[iREZ]

who here would put the life of their super expensive camera for the sake of art....i think this is pretty cool linky

[wdlove]

Those are beautiful pictures, cool.

[acadian]

You can achieve the same effect by engaging in calisthenics with the camera hanging around your neck....

[{PHOTON}Mazz1020]

yea I deffinitally wouldnt throw my camera but i might swing it around my neck

[FulcrumPilot]

Originally Posted by acadian

You can achieve the same effect by engaging in calisthenics with the camera hanging around your neck....

Or just take a regular snap and smoke some weed while looking at it, this way you also become smarter.

[{PHOTON}Mazz1020]

Originally Posted by FulcrumPilot

Or just take a regular snap and smoke some weed while looking at it, this way you also become smarter.

Yea that sounds like the most logical solution.

[production_coordinator]

I just threw my camera on the ground and the picture wasn't all that great... now what?

[tooki]

Originally Posted by iREZ

who here would put the life of their super expensive camera for the sake of art...

Umm, you could lay a pillow down below it, or have the camera tethered so that it won't hit the ground. For the most part, the same rules apply to cameras as to humans: "It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the end!"

tooki

[ASIMO]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

I just threw my camera on the ground and the picture wasn't all that great... now what?

Get another one and try harder.

[FulcrumPilot]

Originally Posted by tooki

Umm, you could lay a pillow down below it, or have the camera tethered so that it won't hit the ground. For the most part, the same rules apply to cameras as to humans: "It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the end!"

tooki

Hmmm slightly importantly incorrect.

We are better capable of handling centrifugal forces because we are full of fluids. The mechanical parts in camera may not be as robust as we are when it comes to such forces.

[iREZ]

i smell an online 'im smarter' dispute a brewing . i dont risk anything when throwing my camera around seeing how my apt is made completely of marshmallows...yummmmmm...i think imma have a bite of my door.

[Cubeoid]

I thinked this thread was about Steve, tossing the kodak on stage when he didn't know how to work it.. that was great..

[Railroader]

I think the images produced by this technique are visually appealing. I might try it with my spare sd110.

And, if you can't flip a camera a few feet in the air and catch it, maybe, just maybe, you shouldn't do it.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by FulcrumPilot

Hmmm slightly importantly incorrect.

We are better capable of handling centrifugal forces because we are full of fluids. The mechanical parts in camera may not be as robust as we are when it comes to such forces.

1. Centrifugal force isn't really a force.
2. Centrifugal force affects rotation, not freefall.
3. The parts in a camera are sensitive to g-forces, not movement.
4. A g-force is basically a measurement of acceleration (positive or negative), and it's a high g-force that damages things. The "sudden stop at the bottom" would induce very high g-forces.

So yeah, um, I stand by what I said.

tooki

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by production_coordinator

I just threw my camera on the ground and the picture wasn't all that great... now what?

Start smoking the pot.

[jersey]

blows.

if they wanted to be cool they would have taken the camera to a firing range and shot at it.

[bad_quote]

This is boring. You don't have to toss your camera at all. Just leave the shutter open longer and wiggle it around.

[cszar2001]

I wouldn't do that with my camera.
I prefer the other way round: camera stationary and moving lights:



or this one:

[broxy5]

Cool desktops.

No one says you have to toss it 15 ft. A light flip'll do. Have fun.

[Cubeoid]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

This is boring..