Pencam verité
October 25, 2001 4:39 PM Subscribe
Pencam verité Using an inexpensive digital camera about the size of a magic marker, the photographer/webmaster of pencam.org demonstrates how a keen eye for detail and composition and a little bit of Photoshop tweaking can overcome cheap tech with his gallery of hundreds of extraordinary images taken from daily life.
I need to learn from this man -- my skimpy little WebCam Go is cute, but the quality of the pix makes me hang my head in shame...
(shuffles off to corner, dejected)
posted by davidmsc at 5:03 PM on October 25, 2001
(shuffles off to corner, dejected)
posted by davidmsc at 5:03 PM on October 25, 2001
Dave is a Pencam master... I never tire of looking at his photos.
posted by heather at 5:21 PM on October 25, 2001
posted by heather at 5:21 PM on October 25, 2001
The colour saturation on these images is really strong. I'm guessing he's punched things up in Photoshop afterwords. Does anyone have any tips for achieving similar results?
posted by kaefer at 5:42 PM on October 25, 2001
posted by kaefer at 5:42 PM on October 25, 2001
Dave never ceases to amaze me with the Pencam. And it ain't just the camera. He's got a great eye.
And Ms. Heather is none too shabby in the small camera department, as well. Queen of the Casio Wristcam.
posted by PhotoDude at 6:15 PM on October 25, 2001
And Ms. Heather is none too shabby in the small camera department, as well. Queen of the Casio Wristcam.
posted by PhotoDude at 6:15 PM on October 25, 2001
Heather has lots of pencam shots at Harrumph.
...and also at the Mirro Project website, which is still not about vanity.
posted by websavvy at 6:29 PM on October 25, 2001
...and also at the Mirro Project website, which is still not about vanity.
posted by websavvy at 6:29 PM on October 25, 2001
Ouch. Mirror.
Ouch. Didn't see one of my Heather sites in the previous post.
posted by websavvy at 6:31 PM on October 25, 2001
Ouch. Didn't see one of my Heather sites in the previous post.
posted by websavvy at 6:31 PM on October 25, 2001
This site is very cool! I mean, even aside from the images, the design is ingenious and attractive. Well done.
posted by rodii at 7:07 PM on October 25, 2001
posted by rodii at 7:07 PM on October 25, 2001
It's not the camera, it's the eye: he's got the eye.
*I'd* love to know what he's hearing as his sound-track when he takes his photos, because each set of photos brought some very specific '50's and '60's jazz to my inner ear.
Thanks so much for this link & this thread, gentlefolk. I think I need a pencam, if only to shoot a clip each to Lalo Schifrin & Herbie Hancock & MJQ. This is inspiration at its purest!
posted by realjanetkagan at 7:35 PM on October 25, 2001
*I'd* love to know what he's hearing as his sound-track when he takes his photos, because each set of photos brought some very specific '50's and '60's jazz to my inner ear.
Thanks so much for this link & this thread, gentlefolk. I think I need a pencam, if only to shoot a clip each to Lalo Schifrin & Herbie Hancock & MJQ. This is inspiration at its purest!
posted by realjanetkagan at 7:35 PM on October 25, 2001
Hey, thanks for the compliments, everyone! And it's true... Heather is my hero. She's the one that inspired me to get the pencam in the first place, late last winter. Her pictures are the best. Praise from her is high praise indeed.
As for the saturation of the images. I don't dink around too much with most of the images you see on the website, aside from boosting the contrast (+40), shrinking them down a bit, and converting them from bitmap to jpeg. Admittedly, I do tweak some of the pictures for the sake of composition. But most times, the colors you see (including those vivid blue skies) are what the camera puts out.
Again, Thanks everyone.
posted by crunchland at 10:40 PM on October 25, 2001
As for the saturation of the images. I don't dink around too much with most of the images you see on the website, aside from boosting the contrast (+40), shrinking them down a bit, and converting them from bitmap to jpeg. Admittedly, I do tweak some of the pictures for the sake of composition. But most times, the colors you see (including those vivid blue skies) are what the camera puts out.
Again, Thanks everyone.
posted by crunchland at 10:40 PM on October 25, 2001
I'll always be a fan of the lomography stuff.
It's hillarious to think a whole "sect" of photo buffs out there are fixated on these photographs when the only reason the look the way they do is because of a terrible, poorly built camera.
posted by KnitWit at 6:43 AM on October 26, 2001
It's hillarious to think a whole "sect" of photo buffs out there are fixated on these photographs when the only reason the look the way they do is because of a terrible, poorly built camera.
posted by KnitWit at 6:43 AM on October 26, 2001
I dig Laura Holder's pencam shots from around nyc, although the rest are great too.
posted by misterioso at 7:37 AM on October 26, 2001
posted by misterioso at 7:37 AM on October 26, 2001
Very nice. As so often, even with low tech material, the interesting stuff happens when one truly applies oneself.
posted by mmarcos at 1:23 PM on October 26, 2001
posted by mmarcos at 1:23 PM on October 26, 2001
pooh, i feel left out. in the grand old tradition of self-promotion, please visit my pencam gallery. it also includes the magic link to making your pencam work with a Mac!
posted by caf at 11:04 PM on October 28, 2001
posted by caf at 11:04 PM on October 28, 2001
« Older Sweeps! A televised seance to communicate with... | Army to develop video games. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
I'm amazed he's gotten such good output from such a low-end camera. I also sort of wish he had large, high resolution versions of those images.
posted by mathowie at 4:44 PM on October 25, 2001