first?
[18:59] <troy_s> luisbg: aim for the main market in that line -- the 18-sub hundred mm (in digital is that?)
[19:00] <troy_s> luisbg: basically a 35mm equiv of say 30-70 that is fast -- 2.8.  it should be affordable.
[19:00] <luisbg> I don't understand you
[19:00] <troy_s> (and by fast i don't mean super fast, but fast enough to shoot with available tungsten light and considerations)
[19:00] <troy_s> luisbg: let me look at a local photo site... hold on.
[19:00] <luisbg> ok
[19:02] <troy_s> luisbg: christ i can't find one quickly.  they are very common in 35mm and if the mount is the same it would work fine.
[19:03] <troy_s> luisbg: what makes you want that 40D?
[19:03] <luisbg> 400d?
[19:04] <troy_s> luisbg: yes sorry
[19:04] <luisbg> I'm looking for an affordable dslr with good image quality
[19:04] <troy_s> luisbg: what is the price difference say, between the digi rebel 300d and 400d there?
[19:04] <luisbg> what else would I want?
[19:04] <luisbg> digi rebel 300d is out of the market
[19:05] <troy_s> luisbg: you are aware that _any_ of those digital slrs (and I mean any -- pentax / canon / nikon's are in the same magnifcation class at the same price point) will seriously outshoot any of the 'all in one' pocketcameras.
[19:05] <luisbg> I would go with 350d if I could find it here (I'm sure the difference of price would mean getting an other lens for the same bucks)
[19:05] <luisbg> yeah... that's why I don't want a pocketcamera
[19:05] <luisbg> and since I want a slr... I want the best for my little budget
[19:06] <troy_s> luisbg: or getting a more versatile lens.  the main lens components for versatility are lens length versatility with speed of lens (how fast the lens is)
[19:06] <troy_s> luisbg: and with your budget, you don't want to over shell out for the body and crimp your ability to shoot
[19:07] <luisbg> troy_s, I understand what you are saying
[19:07] <troy_s> luisbg: 2.8 is a minimum speed at the wider angle (a still camera lens shifts f value as you go longer as compared to a motion picture camera that holds the f value constant as you zoom)
[19:07] <troy_s> luisbg: by minimum speed i mean 'minimum speed that you would find useful'
[19:07] <luisbg> troy_s, is the ef-s 18-55 lense a versatile lens?
[19:07] <troy_s> luisbg:  that extra stop of light is a huge bump when shooting say -- interior.
[19:07] <troy_s> luisbg: let me scour the link again
[19:07] <troy_s> luisbg: that size looks about right for the class.
[19:08] <luisbg> troy_s, do you want to move this chat to a PM
[19:08] <luisbg> it's getting big ;)
[19:08] <troy_s> luisbg: sure.
[19:20] <kwwii> luisbg: if you want a versatile lense by something like an 18-200 or so, it might be a bit more expensive but it will cover much more range
[19:22] <kwwii> but in the cheaper stuff you will be barrel distortion, purple fringing, sharpness problems and they will not be too dark (the fstop stuff troy_s was talking about)
[19:22] <luisbg> kwwii, I can have a 18-135mm with the nikon inside my budget
[19:22] <kwwii> that 18-135 is a pretty good lense, all in all
[19:22] <kwwii> for an inexpensive lense
[19:22] <kwwii> they also make zooms which do not change in fstop, they are just really expensive
[19:24] <kwwii> I am thinking about buying a 200-200 Nikor for christmas with a constant 2.8 but it costs like 6500 euros
[19:24] <luisbg> ouch
[19:24] <luisbg> that's a lot of money
[19:25] <luisbg> nikon d40x body with this http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06080902nikonafsdx18-135lens.asp <-- 900 euros
[19:25] <kwwii> yepp, but it will be the last telephoto lense I ever buy ;-)
[19:26] <kwwii> luisbg: I have that lense as well...not a bad "every day" lense
[19:26] <luisbg> kwwii, yeah... good thing is that these are investments for life
[19:26] <luisbg> not like laptops ;)
[19:26] <kwwii> are you buying it in a kit together or seperatly?
[19:26] <luisbg> kit together
[19:27] <kwwii> cool, you get the lense for almost nothing that way
[19:28] <troy_s> luisbg: and no, you will be upgrading to the 1:1s when they become prolific.  just make sure your glass is 35mm as opposed to that shitty 'D' marker.
[19:28] <troy_s> luisbg: there are hundreds of camera shops with 2nd hand 35mm lenses... go use them.
[19:30] <troy_s> luisbg: on that note, a prime lens will always perform better than a zoom, and you can get them for quite cheap in a 2nd hand shoppe.
[19:32] <kwwii> just be carefull when buying used lenses, and make sure that it has autofocus
[19:32] <kwwii> and honestly, with the kit prices you almost get the lense for free
[19:33] <kwwii> but I do agree with the comment that should not buy the DX lenses
[19:33] <luisbg> kwwii, the bad thing about nikon d40x is that focus motor is in the lens... so no autofocus if not nikkor lens
[19:33] <kwwii> as a normal lense really is an investment for a lifetime, whereas the DX lenses is an investment for as long as you have a camera with a smaller sensor
[19:33] <troy_s> luisbg: not a big deal
[19:33] <troy_s> luisbg: if you are taking portrait shots (as seems to be what you want) manual focus is completely fine.
[19:33] <luisbg> so this lens are DX or 35mm?
[19:34] <kwwii> pretty much any nikon lense made in the last 10 years will be autofuocus (and any of the other lense manufacturers)
[19:34] <luisbg> troy_s, I'm not sure yet if that's going to be my "style"... I have to find it shooting stuff (with a camera not a gun)
[19:34] <kwwii> DX means that it is made for the smaller sensor
[19:34] <troy_s> luisbg: the D shit is digital.  it means that the glass isn't as big inside and that will mean vignetting as you increase your receptor size. (read useless when you upgrade to a real 1:1 body)
[19:34] <kwwii> but manual focus on a digital camera is not what you want
[19:35] <kwwii> as you do not have any way of knowing when it is really sharp
[19:35] <troy_s> ???
[19:36] <kwwii> chemical film cameras had the nifty grids with blocks and such to know when it was really sharp, digital cameras do not have that
[19:37] <kwwii> you will find that many of the pics you thought were sharp are not sharp
[19:38]  * troy_s outs.