General photography thread [img heavy]

What you see is what you get, including photography, displays, and video equipment.

Moderators: Dposcorp, SpotTheCat

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:02 pm

I was wrong; that's a blue jay.

Here in VT I've never seen a jay without a crest. Never knew it was possible.
It is one of the blessings of old friends that you can afford to be stupid with them. Ralph Waldo Emerson.
Captain Ned
Global Moderator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 20215
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:11 am

I bought a reasonably cheap second-hand film SLR some time ago to play with. Here are some of the results:

Image Image Image Image Image Image Image
quock
Gerbil
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 10:38 am

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Mar 31, 2011 6:54 am

quock wrote:I bought a reasonably cheap second-hand film SLR some time ago to play with.


What is this film thing, of which you speak? :)

--SS
SecretSquirrel
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Colony, TX (Dallas suburb)

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:35 am

SecretSquirrel wrote:
quock wrote:I bought a reasonably cheap second-hand film SLR some time ago to play with.


What is this film thing, of which you speak? :)

--SS


Dinosaurs used them to make pictures :-p
quock
Gerbil
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 10:38 am

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:43 pm

Even though watching a digital slideshow on the projector in 1920x1080 is nice, there is a certain tactile thing with actually having a slide projector doing the projection, having the kachick when it changes image, etc... not for the quality, but for feeling and nostalgia. That said, there are some really good slide films out there, although they are starting to fade away. I shoot alot of slides before going over to digital and liked it.

That said, havent touched my Eos 33 more then twice since i got the 20D when it came out in what... 2004. And since switching to the 5D mk2, I sure never will. If I ever do analog again it'll be medium format or bigger. Had to go out and look at the old 33 though, and cameras have gotten ALOT sturdier. Even the cheaper ones doesnt feel as plastic anymore.
Aphasia
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3426
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Solna/Sweden

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:28 pm

Aphasia wrote:Even though watching a digital slideshow on the projector in 1920x1080 is nice, there is a certain tactile thing with actually having a slide projector doing the projection, having the kachick when it changes image, etc... not for the quality, but for feeling and nostalgia. That said, there are some really good slide films out there, although they are starting to fade away. I shoot alot of slides before going over to digital and liked it.


Ah yes, that brings back memories. :D My dad is a watercolor artist and for some of his more realistic paintings, he would project a slide of the image he was going to do onto the blank paper and pencil in the basic image outlines before doing the actual image. I can distinctly remember the smell of a hot slide projector that had be on for two hours. I also know that kachick. Ah, memories.

--SS
SecretSquirrel
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Colony, TX (Dallas suburb)

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:47 pm

Over the last month I have been studying for my first A.R.E. exam to become a licensed architect and have not been out shooting much lately. My first test is tomorrow morning, and while cramming this weekend I needed a few "mental breaks" from the books...and photography was a great escape! The images are OK...they're just some random images from my walks...

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
jobodaho
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: University of Nebraska Lincoln

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:26 am

Time for a highlights real of the Denver Auto Show. All shots taken last Saturday with my new-to-me Canon 7D at 1600 ISO. The show is a regional affair put on by the Colorado Auto Dealers Association, so although they do get a decent selection of latest-year production models, there aren't any concept cars and the presentation quality varies. Oh well. At least you're allowed to climb through about 90% of everything in the room.

First up, the Chevrolet Sonic LTZ. The car: Meh, looks like a Civic/Golf love child with a swine snout. The girl: Yes, please. The programmed sales pitch she was spewing: Crap on a crud, that is a total load of crap! I had to take a couple very quick shots, and then get out of there before going the full Joe Wilson:

Image

Suprisingly, several Ferraris were completely open to the public -- touch, feel, play with the console, whatever. Unsurprisingly, these did not include the 458 Italia:

Image

The Audi R8 Spyder would have fit very nicely underneath my rear end. Sadly, this one was also partitioned off:

Image

How about a Merc SLS Gullwing?

Image

Classic racing iron, restored and clear-coated within an inch of its life:

Image

Hot Lambo goodness:

Image

One corner of the convention hall was allocated for high-dollar vehicle conversions and restorations. Here's something the cat dragged in from SEMA. For some reason, somebody decided to limo out a Toyota Sienna minivan. 44-inch extention, six-inch drop, dubs, blue sill-rail lighting, wet bar, and an Internet station with a 26" monitor suspended from the ceiling. I didn't get a picture, but the monitor was prominently displaying a "subscription expired" error window for Norton Internet Security. Oops.

Image

Nice rod:

Image

Honda CR-Z. This representative also had a preprogrammed marketing spiel, but unlike the GM display, her schtick was moderately informative:

Image

A Subie STi:

Image

Subaru also had a sweet cutaway of a Legacy, including a full view inside the engine block and head, but my pictures of that got lost into the netherworld somewhere, and I still haven't figured out how :evil:
He who laughs last, laughs first next time.
ludi
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5431
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:47 pm
Location: Sunny Colorado front range

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Fri Apr 08, 2011 11:08 am

Been a bit quiet of late. That's because this little scamp has been eating up all my time with late night potty breaks and training.

(At 8 weeks)
Image

Image

Image

(At 11 weeks)
Image

Image
Wind, Sand and Stars.
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2453
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:44 am

Here's my first attempt at capturing star trails, and I am now realizing it is harder than I thought it would be. I'm on a business trip in New Mexico and last night I set my tripod up outside of the hotel and took this 1.5 hour exposure. I shot in RAW at ISO 100 and f/11 and the image still turned out very bright...but luckily not over exposed. I had to play with it a bunch in Lightroom to get it how I wanted, but it definitely still has a lot of noise due to the extremely long exposure. Does anyone know how I can reduce the noise for such a long exposure? I'm going to have probably one more attempt at this tonight...wish me luck!

Image
jobodaho
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: University of Nebraska Lincoln

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:43 am

jobodaho wrote:I had to play with it a bunch in Lightroom to get it how I wanted, but it definitely still has a lot of noise due to the extremely long exposure. Does anyone know how I can reduce the noise for such a long exposure?

That's a pretty good cleanup already. If you want more precision, maybe you could try duplicating in Lightroom what Canon's "Long Exposure Noise Reduction" feature does -- takes a second, black frame at the same exposure time as the original, and then uses that information about the sensor performance as a reference to clean up some of the noise in the captured frame.

You might not need a full hour and a half for the reference frame, but (say) 15 minutes with the body cap installed, at the same ambient temperature as the time exposure, might do it. Then overlay the reference noise frame against your image and try a few blending filters to see what, uh, develops.
He who laughs last, laughs first next time.
ludi
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5431
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:47 pm
Location: Sunny Colorado front range

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Apr 13, 2011 1:10 pm

ludi wrote:
jobodaho wrote:I had to play with it a bunch in Lightroom to get it how I wanted, but it definitely still has a lot of noise due to the extremely long exposure. Does anyone know how I can reduce the noise for such a long exposure?

That's a pretty good cleanup already. If you want more precision, maybe you could try duplicating in Lightroom what Canon's "Long Exposure Noise Reduction" feature does -- takes a second, black frame at the same exposure time as the original, and then uses that information about the sensor performance as a reference to clean up some of the noise in the captured frame.

You might not need a full hour and a half for the reference frame, but (say) 15 minutes with the body cap installed, at the same ambient temperature as the time exposure, might do it. Then overlay the reference noise frame against your image and try a few blending filters to see what, uh, develops.



Pretty much what ludi said. The image you posted was a little small to be able to tell just how bad the noise was, but the general principles apply.

To elaborate:

1) Use the pixel map function on the camera so the body processes out hot pixels automatically. Some people suggest using live view for a while to heat up the sensor first, so that marginal pixels that would otherwise only show up in long exposures get stressed enough to be seen by the camera. Note that Canon bodies reset the hot pixel map data after firmware updates, so your old hot pixel map may have been deleted.

2a) Use the long exposure noise reduction function. This is great if you only have to take 1 exposure, but it is very time consuming, since it takes a long exposure after every shot. Not a good idea if you want to chain multiple exposures together.

2b) Alternatively, take a single long exposure with the lens cap on immediately after your last long exposure. I do it after instead of before since the sensor will probably be at its hottest at the end of a series of long exposures. Subtract the dark frame from the exposed pictures in photoshop (there are filters and scripts that can automate the process for you, or you can do it manually with a variety of techniques).

As for base noise (vs hot pixels), that's just an unfortunate characteristic of CMOS sensors and the read noise characteristics of your given body (which get exacerbated by long exposures). You can use the NR filters/algorithms in PS/LR to reduce the noise, or work in layers (with the star trails on a separate layer/mask) to preserve detail areas etc.
Wind, Sand and Stars.
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2453
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:16 pm

Voldenuit wrote:
ludi wrote:
jobodaho wrote:I had to play with it a bunch in Lightroom to get it how I wanted, but it definitely still has a lot of noise due to the extremely long exposure. Does anyone know how I can reduce the noise for such a long exposure?

That's a pretty good cleanup already. If you want more precision, maybe you could try duplicating in Lightroom what Canon's "Long Exposure Noise Reduction" feature does -- takes a second, black frame at the same exposure time as the original, and then uses that information about the sensor performance as a reference to clean up some of the noise in the captured frame.

You might not need a full hour and a half for the reference frame, but (say) 15 minutes with the body cap installed, at the same ambient temperature as the time exposure, might do it. Then overlay the reference noise frame against your image and try a few blending filters to see what, uh, develops.



Pretty much what ludi said. The image you posted was a little small to be able to tell just how bad the noise was, but the general principles apply.

To elaborate:

1) Use the pixel map function on the camera so the body processes out hot pixels automatically. Some people suggest using live view for a while to heat up the sensor first, so that marginal pixels that would otherwise only show up in long exposures get stressed enough to be seen by the camera. Note that Canon bodies reset the hot pixel map data after firmware updates, so your old hot pixel map may have been deleted.

2a) Use the long exposure noise reduction function. This is great if you only have to take 1 exposure, but it is very time consuming, since it takes a long exposure after every shot. Not a good idea if you want to chain multiple exposures together.

2b) Alternatively, take a single long exposure with the lens cap on immediately after your last long exposure. I do it after instead of before since the sensor will probably be at its hottest at the end of a series of long exposures. Subtract the dark frame from the exposed pictures in photoshop (there are filters and scripts that can automate the process for you, or you can do it manually with a variety of techniques).

As for base noise (vs hot pixels), that's just an unfortunate characteristic of CMOS sensors and the read noise characteristics of your given body (which get exacerbated by long exposures). You can use the NR filters/algorithms in PS/LR to reduce the noise, or work in layers (with the star trails on a separate layer/mask) to preserve detail areas etc.


Thanks for the tips guys, I just did the re-mapping trick for both of my cameras, and my 60D always had a dead/hot pixel right in the middle of the frame which drove me nuts and it is now gone! I followed the technique here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJBuGhMnvFo

But just so I'm clear I'm going to ask a few more questions...

So with Long Exposure Noise Reduction on, does it automatically take the next reference image OR upon the next time you press the shutter does it activate? Does the next long exposure need to be as long as the first? I'm planning on this next image being in the 2-3 hour range, and I most certainly don't want to be out there for over 6 hours! Would using a script in Photoshop require the exact same length in exposure time for the next shot?
jobodaho
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: University of Nebraska Lincoln

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:20 pm

jobodaho wrote:Thanks for the tips guys, I just did the re-mapping trick for both of my cameras, and my 60D always had a dead/hot pixel right in the middle of the frame which drove me nuts and it is now gone! I followed the technique here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJBuGhMnvFo


Yay!

But just so I'm clear I'm going to ask a few more questions...

So with Long Exposure Noise Reduction on, does it automatically take the next reference image OR upon the next time you press the shutter does it activate? Does the next long exposure need to be as long as the first? I'm planning on this next image being in the 2-3 hour range, and I most certainly don't want to be out there for over 6 hours! Would using a script in Photoshop require the exact same length in exposure time for the next shot?


Long Exposure Noise Reduction automatically takes a second exposure after the first one. Normally, the exposure is as long as the first one, though if you're using bulb mode (as I presume you are for a 3 hr exposure), then I'm not sure (I've grandfathered my 40D to my dad and no longer have it with me for testing). Long Exposure Noise Reduction both subtracts hot pixels (to a greater degree) and reduces noise (to a lesser degree) - mostly read noise and baseline sensor noise. If you're manually subtracting in Photoshop, you don't need to match the exposure time, although the farther apart the exposure, the less the hot pixel and noise results will match your first exposure. If I were shooting stars, I'd try to keep track of my shutter speeds and then fire off a batch of matching long exposures with the lens cap on - this can be done on the car ride home. Pity you can't write up a macro to fire off a batch of long exposures with the lens cap on... or can you? I'm afraid I haven't done much experimenting with the tethering software available for Canons.
Wind, Sand and Stars.
Voldenuit
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2453
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:10 pm

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:08 pm

Voldenuit wrote:Pity you can't write up a macro to fire off a batch of long exposures with the lens cap on... or can you? I'm afraid I haven't done much experimenting with the tethering software available for Canons.
Tethering to a laptop is easy enough with a USB cord. I've got an intervalometer that can handle those sorts of things. You should be able to shoot a similar scene as a series of exposures (say as 18 four-minute exposures at f/2.8 with one minute between shots), then composite them digitally.
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15408
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:36 pm

Voldenuit wrote:Long Exposure Noise Reduction automatically takes a second exposure after the first one. Normally, the exposure is as long as the first one, though if you're using bulb mode (as I presume you are for a 3 hr exposure), then I'm not sure (I've grandfathered my 40D to my dad and no longer have it with me for testing). Long Exposure Noise Reduction both subtracts hot pixels (to a greater degree) and reduces noise (to a lesser degree) - mostly read noise and baseline sensor noise.

I just checked with my 40D, and it appears it does. So summarily: If you want to do it automatically, enable the LENR feature, make sure you have enough battery life to let the camera run for twice as long as the desired shot, take the desired image, and then leave the camera on while you get dinner, go to bed, drive home, whatever.

If you want to do it manually during post processing, make sure LENR is disabled, and then take the second frame at your leisure with the body cap installed.
He who laughs last, laughs first next time.
ludi
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5431
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:47 pm
Location: Sunny Colorado front range

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:30 am

Some greats pics there!!...Especially the light trails one

Been a TR reader for over 7 years now, but never really looked at the forums. Guess I will have this thread subscribed!!
aces170
Gerbil
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:26 am

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:38 am

Woke up to 2 inches of spring snow last Wednesday AM, so I snapped a couple quick flowering tree images just outside of the office using the 7D and the ever-delightful EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro:

Image

Image
He who laughs last, laughs first next time.
ludi
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5431
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:47 pm
Location: Sunny Colorado front range

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue Apr 19, 2011 8:17 am

This was taken last November, on a countryside in India.

Image
Cant get enough of the scene!! by Sahil Udani, on Flickr
aces170
Gerbil
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:26 am

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed Apr 20, 2011 9:36 pm

Great shot aces!
jobodaho
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: University of Nebraska Lincoln

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Fri Apr 22, 2011 11:55 pm

jobodaho wrote:Great shot aces!


Thanks. To revive the thread, a rudimentary attempt at HDR:
Image
Saputara in HDR by Sahil Udani, on Flickr
aces170
Gerbil
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:26 am

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Tue Apr 26, 2011 1:52 am

Two engines parked back-to-back on a siding with an interesting structure in the background. My kingdom for a blue sky with light cloud activity :cry: In retrospect, given the lighting conditions, I should have grabbed the Red #29 and then made a proper black-and-white job out of it, instead. Still, with a bit of deliberate over-saturation, I can get this:

Image

Image
He who laughs last, laughs first next time.
ludi
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5431
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:47 pm
Location: Sunny Colorado front range

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:40 am

ludi wrote:Two engines parked back-to-back on a siding with an interesting structure in the background. My kingdom for a blue sky with light cloud activity :cry: In retrospect, given the lighting conditions, I should have grabbed the Red #29 and then made a proper black-and-white job out of it, instead. Still, with a bit of deliberate over-saturation, I can get this:

Nice pics, I do notice some good background formation but its getting overexposed. I think this would have been shot in the harsh afternoon light.

A pic from a trip to a street children's play home in Mumbai, India.
Image
Up she goes!! by Sahil Udani, on Flickr
aces170
Gerbil
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:26 am

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Thu Apr 28, 2011 2:47 pm

aces170 wrote:Nice pics, I do notice some good background formation but its getting overexposed. I think this would have been shot in the harsh afternoon light.

Thanks! And yes, it was around 2pm/1400 (the EXIF says differently because I apparently don't have the camera's clock set correctly).

Incidentally I do like that HDR shot -- lots of interesting layers to the image. All it needs is a two-page glossy layout in National Geographic.
He who laughs last, laughs first next time.
ludi
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5431
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:47 pm
Location: Sunny Colorado front range

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:55 am

ludi wrote:
aces170 wrote:Nice pics, I do notice some good background formation but its getting overexposed. I think this would have been shot in the harsh afternoon light.

Thanks! And yes, it was around 2pm/1400 (the EXIF says differently because I apparently don't have the camera's clock set correctly).

Incidentally I do like that HDR shot -- lots of interesting layers to the image. All it needs is a two-page glossy layout in National Geographic.

Thanks.

Apparently the only way I know to adjust the harsh afternoon light (usually I avoid it) is to use tone mapping. First I adjust the exposure compensation to 1 or 2 stops in the negative, and then I auto-bracket 3 stops of exposure and do a fast continuous capture of 3 images. The images are finally tone mapped in Photomatrix (apparently the best software I have used for HDR images). A CPL or a 3-5 stop Graduated Natural Filter would do wonders too, but they are useless if you want to capture portraits.

One can only hope that technology catches up and selective exposure becomes easier and fluid in post processing.
aces170
Gerbil
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:26 am

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed May 04, 2011 6:08 pm

I decided that I would take another stab at some star photography and went out a few nights ago. The goal was to drive south and look north in order to get the North Star in the photo and the concentric circles of stars around it. What I didn't realize, however, was that driving 1 hour south of Omaha was still not enough to eliminate the glow from the city in these shots. In the first image the sun had been down for around 15-20 minutes which allowed the the sky to still remain blue even with the stars showing, and the orange base is the glow from Omaha. The second image was taken about an hour later, and due to the amount of light at the base I could only do an hour exposure without completely blowing out the bottum. I determined this by taking some 30 second test shots at ISO 3200 and f/4 and then calculating the stop difference from that to ISO 100 and f/5.6.

This time I also used the Long Exposure Noise Reduction which helped tremendously, and I was able to take the 1 hour long exposure, pack my gear up with the camera still calculating, drive home, and right as I was pulling into my driveway the image appeared! So cool...

Image

Image
jobodaho
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: University of Nebraska Lincoln

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed May 04, 2011 6:27 pm

I know you were going for #2 but #1 is an immensely beautiful picture. The range of colors and intensity from the Omaha sky glow to the sliver of black in the upper right makes for a picture that recalls Monet/Manet and the Impressionists (and that's just from the JPEG).

No, really.
It is one of the blessings of old friends that you can afford to be stupid with them. Ralph Waldo Emerson.
Captain Ned
Global Moderator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 20215
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed May 04, 2011 6:34 pm

Thanks Ned!!!

And your right, the accidental image is more powerful and it's kind of crazy that it worked out that way, and goes to show that you can try and know and predict everything when it comes to photography but no matter what there is always something to learn or discover!
jobodaho
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1146
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: University of Nebraska Lincoln

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Wed May 04, 2011 6:50 pm

I'm not sure the skyglow in the second image is a problem. It adds contrast that would otherwise be lacking, and your lens was wide enough to still go full-black at the top of the image.

Although...to get a longer exposure time without blowout, maybe try a graduated ND filter so the lower half of the frame doesn't expose as quickly?
He who laughs last, laughs first next time.
ludi
Gerbil Elder
 
Posts: 5431
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 10:47 pm
Location: Sunny Colorado front range

Re: General photography thread [img heavy]

Postposted on Fri May 06, 2011 12:38 am

I agree the 1st picture is beautiful, with the blue sky and orange glow, kinda has that surreal feel..
aces170
Gerbil
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:26 am

PreviousNext

Return to Visual Haven

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests