Home :: FAQ :: Login
Album list :: Last uploads :: Last comments :: Most viewed :: Top rated :: My Favorites :: Search


Home > Members galleries > Silversnapper > Monochromes
Click to view full size image
Gradually fading into obscurity....
Anyone remember these? Now I don't have a problem with the metric system but I object most strongly to having it imposed on me via the back door! And why does television insist on referring to distances here in kilometers when all the signposts in this country are in miles?
File information
Album name:Silversnapper / Monochromes
Rating (1 votes): (Details)
Editing Performed:Converted from RAW, converted to mono, selective brightness, contrast and saturation adjustments, sharpened and cropped slightly
File Size:238 KB
Date added:Jan 19, 2014
Dimensions:1000 x 747 pixels
Displayed:29 times
Color Space:Uncalibrated
Customer Render:0
Date Time:2014:01:19 11:44:50
DateTime Original:2014:01:18 20:18:19
DateTime digitized:2014:01:18 20:18:19
Exif Image Height:747 pixels
Exif Image Width:1000 pixels
Exif Offset:220
Exif Version:version 2.21
Exposure Bias:0 EV
Exposure Mode:1
Exposure Program:Manual
Exposure Time:1/60 sec
FNumber:f 16
Flash:No Flash
Focal length:105 mm
Max Aperture:f 2.8
Metering Mode:Multi-Segment
Model:Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Orientation:Normal (O deg)
Resolution Unit:Inch
Scene Capture Mode:0
Software:Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
White Balance:0
X Resolution:300
Y Resolution:300
IPTC Title:
IPTC Copyright:
IPTC Category:
Favorites:Add to Favorites
George  [Jan 19, 2014 at 01:15 PM]
Yeeeees I agree wholeheartedly Keith. It's the likes of them at the Mad House that does it, and the Biased Broadcasting Corporation too
An inspired composition again Keith, the weights spiralling from the left up to top centre, as is our reading/writing style, the low light from the left giving gorgeous shadows that make the embossed markers stand out beautifully.
A gorgeously simple shot that belies the inspiration that obviously went into its preparation and execution.
Luv it, luv it to bits.
Gotta be a Ten, it's that good.

And I bet if these were put against modern weights they wouldn't be far off.
Silversnapper  [Jan 19, 2014 at 03:12 PM]
Thanks George. Just as a matter of interest I put them on my accurate kitchen electronic kitchen scales and they were all about 1/8th of an ounce of the marked weight!
SteveT  [Jan 19, 2014 at 04:59 PM]
Again I agree with all of George's comments, are they the type of weights with a drilled hole in the back that is filled with lead to fine tune them ?
Silversnapper  [Jan 19, 2014 at 05:09 PM]
Thanks Steve. Cast into the top of the scales chassis are the words 'FOR DOMESTIC USE ONLY' shown here so I suppose that sort of accuracy in the weights isn't necessary.
Silversnapper  [Jan 20, 2014 at 07:29 AM]
Doh! - I just found the 1/4oz weight on the floor!
George  [Jan 20, 2014 at 12:53 PM]
JOHN  [Jan 20, 2014 at 06:39 PM]
Another nicely laid out and taken photo, I like it.
Ref. the actual weight of the "weights" I would think that they should be what they say they are in this case, but it could also depend on the distance of the weighing platforms from the fulcrum.
Metrification like it or not, but petrol at £6.30 a gallon perhaps they don't want us to see that, I remember 4/11p a gallon.
alanuk  [Jan 22, 2014 at 06:47 PM]
Ah.. I was right; all imperial weights and a fine display and capture of them. Funnily enough, I walk in miles but ride in kilometres. I measure my height in feet and inches yet weigh myself in kilo grammes. I do like a 10oz steak, though Petrol at 4/11? I remember getting 3 gallons for a quid.
Photojunkie  [Feb 01, 2014 at 04:09 PM]
Really love this Keith - love the gritty b/w effect - I can't get this on my built in win pic gallery editing thing, unless I really go swot up on my PSE instead.