<<< o >>>data driven #1 8 comments + add yours

Earlier this week, as you'll know if you follow me on Facebook, one of the hard drives in my NAS device failed. Rather than chuck it away, I thought I'd see if I could dismantle it, which proved to be a difficult task as I don't have any star shaped screwdrivers. After struggling with it for twenty minutes, and breaking one of my small screwdrivers, I finally managed to get the cover off so thought I'd take a few shots.

This is the first of three, all toned in the same way, and is probably my least favourite of the set. That said, I sent them to my good friend Craig this afternoon and this one was his favourite. What does he know? ;-)

As always, let me know what you think.

shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
image quality
RAW converter
image editor
plugins (etc)
11.38am on 6/9/11
Canon 5D Mark II
EF 100mm f/2.8 macro USM
aperture priority
Camera Raw
Photoshop CS5
3x2 + macro + show the original
comment by Garry at 03:17 PM (GMT) on 6 September, 2011

At first glance I thought it was a new building in Dubai... :)

comment by djn1 at 03:26 PM (GMT) on 6 September, 2011

The Seagate Tower :)

comment by Chris Wray at 06:20 PM (GMT) on 6 September, 2011

... and there's me thinking you'd been inspired by the gallery I sent you last week :-)

comment by Carlos Garcia at 07:36 PM (GMT) on 6 September, 2011

Sweet! Looks like something Darth Vader would use.

comment by Debbie Hartmann at 09:04 PM (GMT) on 6 September, 2011

I have taken a lot of harddrives apart for fun and as u foundd out it is not easy! But once inside you are rewarded with very shiny stuff... I love how you captured it here and look forward to seeing the other two. By the way... there is a powerful earth magnet inside of the drive.... have u discovered it yet?

comment by Justin Photis at 08:01 AM (GMT) on 7 September, 2011

Looks like some future medical device. :) Nice toning on the shot. The original looks quite dark , was it under exposed ?

comment by Rick at 07:33 PM (GMT) on 7 September, 2011

Why did you flip it from what you originally posted?

comment by djn1 at 07:38 PM (GMT) on 7 September, 2011

Justin: yes, it was underexposed, but more by accident than design.

Rick: because I thought it worked better this way round, i.e. you see the sharp detail, before the blurred section. Would you prefer it the other way round?