Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Adlern on October 21, 2010, 02:16:52 pm
-
Hello,
I am a Photography student from Norway, in my last year on Norwegian School of creative arts.
At the moment, I got a Nikon D300 with all the Nikkor lense series. (14-24, 24-70, 70-200 etc.)
I have studied fashion for two years, and I wish to go this way in Photography when im done. And I want to get an assistant job for a photographer in New York or Paris in the near future, read. Craig Mcdean, Dusan reljin, Sølve Sundsbø, etc.
Anyway, a few days ago i got an offer to buy a Hasselblad H3D-22 with a HC 35mm Lens for 4.000$.
So my question is, is it worth it?
Is it any point buying this now, will i get anything out of it. The reason im asking is because a brand new H3Dii-31 w/80mm cost about 30.000$ in Norway.
But i can afford the H3D-22, and 4.000$ aint alot eather. But is this system so undated, that i would get better files from getting a new Nikon D700 or a D3x.
Thanks!
-
Hello,
I am a Photography student from Norway, in my last year on Norwegian School of creative arts.
But i can afford the H3D-22, and 4.000$ aint alot eather. But is this system so undated, that i would get better files from getting a new Nikon D700 or a D3x.
Thanks!
Hi Adlern, and welcome.
(I cycled from UK midlands to Tromso via Boulogne in 1996)
I think the general opinion is that 22Mpx MFD is much better than 24Mpx DSLR, due to the lack of AA filter, if nothing else.
For fashion Hasselblad is a good choice as you have good a moire filter... but you will also need a longer lens.
If you do not need the 35 you might be able to exchange it.
-
Yeah, you wouldn't have much trouble selling the 35mm and picking up a 100mm for a similar price.
As Dick mentions, the lack of AA filter is still a plus. Also, the sync speed may be handy as well, if you ever shoot outdoors.
-
Thanks alot for the info :) So all in all, although this is only the 22mpx version, this is still a great camera.
I`ve also heard, that you can download the H4D software and install it in a H3D, but this is maybe just for the H3DII (second version) .. or am I completely wrong here.
Again, thanks.
-
If I was you,I wouldn't buy anything.
Spend some time assisting your hero's in New York instead.
When you're ready to start your own business,you should be able to get Hassy system for next to nothing.
My 2cw,
Have fun in New York.
-
Same here. Maybe I would get a D700 just to have fun with it and save the rest of the money. No piece of equipment is as valuable as spending time learning from the people you admire. I wish I could assist some of the people I admire.
Unless ofcourse you really want to have the H3D22 and are just looking for a good excuse to get it ;) In which case my advice would be, if it makes you happy go for it.. The price is certainly pretty good (for the moment, maybe in the future people will actually give them away for free ;)).
-
If I was you, I wouldn't buy anything.
Spend some time assisting your heros in New York instead.
When you're ready to start your own business,you should be able to get Hassy system for next to nothing.
Getting your own Hasselblad, and experience with it and with Hasselblad's Phocus software might help you get the assistant job you want.
-
The 22mp backs are very prone to moire which is a problem for fashion. It can show up on fabrics and around hair. I don't know how good the moire removal tool is in Phocus but with the Phase 22mp back the tool in Capture One can remove the colour part of the moire but not the luminance part. I usually end up layering files in PS to avoid blurring colour in areas not affected by moire. I think you will end up spending significant time trying to fix moire in the Raw software and in Photoshop and even then you may not be able to fix it all.
Having said that, although I am not a fashion photographer I do shoot models and people for brochures etc with the Phase 22mp back and I love the images.
I would think the 35mm lens isn't so useful for fashion.
I would definitely try and test it with a longer lens on clothing and hair, or get hold of some raw files, before you buy.
-
I should have added that my Phase 22mp back which I believe uses the same Kodak sensor as the Hasselblad, suffers from colour casts across the frame even with the prime HC lenses, especially the 35mm. So you might need to correct for this too. Its most obvious when shooting against neutral backgrounds.
-
I should have added that my Phase 22mp back which I believe uses the same Kodak sensor as the Hasselblad, suffers from colour casts across the frame even with the prime HC lenses, especially the 35mm. So you might need to correct for this too. Its most obvious when shooting against neutral backgrounds.
Phocus quickly and easily gives excellent moire removal, and you export a layered file to PS so that you can mask, and only use the moire corrected image where you need it. (The moire reduction reduces res a bit.)
I think the Hasselblad/Phocus Digital Aberration Corrections (DAC) would automatically eliminate colour casts, and I think that this works for all Hasselblad lenses and all Hasselblad digital backs, including shift/tilt settings for the HTS, but not, unfortunately, tilt and shift settings for the 1990s Flexbody with CF (film) lenses and the CF adapter.
Does anyone know of any Hasselblad back or lens for which DAC does not work? Does it work with the 1970s silver lenses? ...I think that the earlier digital backs do not communicate the lens data to the digital back, so Phocus does not get the data it needs to correct the aberrations. Can the early backs record this data?
I have used my H3D11-50 with the CF adapter and the Zeiss Distagon 40 without problems, and posted to LuLa.
It is nice that you can get quality for such a modest outlay.
-
Sounds like a bargain to me, which means you could get your money back if you change your mind in a few months. Spending a month or two with this camera and software could be very useful later when you work as an assistant.
-
Save your money. It'll be better spent on production for tests or living off of while you are looking for work or moving expenses.
-
Phocus quickly and easily gives excellent moire removal, and you export a layered file to PS so that you can mask, and only use the moire corrected image where you need it. (The moire reduction reduces res a bit.)
Dick,
Does Phocus remove the luminance element of moire patterns on fabrics? If it does that's very useful.
The exporting of layered files is sensible, hopefully it will be added to C1, it's useful in many situations.
Tony
-
From someone who did exactly what you are going to do, save your money. You won't learn all you need in less than 2 years. By then, this is a really old camera. Take your Nikon and an open mind and learn. Worry about gear later. FWIW The old 22mp cameras all have really low iso's and for fashion are really only studio cameras. As well they have serious moire issues on clothing(fashion)
Go learn, it's how I did it and was the best time of my life. What you will learn is this. School taught you very little about the real world and you are essentially starting over. That's awesome though as you will now learn how jobs really work. As well you will find they taught you nothing about running a business and that is much harder than taking great pictures.
Good luck
-
From someone who did exactly what you are going to do, save your money. You won't learn all you need in less than 2 years. By then, this is a really old camera. Take your Nikon and an open mind and learn. Worry about gear later. FWIW The old 22mp cameras all have really low iso's and for fashion are really only studio cameras. As well they have serious moire issues on clothing(fashion)
Go learn, it's how I did it and was the best time of my life. What you will learn is this. School taught you very little about the real world and you are essentially starting over. That's awesome though as you will now learn how jobs really work. As well you will find they taught you nothing about running a business and that is much harder than taking great pictures.
Good luck
Rogan's right.
Dropping even 5 grand on an old camera is not gonna change your life in the positive. In fact you'll spend so much time finding workarounds, fixing files, being limited in what you can shoot with it that it will probably be a negative to your career. A $40,000 camera won't do it either.
Do good photography, do good business, do good promotion, do good by people . . . all will move you a lot further than any piece of equipment, but never lose the thought that only 1 in about 10,000 ever make it to any acceptable, feed the family level and you'll understand that making it in this industry means you have to be complete.
IMO
BC
-
Thanks for all the good feedback, I see it in another perspective now :)
- Sondre
-
Thanks for all the good feedback, I see it in another perspective now :)
- Sondre
You might want to ask questions on The Hasselblad Digital Forum (http://www.hasselbladdigitalforum.com/)... you can ask questions without being registers or an owner.
-
...and you'll understand that making it in this industry means you have to be complete.
IMO
BC
This is really the clew IMO.
I'm just realising it, maybe it also brings me as much gasoline as troubles.
Schools never teach what the all circus is about. I have a painter training, but could see in the very prestigious photographic school of Arles that was on the corner what all was about: they teach Art, right? = they teach nothing. I had enough of that pretentious bullshit in Fine arts to feel really attracted by Arles, even if prestigious photographers are "teaching" there. Art and techniques, are just one part of the equation.
Yeah, bought myself the discourse, even bought myself the dealers discourses. Gear, machines that can make me better or something liker that.
When I started to assist (not a long time ago) in big productions, all my systems vanished suddenly.
In fact, it's more simple that I thought it was in areas that I imagined complicated, and much more complicated that I thought it was in areas that I beleived simples.
Good photographer, in its artistic or creative understanding is just a little part, and probably, at least for me, the most complicated things to masters are not the gear or the imagery in iteself but really the business and relashionships part.
You need to learn leadership to some extend also. And that has nothing to do with photography itself.
I'm facing a sort of personal crisis at the moment because I'm discovering all the ingredients, I'm seeing myself immerged in a both hostile and friendly reality. I'm measuring my strenghs and wicknesses, my own reality in a real world and not in the very protected and unrealistic "bohemian art sphere". For sure, I understood that the process, the path in itself is what really can be enjoyable but not if you will make it or not as a living, fame and recognition or whatever.
Keep feet down to earth, because been successfull means that you are complete. B.C is absolutly right on that point, and you can trust him, he made it very well actually...
The qualities required are not taught at school.
I see the guys I assist, this is a lot, I mean a lot of human leadership and inteligence in relationships. Also being a businessman, and...having a CLEAR goal that you can really feel, beleive, and enjoy, regardless of the obstacles, because they will show-up all the time. If your purpose is not that clear, you won't be able to overcome obstacles. You will be defaited.
Then, knowing your own wicknesses and surrownd yourself with the right people. You don't need people who do what you already master well, you need people who are good where you are not or you can't.
Most importantly, just enjoy where you really are. Don't draw yourself fake stories; I did, like a lot, there's a price to pay and you'll always end at your real place.
In short, I'm learning to like what I have, where Am I and from there doing my best with what I can afford. I don't see another path honestly. I beleived in different ways, maybe more exhuberant, more dramatic, the big stories...but it never worked and it generally ends disapointed. To do the big story we have to start to make good small stories and enjoy.
In this website, you gonna see a lot of people with top gear, with the very best equipment you can find on earth.Keep your head cold.
Assist the masters if you can, that's the best school IMO.
-
"Do good photography, do good business, do good promotion, do good by people . . . all will move you a lot further than any piece of equipment, but never lose the thought that only 1 in about 10,000 ever make it to any acceptable, feed the family level and you'll understand that making it in this industry means you have to be complete.
IMO"
By b.cooter.
............................................
Yes, the figures are frightening. I had a friend here in Spain who ran a big tourist agents' handling agency. His son went to university in England, and whilst there, he thought he'd like to become a photographer. His dad went over to Britain to discuss it, and together, they went to a careers consultant (big money stuff). The consultant told them that only about a dozen photographers in Britain were making real money; he went to work in PR in Sun City and had an interview to be PR to Julio Iglesias... Photography, please. If you have to ask about the prospects, forget it; you can't afford it.
What you do have to have, is total belief in yourself. And a helluva lot of good luck. I had both.
"Go learn, it's how I did it and was the best time of my life. What you will learn is this. School taught you very little about the real world and you are essentially starting over. That's awesome though as you will now learn how jobs really work. As well you will find they taught you nothing about running a business and that is much harder than taking great pictures."
By Rogan
...................................................
Right, and as Fred also told you, what you learn in photo academia is not what you need to know in business. And business is what it is eventually all about. I never wanted to be in business, I just wanted to do photography, but I soon learned that other than self-employment there was no way to eat properly.
Buy the D700; mine does all and more that I can imagine ever wanting to do.
Rob C
-
.....snip.....where Am I and from there doing my best with what I can afford.......snip......
Your 100% right with that quote.
There are exceptions to every rule, but this isn't an industry where one broad stroke sets you for life.
We're not movie actors, or TeeVee stars where one hot gig will work for a lifetime.
If I had a dollar for every assistant that believed buying one type of camera, light, being signed by one repping firm would do it, I could have enough money to buy Greece. (Actually that might not be the best example).
The images for money business is just like any other small business in the fact forward movement comes to you in small increments.
Every photographer believes that one more editorial series for their portfolio is going to be the "one", or one more ad in a source book/web site will get them over the top and that's just not how it works, at least for most mortals that aren't connected by birthright or family income
If you come from a working class background, (which 99% of this business is made up of) 99% of the people in this business are just dedicated hard workers that are trying to make it and move forward.
For every Adriana Llima there are 4,000 young models posing in bras until midnight hoping to be the next Adriana Lima . . . same holds true for the 45,000 photographers that scraped together they money for a 5d2 hoping to be the next Annie or Patrick.
I've also never subscribed to the theory that there are only a few thousand, maybe a few hundred photographers that have success. Maybe that's true, but that doesn't mean that you can't be one of them. They did it, so can you, if your prepared for the sacrifice.
In fact that's what mesmerizes me about this industry, so few can have real success. Who the hell wants a job anyone can do?
Actually I'm proud to know most of the people I've worked with and am always astonished by their ability to work with the intensity and the hours this industry requires. I'm amazed that they come out of the schools so eager, so willing, but are completely clueless about what it takes to survive or what it takes to make it.
I'm also amazed that for forward thinking, creative people, so many photographers use the past as the model for success. They think that the one Rolling Stone gig is the one thing that will set them apart, but today there is not one Rolling Stone there are about 200 online versions all vying for attention. I'll bet tumbler gets more views in a week than all traditional magazines get in a year combined.
In all honesty, I trust the young, starting out crew I work with and use them as a sounding board all the time. I ask continually does that look old and if they say "uh kind of" then the print goes in the trash, the website is redone. This is a business of moving forward.
The thing is they need to trust in themselves as much as I trust in them. That's the real path to success, having faith in yourself.
I've always had a rule, read the press releases of from any person or company that wants a young photographer to "pay" them or work for nothing and do the exact opposite, or at least take it all with a tiny grain of salt.
For me there was always one simple business model and early in my career what I couldn't make up for in money and resource, I could compensate with sweat equity.
I've always believed you go forward in this industry in the same way you would move a building by yourself.
You get up in the morning, slam your shoulder in the right corner of the building, then hit the left corner then the middle. At the end of the day it probably doesn't look like you've moved the building an inch, but if you do it right and don't give up, one year later you'll notice you've moved the building down the block.
You don't do this for a month or a year.
You do it forever.
IMO
JR
-
Hello,
I am a Photography student from Norway, in my last year on Norwegian School of creative arts.
At the moment, I got a Nikon D300 with all the Nikkor lense series. (14-24, 24-70, 70-200 etc.)
I have studied fashion for two years, and I wish to go this way in Photography when im done. And I want to get an assistant job for a photographer in New York or Paris in the near future, read. Craig Mcdean, Dusan reljin, Sølve Sundsbø, etc.
Anyway, a few days ago i got an offer to buy a Hasselblad H3D-22 with a HC 35mm Lens for 4.000$.
So my question is, is it worth it?
Is it any point buying this now, will i get anything out of it. The reason im asking is because a brand new H3Dii-31 w/80mm cost about 30.000$ in Norway.
But i can afford the H3D-22, and 4.000$ aint alot eather. But is this system so undated, that i would get better files from getting a new Nikon D700 or a D3x.
Thanks!
hei,
mcdean, reljin and sundsbø...you're on the right track.
nobody uses phocus in this business. everybody uses capture one.
get a canon or a nikon and capture one and photoshop and learn the software really, really, really, really well.
be bold, be fast, be dependable, bend over backwards and you'll do fine.
if you have a grip on equipment and software, you can work as assistant, a digital operator, in a studio or in the rent business to make money while building your book.
if you’re really good and bust your balls on your book you’ll be successful. if you aren’t and you don’t, well, you’ll find out soon enough.
oh, and here’s something to think about, berlin or munich won't get you into the door at vogue, but there's a lot of catalog and ad work and paying clients here, at least more than anywhere else in europe. just something to think about if you’re starving in london or freezing your nads off in oslo : )
lykke til,
kipling
-
nobody uses phocus in this business. everybody uses capture one.
I'm a professional photographer. I use Phocus exclusively with my Hasselblad digital back - not that I have much of a choice, but I do like the program. With my Nikon I use Lightroom. I have never even opened C1. I have, however, seen a presentation by Doug Peterson on C1 and I don't think it's possible for anyone to know that program better. However, that's not my point. My point is that somehow I have managed to muddle through for several years without either a Phase One back or a working knowledge of C1.
Whatever works....
-
Same here :) I have also
suffered worked for several years with Leaf Capture. I managed to survive without C1.
I totally agree about the catalogue work. It is not the most glamorous thing but it does pay the bills really well. I always had this personal rule that seems to work out really well. 'The more fun I have in a job, the less value I put in money'.
Much valuable information is given in this thread I think. I would add, go and have fun, try to survive and you will do just fine :)
-
hei,
mcdean, reljin and sundsbø...you're on the right track.
nobody uses phocus in this business. everybody uses capture one.
kipling
Im sorry, but that is a very narrow minded view, purely based on that fact that we have sold more than two cameras this year, therefore there are people using Phocus "in the business".
David
-
Heaven is the place where cameras are made by Hasselblad and software is made by Phase One. Hell is he place where ...
Edmund
-
didn't mean to step on any toes...i'm sure there are a few people using phocus, lc, and canon's remote capture...just as there are people who still shoot on glass plates ; )))
seriously, i was refering to the large majority and to the fact that if you want to work as an assistant or a digital operator you need to know capture one.
every rent place on this side of the pond rents phase.
same goes for lighting, profoto and briese you need to know...elinchrom, balcar, etc. are rarely seen here. not that nobody uses them...they're just not a standard.
would be a good idea to be familiar with final cut and hd video cams as well... but i'm just stating the obvious here.
maybe most important thing to learn are people skills. if people like you and trust you, you'll usually do okay.
-
James, Dick and everyone: Thanks alot for your time and the feedback, appreciated!
It really gets me thinking, and ive decided to take a step back and wait. And rather work with the gear i already have.
It's good there are forums with people who have such a passion for this, you all inspire me.
- Sondre
-
Heaven is the place where cameras are made by Hasselblad and software is made by Phase One. Hell is he place where ...
Edmund
You are wrong. Many professionals including myself using Phocus. I love it, sure it could be better in some aspects, but they are only on version 2.6. What's Capture One up to? v5.2?
The misgivings of the current incarnation of Phocus, are easily trumped by the DAC corrections and the final output file quality. And you know it's funny, a bunch of Hasselblad users were just commenting on how few complaints there are in their unified system.
-
I actually like pretty much Phocus.
The possibility to launch it from the beginning full or simplify for example shows that Hasselblad is listening to the photographers.
The only real criticsm I have about Phocus is it's Mac dependence, because the windows version does not have the third-party files available.
I know, I know... 90% (or more) photography is Mac, but it's changing a bit since windows 7. edit: and I've noticed that it's specially changing faster with the laptops.
David, if you see that post, is Hasselblad planning to implement the third party files on the window's version Phocus in the future?
But it's a nice peice of program. Younger than C1 but yet very good.
Honestly, I don't see huge differences with Capture One. They are just about the same. If you know well one or the other, it will take you very little to switch.
If you see that the gap is huge with capture, please I'd really like to know where and why? I run both now and like them both. Maybe exactly like comparing both cameras from the 2 brands. In the end, 10 buttons that do exactly the same thing for one century and nothing more than subtles differences. As we have to end in PS most of the time, those develloppers don't have, and hope they won't, to be the big artillery.
I prefer a very good and simple devellopper than a bad complex and integrated software that will try to by-pass the PS step (lightroom? he he...Michael won't read this one 8)) but in the end you probably end in Ps, so...
If you can make it with Phocus, you will make it with C1 and vice-versa.
Phocus is perfectly suitable for pros. IMO.
-
The days of having to use a specialized tech for every project that is expert in one form of software or another is much less than it was even 4 or 5 years ago.
Now everyone on a crew is tech savvy and in all honesty it takes just a few minutes to get up to speed on eos utility, bridge, c-1, phocus, lc11, etc. etc.
I've done digital a long time, but the crew that comes through my door can run a mac as intuitively as they drink water. They've been raised on computers and have zero fear of anything digital.
I don't own a hasselblad, but if I moved in that direction I would think it would take me and my assistants no time to get up to speed.
Digital just isn't perceived as the voodoo, hard to understand process it was when it started. Today one system or another is kind of like changing lenses from a Canon to a Nikon.
It's all basically the same.
IMO
BC
-
Heaven is the place where cameras are made by Hasselblad and software is made by Phase One. Hell is he place where ...
Edmund
LOL: That explains global warming :)
-
And you know it's funny, a bunch of Hasselblad users were just commenting on how few complaints there are in their unified system.
;D
-
know, I know... 90% (or more) photography is Mac, but it's changing a bit since windows 7. edit: and I've noticed that it's specially changing faster with the laptops.
David, if you see that post, is Hasselblad planning to implement the third party files on the window's version Phocus in the future?
Yes Windows support for 3rd party files is coming!
-
The Converter's Tale:
James sayeth Click ! to his assistant and behold! the data floweth forth and they were glorious.
Edmund
The days of having to use a specialized tech for every project that is expert in one form of software or another is much less than it was even 4 or 5 years ago.
Now everyone on a crew is tech savvy and in all honesty it takes just a few minutes to get up to speed on eos utility, bridge, c-1, phocus, lc11, etc. etc.
I've done digital a long time, but the crew that comes through my door can run a mac as intuitively as they drink water. They've been raised on computers and have zero fear of anything digital.
I don't own a hasselblad, but if I moved in that direction I would think it would take me and my assistants no time to get up to speed.
Digital just isn't perceived as the voodoo, hard to understand process it was when it started. Today one system or another is kind of like changing lenses from a Canon to a Nikon.
It's all basically the same.
IMO
BC
-
Yes Windows support for 3rd party files is coming!
Nick, Thanks. That's a good news. (hope it will read the DNG better than the competition)
-
Your 100% right with that quote.
There are exceptions to every rule, but this isn't an industry where one broad stroke sets you for life.
We're not movie actors, or TeeVee stars where one hot gig will work for a lifetime.
If I had a dollar for every assistant that believed buying one type of camera, light, being signed by one repping firm would do it, I could have enough money to buy Greece. (Actually that might not be the best example).
The images for money business is just like any other small business in the fact forward movement comes to you in small increments.
Every photographer believes that one more editorial series for their portfolio is going to be the "one", or one more ad in a source book/web site will get them over the top and that's just not how it works, at least for most mortals that aren't connected by birthright or family income
If you come from a working class background, (which 99% of this business is made up of) 99% of the people in this business are just dedicated hard workers that are trying to make it and move forward.
For every Adriana Llima there are 4,000 young models posing in bras until midnight hoping to be the next Adriana Lima . . . same holds true for the 45,000 photographers that scraped together they money for a 5d2 hoping to be the next Annie or Patrick.
I've also never subscribed to the theory that there are only a few thousand, maybe a few hundred photographers that have success. Maybe that's true, but that doesn't mean that you can't be one of them. They did it, so can you, if your prepared for the sacrifice.
In fact that's what mesmerizes me about this industry, so few can have real success. Who the hell wants a job anyone can do?
Actually I'm proud to know most of the people I've worked with and am always astonished by their ability to work with the intensity and the hours this industry requires. I'm amazed that they come out of the schools so eager, so willing, but are completely clueless about what it takes to survive or what it takes to make it.
I'm also amazed that for forward thinking, creative people, so many photographers use the past as the model for success. They think that the one Rolling Stone gig is the one thing that will set them apart, but today there is not one Rolling Stone there are about 200 online versions all vying for attention. I'll bet tumbler gets more views in a week than all traditional magazines get in a year combined.
In all honesty, I trust the young, starting out crew I work with and use them as a sounding board all the time. I ask continually does that look old and if they say "uh kind of" then the print goes in the trash, the website is redone. This is a business of moving forward.
The thing is they need to trust in themselves as much as I trust in them. That's the real path to success, having faith in yourself.
I've always had a rule, read the press releases of from any person or company that wants a young photographer to "pay" them or work for nothing and do the exact opposite, or at least take it all with a tiny grain of salt.
For me there was always one simple business model and early in my career what I couldn't make up for in money and resource, I could compensate with sweat equity.
I've always believed you go forward in this industry in the same way you would move a building by yourself.
You get up in the morning, slam your shoulder in the right corner of the building, then hit the left corner then the middle. At the end of the day it probably doesn't look like you've moved the building an inch, but if you do it right and don't give up, one year later you'll notice you've moved the building down the block.
You don't do this for a month or a year.
You do it forever.
IMO
JR
Wise words - I think I'm going to print it out so I still have access to it when LuLa is dead and gone.
-
interesting to see a 2010 thread resurrected.
I wondered what became of our student, it seems he is a commercial photographer, and as predicted by some in the thread paying his way with product/interior work:
https://no.linkedin.com/in/sondre-adler-guriby-30982535
http://www.kid.no/
Wonder which software he is using? :)