I had someone tell me that they used a underwater camera housing and had 0 issues
CanonXtiDude Member 238 posts Joined Sep 2007 More info | Aug 04, 2012 10:57 | #16 I had someone tell me that they used a underwater camera housing and had 0 issues
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tk1138 Senior Member 294 posts Joined Jun 2011 Location: Denver, CO More info | Aug 04, 2012 20:14 | #17 CanonXtiDude wrote in post #14813370 ![]() I had someone tell me that they used a underwater camera housing and had 0 issues ![]() Do you know which housing? I am considering that option, but it's kinda pricy for something I may not use much.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aug 05, 2012 06:55 | #18 Yeah. Very pricey for once a year. I go under water a lot, but not in water I can see further than 2 feet in.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
narlus Cream of the Crop ![]() 7,668 posts Likes: 85 Joined Apr 2006 Location: North Andover, MA More info | Aug 19, 2012 08:40 | #19 the organizers just put a big clampdown on photo usage: www.tinnitus-photography.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aug 19, 2012 11:46 | #20 That's not new. BM's policy has always been "ask first" and "no commercial usage".
LOG IN TO REPLY |
narlus Cream of the Crop ![]() 7,668 posts Likes: 85 Joined Apr 2006 Location: North Andover, MA More info | Aug 20, 2012 01:29 | #21 i'd say a lot of people run foul of this, if it's not a new rule. I agree that, in the event I post, or allow to be posted, any images (still or video) on a personal website or a website controlled by a third party: (1) I will place, or cause to be placed, on any website in which such images are displayed a notice that the images can be used only for the poster’s personal use and not for any other purpose and that downloading or copying of the images is prohibited, which may be communicated via the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share-Alike license, providing the images do not contain nudity, partial nudity, or sexually suggestive poses (nudity and partial nudity include any images in which bare breasts, bare buttocks, genitals or genital areas are visible); www.tinnitus-photography.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tk1138 Senior Member 294 posts Joined Jun 2011 Location: Denver, CO More info | Aug 20, 2012 22:54 | #22 kiss-o-matic wrote in post #14878139 ![]() Back to the topic(s) at hand, how good does Gaffer tape work? I've got some on order and I'm ready to tape up my camera. However, if some dust starts flying, should I not even bother with pictures? I'm sewing a couple of cases for my 5Ds out of sport nylon an clear plastic that should be waterproof-ish, so I hope it will keep most of the dust out too. No seam tape, so I don't think it will be perfect, but it's worth a shot. If it works, I'll post the plans.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aug 21, 2012 08:53 | #23 i'd say a lot of people run foul of this, if it's not a new rule. There's a few blogs that give pointers for this stuff. They say the best rule of thumb is "are you invading someone's privacy". If no, then they probably aren't going to care. There are tons of pictures w/ just way too many people in them. My experience with gaffer tape so far has been positive, but it does need to be refreshed if the taped object is handled a lot. Is Gaffer tape alone good enough. At this point, I'm only planning on using it in "good" conditions. I know that's weary, but whiteouts, and my camera stays in the bag, covered. I'm hoping the fur I sewed on there catches most of it.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tk1138 Senior Member 294 posts Joined Jun 2011 Location: Denver, CO More info | Aug 21, 2012 23:36 | #24 kiss-o-matic wrote in post #14886419 ![]() Is Gaffer tape alone good enough. At this point, I'm only planning on using it in "good" conditions. I know that's weary, but whiteouts, and my camera stays in the bag, covered. I'm hoping the fur I sewed on there catches most of it. I've never used Gaffer tape, but they say it around the lens base and card & battery slots and you're probably okay. I am only taking 1 lens for the whole trip. I will have to take the card out at some point though. Do you think I will live w/o a rain sleeve as well? That is the big question. It's supposed to be a very dusty year. How much infiltration is acceptable (In your body and in your lens)?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jetcode Cream of the Crop 6,239 posts Likes: 21 Joined Jul 2009 Location: West Marin More info | Aug 21, 2012 23:53 | #25 I have only ever seen images that were "free" posted of the event and I am stunned by some of the art. Dust aside Burning Man has produced some truly spectacular eye candy. Not a wonder they want to keep Getty and company out of the picture.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aug 23, 2012 11:41 | #26 You cannot use pictures from the event for commercial use ... at all. Hence, no Getty. That is the big question. It's supposed to be a very dusty year. How much infiltration is acceptable (In your body and in your lens)? Here's the questions I asked myself: Can you afford to replace your gear if it's damaged beyond repair? If not, do you have insurance that will cover any damage from burning man? Are you going to be stressed out about your camera(s) the whole time? Are you going to be bummed if you see a shot you can't get with what you're taking? It's a risk. I hope it pays off for us both (in a rewarding experience way, though a monetarily remunerative way would be nice too). yeah, been reading this. I think I'm going to take some convenience store bags and tape up pretty much everything but the lense and viewfinder. I can make due w/ the rest being covered. I'll go from there. If it gets totally FUBAR, then yes, that will suck. My guess is it won't (knock on wood) but it's likely to enough crap inside to render it useless until it's serviced... making the event a bust.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 28, 2013 00:18 | #27 tk1138 wrote in post #14890235 ![]() That is the big question. It's supposed to be a very dusty year. How much infiltration is acceptable (In your body and in your lens)? Here's the questions I asked myself: Can you afford to replace your gear if it's damaged beyond repair? If not, do you have insurance that will cover any damage from burning man? Are you going to be stressed out about your camera(s) the whole time? Are you going to be bummed if you see a shot you can't get with what you're taking? It's a risk. I hope it pays off for us both (in a rewarding experience way, though a monetarily remunerative way would be nice too). Its dusty right now.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 02, 2013 19:27 | #28 There are different levels (depending on how much rain was had in the winter). Last year was supposed to be a "bad" year whereas 2011 was one of the most dust-free. Not kept up w/ the 2013 forecast.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 08, 2013 02:06 | #29 kiss-o-matic wrote in post #16085737 ![]() There are different levels (depending on how much rain was had in the winter). Last year was supposed to be a "bad" year whereas 2011 was one of the most dust-free. Not kept up w/ the 2013 forecast. Black rock desert.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 10, 2013 18:44 | #30 You just said "it's always dusty". That's well... true, I guess... but that's like saying it always rains in Seattle. Sometime's it's bearable, sometimes it sucks. All I heard last year was how awful 2012 was going to be b/c the dust was not packed in by a nice winter... and while not the cakewalk that the now legendary 2011 was, it was hardly a hassle.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
y 1600 |
Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting! |
| ||
Latest registered member is mpistonephoto 695 guests, 284 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 |