darkknight
Super Freak
I agree, the Mark III is still a cool figure. I'm still keeping my original Mark III and BD Ex. Mark III. But it sucks hearing all the horror story about the fading paint.
Hot Toys - Iron Man 2:Mark IV Limited Edition spec
- Thread starter wookster
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
I agree, the Mark III is still a cool figure. I'm still keeping my original Mark III and BD Ex. Mark III. But it sucks hearing all the horror story about the fading paint.
Lower the ISO on your camera and you can say goodbye to the blurry/grainy look.
whats the ISO?
I know. I quoted the wrong pic. But I stand by what I said. Very impressive. And very, VERY nice pics.
dedguy
Super Freak
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 6,448
- Reaction score
- 6
rubio95: thanks dude. I also think the MKIII holds up well, more so against War Machine but in large part that's just because the MKIV armor design itself is just plain better.
ISO is film speed. Higher the ISO the less light you need to take a photo but the higher the grain. Increasing exposure time can also increase grain. This is an extreme example taken at ISO1600 and 30second exposure.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dedguy/5399500880/
ISO is film speed. Higher the ISO the less light you need to take a photo but the higher the grain. Increasing exposure time can also increase grain. This is an extreme example taken at ISO1600 and 30second exposure.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dedguy/5399500880/
Really? I didn't know that was a factor. I've done some 30 second exposure that were crystal clear with a low ISO.
Wow, must have been really low light!
That's why it's fun
dedguy
Super Freak
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 6,448
- Reaction score
- 6
Really? I didn't know that was a factor. I've done some 30 second exposure that were crystal clear with a low ISO.
Well if you're taking a 30" ISO100 photo with a fairly decent camera you're not going to really notice it. If it's 800 or 1600 I've found it can exacerbate the grain. For example compare the grain in that super low light photo to the grain in the ISO1600 photo at the bottom of this comparison chart.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dedguy/4220211562/sizes/o/in/photostream/
When taken at a "normal" shutter speed in the sub-1" range my camera has relatively little grain even at ISO1600.
Hmm, guess there's a lot I don't know.
I have a point and shoot. All I do know is that when I take a picture with a 1 second shutter speed (maximum) with the ISO set to 100 in low light is looks nice and clear, whereas if I take the same picture with the ISO at 800 it will look grainy.
On topic: I can't wait to get this figure and take a 1000 pictures!
JEDSTER
Super Freak
Very very nice !!!!!
tigerslash51
Super Freak
Should I choose to get this Mark IV or Mark VI?
They both look fantastic.
They both look fantastic.
dedguy
Super Freak
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 6,448
- Reaction score
- 6
I like the MKVI better as I think the triangular reactor goes better with the armor design and I also just like it for the novelty. I'm also much more a fan of the VI color scheme.
Depends on what you're doing, especially if you decide to do some weirder stuff.
Depends on what you're doing, especially if you decide to do some weirder stuff.
JonWes
Super Freak
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2009
- Messages
- 4,688
- Reaction score
- 18
Na, you still do - especially in low-light situations or if you're doing something with lighting.
baloo
Super Freak
Not completely exact, my friend:
ISO: it is the unit of measure for the sensibility of the film or the sensor (in digital photography). The more the value is raised, the more the sensor is sensitive... In other words, the more the value is raised, the more the sensor can get back tiny values of light which the subject reflects. So for example, when we photograph in daylight (sunshine) we shall select a sensibility of 50, to see 100. If on the other hand, we miss luminosity and if we do not want to use the flash, we can increase the sensibility while keeping a fast shutter speed, but to the detriment of a grain all the more marked. That is why it is better to play on the exposure time than on the sensibility when shooting stationary objects like are our figures; the quality is only better.
dedguy
Super Freak
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 6,448
- Reaction score
- 6
I was trying to give a quick easy to understand answer. Most people have experience with "film speed" so it's a good shorthand for explaining ISO.
Granted that is changing as more people are growing up who have never even seen a roll of film.
Granted that is changing as more people are growing up who have never even seen a roll of film.
WilltheThrill
Just a little freaky
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2010
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
Personnally I would get both, but if you had to choose get the MK VI. You can display it clean or as battle damage.
toylion
Super Freak
I vote for the Mark IV
baloo
Super Freak
I understand you, do not worry!
It's sure that the more things will go and the fewer people will have seen also a "Star Bicycle" (me the first)... That's the walking in front of the progress, hehe...
But to return briefly to photography, we can not say that the more we increase the time of exposure, the more we are going to have of the grain, you see...? In wanting to simplify (which I think is the most difficult exercise that is), sometimes you might make things more confusing, or even distorting.
But anyway: beautiful comparative shots!
Similar threads
