eugimon

One is in focus, the other one isn't. The one that's not in focus happens to have a shallower depth of field but the subject isn't properly in focus, with the F stop open like that you've also over exposed the image, blowing out all the contrast. Playing with depth of field should be done to isolate a subject: shot at f/1.8, iso 200, aperture priority. It's entirely possibly to have a very shallow depth of field and maintain contrast and clarity of subject

It's because they stuffed in that stupid lights/sounds/"gear alive" crap. Cut out useless appeal to 4 years olds crap and there would be a lot more room to hide the bot parts.

Where you decide to meter is important as well: Nothing changed in these two shots other than first one was metered on a bright spot while the second one was metered on a dark spot. So the AI on the camera basically decided that the whole thing was in correct exposure because the metering said so and the whole image is too dark as a result. The second the AI decided the whole image was too dark and over exposed it and now everything is blown out. Cases like this is where you want to go in manually and not use the camera's AI (I usually shoot in aperture priority mode) This time I manually set the exposure to -1.00, which got me the desired effect though I could have done the same by going into manual mode and dialing in the shutter speed to get it slightly underexposed (according to the camera's AI) excuse the dappling, it's the shadow from my window screen...

meh on the sticker sheet... what's the point, have a cheap ass sticker version of a nice fully painted version for 10 bucks less? If they're gonna do a sticker sheet I'd rather it be stuff like the minmay guard, or a camo scheme, something interesting, not just a mix and match of the same old 4 colors schemes.

as long as the wings actually lock in place when folded back. I agree though, it looks good, maybe just because those bell bottoms hide the ridiculous urkel legs on the vf-25

So this is an example of manually selecting the focus point and using spot metering and using a reflector to bounce some light back up on the target.

Then you should try reading some books. History books. History books on expansionist and colonial wars because fighting wars over far off resources is a pretty common reason for fighting wars. See, it's rather simple, as populations and standards of living grow, they out strip the resources native to their particular geographic area. They then spread out and colonize other areas, fight wars with the natives for those resources and often fight wars with their neighbors to control the trade routes to those resources.

First, the LED custom is sweet... that's just impressive. Second, try changing the AF from 3D or auto to manual control and use it to select where you want the camera to focus. You can control that with the d-pad on the back. Right now it looks like the camera focused on the nacelles which is a really small area and makes the image just look out of focus on first look.

http://www.tfw2005.com/transformers-news/t...rscream-168716/ Leader class Starscream jet mode pics. Looks like a whale with wings... will wait for it go on sale.

Hey,, what's with all this talk of shallow depth of field is no good?

2nd trailer does look better but it still looks like Dances with Wolves... in space.

edward james olmos has talked about another movie set on earth with the full cast,, so who knows. If it's gonna be like The Plan, I'd rather they didn't. Getting some insight into the Brother Cavils was interesting and all but it was just kinda meh.

It actually looks better than I expected it to look. if I see one in a local shop, might pick one up for my son.

all I know is the toys look like crap.

yup, bandai can do much better but honestly the DX feels like it was made by a dozen teams that didn't know what each other was doing. Case in point, the shoulder joint... the shoulder underneath the shoulder armor has like 2 degrees of movement... why even bother?

I agree. I'm a huge fan of the show but this really felt like a collection of cut scenes.

looks great all detailed up!

It's not a bad toy, it's just not a modern toy... it really looks and feels like a toy from 10 years ago. Some people are in to that, good for them, I'm even happy for them. We should all have a chance to get what we want. I can only say that I'm not keen on the DX line so far. The poor planning and implementation of the toy, the accessories, the number of exclusives for the line... the whole thing leaves me with a feeling of mild disappointment. Here's hoping the vf-27 will improve where improvements are due.

Yup, the 1/48 armor has issues all the same ones the DX armor has but at least it didn't require retooling the 1/48 or parts swapping. For the record, yes, I'm not nugundamII, I can follow instructions. The crotch armor falls off and the hip gun armor falls off as well as the ball socket joints don't hold the ball joint with any sort of tension. The best it can do is hang there limply. And oh, none of the 1/48 accessories interfered with the transformation of the toy... almost as if the FAST packs and GBP were being considered were being considered when the 1/48 was being developed. The DX can't say the same.

The naked DX is fine (for what it is)... it's the armor that makes it a fiddly, loose, parts popping off, can't stand on it's own, parts swapping throw back to 2001.

yeah... it's easy to tell if and what you did wrong on the yf-19... again, nugundamII, what YOU did wrong.

if the DX vf-25 came out in 2001 I would have been much more impressed with it.

imo, it's only bad in comparison to what came after... granted, nugundamII, it helps if you actually know how to transform it and you keep the toys away from the wall.

it is. the glue isn't strong though.