// i dont find that appealing.

neither do i to be honest. i do it out of nessecity. It can be done really well, and i think on some shots i have it nailed. But i much perfer ol'skool rock photography. I mainly use the blur technique now when i am photographing a high energy band where i use it subtley to add impact and emotion to a photo, or i use it on the extreme end of the scale when photographing "art" bands, ie. noise rock etc, bands who perhaps don't really want to see themselves clearly and perfer an image as opposed to a rock photo.

I know some good intl photo sites you can check out, but will put up tomorrow, i tired.

yeah, youre no expert and neither is mel.
I know that mel has never had any photography training and has learnt to take photos through trial and error.
And she only owns one camera which is falling apart and is 40 years old.
I think photographers should take photos which ever way makes them happy.

[ http://melsphotos.tripod.com ]

yes, you definatly can't please everyone....
You may not have looked at all the photos on the site, sure most have that 'blurry' effect, but there are also 'non blurry' photos there too. A good example is the D4 and Datsuns photos on the site, about 1/2 are 'blurry' and 1/2 are clear.

[ http://melsphotos.tripod.com ]

So true....

[ http://melsphotos.tripod.com ]

Hi manamana, yeah I decided it was about time I join the nzmusic.com forums.

Hmmmmm, I suppose one reason why I like taking 'blurry' photos is because I cannot draw or paint on paper to express myself, I basically could not draw a picture to save my life hehehe, so to be able to take such colourful, creative, and interesting photos really excites me, it actually gives me the chance to express myself creativly.
I like long exposures (blurry photos) because the colours end up being so vivid and interesting, and you never quite know what the end result is going to be.
Theres nothing quite like the thrill of taking your film in to get developed and then counting down the minutes to when you can pick it up and examine your photos - it really gives me such a high. hahaha that probably makes me sound insane, but thats just the way I feel about photos.

[ http://melsphotos.tripod.com ]

// its all about personal preference

im all for that.

maybe mel can dog my photos when i get my camera ;)

i'll email you an "overcrowded" photo:) bitch:)

send me an email and i will email you a photo of you in the overcrowded crowd looking knackered at the datsuns gig.

who cares about the Datsuns? I wanna better look at your Bon Jovi Stadium Tour jacket.

hey mel you must be doing well you have 2 staunch groupies on this site passerine and divad

yeah buy only after i dog your datsuns review.

where is that?

[ http://www.doghumpingleg.com ]

working on it now. I'm slack ass #1 at the moment.

[ http://www.lazyslave.com ]

if i could spell i would of said their nuxt gig

[ http://www.standard4.org ]

// I wanna better look at your Bon Jovi Stadium Tour jacket

it's just getting blown out of proportion. it's no jacket ,just a t-shirt. a fuckn cool tshirt, but just a shirt. Matt Staple offered me straight up $50 for it, but i couldn't let it go. my fav shirt.

and mana! i got no groupies, i'm to hairy. Hopefully mel doesn't have this problem :)

don't hold out for that datsuns review, I'm still waiting on that "guess who" review from may 31st 2002. I do believe Stefan has a current 5 month backlog on his reviews.

I've done some semi-professional over here in the states, and used to teach black and white at the university. Maybe I'm just cheap, but I'd never buy a brand new camera simply because people will try to screw you out of every dollar you have and sell you on accessories you don't need unless you go in knowing exactly what you want.

I have a dinky point and shoot fully automatic that I spent about $200nz on, and a 20 yr old Minolta (given to me by my father) that I'm very happy with. I've never felt the need to use more, and if need be, I can always buy more toys for the Minolta.

see the post below, I should have replied to this one instead.

And of course secondhand bodies are available at times also. Just look around for a while before buying.

Check out this link for info on photographing concerts.

[ external link ]

yea - i just bought a decent sec. hand camera for just over $500 and from what i've been told buy people [friends etc - not stupid camera shop ppl] that is is quite a good deal - well for the camera i bought.
it's last years model, yet - works better than this year's model.

There _is_ a valid middleground between introductory and "professional" equipment, it's just a question of deciding whether that ground's going to provide what you need. But to start, do what blink said :-)

G CANON A1 BODY,50MM F1.4 LENS,POWER WINDER. $495 on progear.co.nz looks pretty good.
and OLYMPUS OM-1 WITH 50MM F1.4 $425.00
both the A-1 and om-1 are both classic cameras. Many people regard the olympus om-1 and om4-ti as the finest manual focus slrs available.
These prices are not amazing, but solid.

trademe.co.nz has pretty good shit sometimes.

it's tough to recommend cameras becaue there is no way in hell you would catch me using manual focus at a gig, but i also know that cheap autofocus is worse then manual focus. Spend $500 on a good manual kit and put $1000 in saving for your serious gear later on. ( i reckon, just don't punch me when you get tired of manual focussing all the time)

CANON A1 BODY,50MM F1.4
i checked one of these out, but it was a bit shitty. definately seems like the bizzo though, ive been reading up on them and getting all stoked.

hey that link didnt work :P

http://www.petrajane.com

shes my best friend