(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 01:35 am (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 02:41 am (UTC)
maelorin: (eye)
From: [personal profile] maelorin
kitty!

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 05:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] drhoz.livejournal.com
Hmmm? *peers closer* YIKES

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 07:20 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rbarclay.livejournal.com
I'm pretty sure you posted this about a year ago.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 12:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
More like three. But yes, I've posted this before. I just found it again today.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 02:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cleodhna.livejournal.com
I certainly like that!

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 01:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] strawberryfrog.livejournal.com
Awww! Kitty is playing "tiger in the long grass" again.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 02:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cleodhna.livejournal.com
You can't see me I'm not here don't worry there's nothing in the grass I'm going to eat you now kthxbai

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 02:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lurkerwithout.livejournal.com
Sneakerkitty is full of sneaks

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 04:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dgg.livejournal.com
Hope the guy who took the photo was using a zoom lens

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 05:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] silmaril.livejournal.com
That's my hope also.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-13 09:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dglenn.livejournal.com
The perspective looks like it was shot with a long lens, based on the sort of flat look of kitty's face, but without similar shots using different focal lengths to compare, I'm not super-certain.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-13 09:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dglenn.livejournal.com
I probably wouldn't have used a zoom lens for that. Probably a 400mm prime, maybe with a teleconverter, or even a mirror lens if I had one. Then again, some modern zooms are smaller and lighter than the zooms I've got, so I dunno. The only way to be sure, short of asking the photographer, is if the focal length is in the EXIF data and turns out to be a length that prime lenses don't come in. (And considering how often zooms are used at one extreme or the other, even that trick might not reveal a zoom lens if one was used -- a 150-400 zoom all the way at the 400 end of its range would look just like a 400 prime in the EXIF tags.)

But yeah, I do hope the photographer used a long lens (and it looks like that's the case).

I would not want to shoot that with my 28-70mm zoom lens.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-12 05:38 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rev-ursa.livejournal.com
I see you....

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-13 02:46 am (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2012-11-14 12:44 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] spritelord.livejournal.com
we can see you, carl.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Feb. 6th, 2026 06:34 pm