One reason why there might be no grain is because it is 2 negatives on top of eachother under the light. The grain from one may very well filled in the gaps of the grain from the other,, ever so gently. Just a thought, I might be wrong. ry

Dude, I throw the word eclectic around pretty freely. Generally, I mean anything that shows the person in question was "thinking outside of the box," to say it.It's not a daily thing that I see someone have such incredibly well thought out work, be it photography, sculpture, paintings, or digital work, and I was, to use a word of my generation that isn't in my daily vocabulary, was to give you "props...-giggle-". Funny word, but it speaks my point well. Link up that site of yours for me...

make the cherry on the end of the smoke about a centimeter (to real life measurements apporx) longer, and you got yourself a cancer stick boy! Now for some Canadian made Players Lights... mmm mmm ry

Personally, the focus is messing with my eyes a bit. Dunno if it was intended, or if I'm just imaginging it.

RJH's pic didn't follow the rules then seeing as his was a candle light (which I thought was a fricking exellent shot). Hmm, oh well, I didn't arrive in time anyways. ry

I was only expressing my albeit limited experience. Still, gimme a nikon FM10 any day

nothing beats the digital sony cams that when the have the night filter on in daylight, they can see through thin women's clothing. ry

I'm a purest when it comes to photography. I've used really good quality digital cameras, but i find with them you have to spend a lot of time in photoshop to get the colours right, etc. Also, I only use black and white 35mm film on a regular camera. Pretty much the only thing i found the digital of use for (for me that is) wwas shooting my portfolio of art and shyte, where I am willing to take the 45 minutes per picture to make things look JUUUUUSSST right, and then print it out at 300dpi on Epson Photo Quality Glossy paper. As for any other photography, the darkroom is my best friend. ry

Anyways, butterfly, side, double side, fireside, and rembrandt lighting styles have been posered and photoshopped. I'm gonna send'em to Syyd, and if anyone else wants a look at'em, ask, and yee shall recieve. ry

How do i enter??

Do available light entries have to be set outdoors, or can it be any print that doesn't use artificial lighting? ry

Man I loved that pillow. I just posted this and another print i put on the forum yesterday on the gallery this morning. The other one, the guy is buck naked in the shot, so I put "untiteld(nudity)" and it's probably gonna get like 6 billion clicks by the end of the day. I've been getting a lot of comments about having both VERY dark, and VERY bright pictures all in one. I'm a fan of high contrast personally. I won't like a picture at all if there aren't enough greys in it, but, if I'd lowered the contrast on say, this specific print, I think it'd look kinda cruddy. Time to upload my last print of the day (I only got up not a half frickin hour ago!). ry

hmm, the darks are actually a shade or two darker in reality.. thought I fixed that. Oh well. Anyways.... ry

lol, that thread got way out of hand, and became something it was never meant to be: A flame war. The only people who've personally messaged me are ones that, even if they think what i've done/still doing is/was wrong, they do understand it. I dont got 7grand to spend on software, so poof, the company hasn't lost any money! Anyways, enough rehashing. People are ignorant (myself included), but there is no need to broadcast false facts. I shot 3 rolls in that photo shoot, arugably my favorite prints came from them, aside from the double negative "snakeskin(as u dubbed it)" print, which is my 16x20 pride and joy. Thanks for the comments though man.