|
HookShot posted:I'm pretty sure those photos from last year aren't taken by him dude. Wow, I'm an idiot. I inferred that he took those as a spectator and was asked to shoot this year. STILL! Learn from that guy's mistakes, Legdiian.
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 01:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
the posted:Those pictures are terrible. I am sure you can do better. I don't think you need any additional lenses. I was just thinking I may need something a little faster because it looks quite a bit of the show is a night. But yeah, I can't believe those are the "official" images for that event...
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 03:31
|
|
|
My wife likes to get tons of pictures of our brat children from Olin Mills because their processing has always been better then all the other cheap kid photo places. Anyway they were recently purchased by one of the other bad places and now their photos are piss poor quality also. Where the hell can I now go to get properly developed 8 X 10 and various shots of brats for $50 a session? I am really bummed out about losing my cheap kid photo place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 22:03
|
|
|
For $50? Probably not many places-- do a search for photographer(s) in your area, look at their portfolio, then prices.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 22:06
|
|
|
Elephanthead posted:My wife likes to get tons of pictures of our brat children from Olin Mills because their processing has always been better then all the other cheap kid photo places. Anyway they were recently purchased by one of the other bad places and now their photos are piss poor quality also. Where the hell can I now go to get properly developed 8 X 10 and various shots of brats for $50 a session? I am really bummed out about losing my cheap kid photo place. Get your own camera?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 22:58
|
|
|
the posted:Get your own camera? Totally, I mean why pay for someone else to take professional pictures of your kids when you can do the same job yourself? When I get married I'm just going to hand my rebel over to my friend and I'll have professional pictures at zero cost!
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 23:10
|
|
|
the posted:Get your own camera? Oh, man....can of worms opened. I shoot kids, a lot. I'm no pro, but I'm worlds better than the parents with cameras. It takes practice and patience and skill to do good kids' portraits, not just a good camera.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 23:19
|
|
|
"Nice photo, you must have a really good camera!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 06:47
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:"Nice photo, you must have a really good camera!" Hahaha! That phrase reminds me... I was so pissed of by hearing some variation of this sentence - thus I copied downsized versions of the images I took with my DSLR to my PowerShot A20's CF card. (32MB woo!) Cue above dumb sentence, I whipped out the camera and hit the play button... The  reaction was worth the effort 10 times over.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 07:22
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:Hahaha! Now go do the same with med format scans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 09:36
|
|
|
50 bucks isn't exactly the budget for a professional. You can always put an ad on craigslist asking for someone to take pictures of your kids? You might even get someone doing it Time for Prints
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 09:41
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:Hahaha! That's funny, but at the same time it kind of proves the persons point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 12:07
|
|
|
Legdiian posted:That's funny, but at the same time it kind of proves the persons point. Well I guess if you hit a low enough level, then yes -- but: Some of my all time favorite pictures were taken with a Canon Powershot A570. Which is by today's standards probably well below bargain bin level point and shoots. Also lots of my A20 photos being crap had more to do with the fact that I was a crap photographer back then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 12:26
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:I shoot kids, a lot. Heh heh heh.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 14:06
|
|
|
Next weekend I get to take a ride in a hot air balloon :o. If I can overcome my paralyzing fear of heights to actually get on the thing, and then actually open my eyes, I would like to take some photos. I would think the wider the lens the better for something like this? And a polarizer? I have an m4/3 camera with a 20mm (40mm equiv) and a 14-45mm (28-90mm). I doubt either is ideal. I have rented the 7-14mm (14-28mm) m4/3 lens before, and it was great, but it does not have a filter thread. Any other advice would be lovely. I am certainly not a professional and I doubt I will have a second chance at this any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 22:00
|
|
Associate Christ
|
Maybe rent the Olympus 9-18? That one can take filters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
Local photographers look like a bunch of pretentious douches. Looks like I try the field image camera.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 02:12
|
|
|
Kaluza-Klein posted:Next weekend I get to take a ride in a hot air balloon :o. If I can overcome my paralyzing fear of heights to actually get on the thing, and then actually open my eyes, I would like to take some photos.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 04:28
|
|
|
I took almost the exact same lenses on a helicopter flight over Victoria falls last September. Didn't really get a chance to use the Panasonic 20mm because the flight was only 15 minutes but the Olympus kit 14-42mm was far from ideal. Get the longest you can get, wish I had.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 12:14
|
|
|
Saint Fu posted:The longer the better. All of the wide angle shots will look the same. A longer lens will let you frame interesting landscape features from above. Huh, never thought of that. Maybe this is an excuse to buy the cheap 45-200mm panasonic makes :o. Searching flickr for hot air balloon ride is mostly pics of people in/around balloons or pictures of balloons themselves. And for god knows what reason almost all of them have their exif data removed/hidden. I wanted to steal their exif secrets!!!
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 15:03
|
|
|
Can someone tell me what's going on here and how to achieve it? It looks like the trails are from a long exposure, but then the subject itself is exposed with a flash...?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2012 17:11
|
|
|
Tshirt Ninja posted:It looks like the trails are from a long exposure, but then the subject itself is exposed with a flash...? Yep. Probably second curtain flash so the trails go the right way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2012 18:58
|
|
|
Bulb with second curtain flash. Press, move (+zoom in), release, profit. there is no profit
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2012 19:53
|
|
|
Much appreciated!
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2012 23:50
|
|
|
Tshirt Ninja posted:Can someone tell me what's going on here and how to achieve it? It looks like the trails are from a long exposure, but then the subject itself is exposed with a flash...? Get drunk and then press the shutter button with your dick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:Get drunk and then press the shutter button with your dick. The best way to take any kind of photo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2012 04:51
|
|
|
I have some magazine prints I've scanned and they have the paper has started to yellow. They are 40 years old. Whats the right way to get rid of that? White balance? Subtract/multiply yellow? Something else?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2012 21:19
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:I have some magazine prints I've scanned and they have the paper has started to yellow. They are 40 years old. Whats the right way to get rid of that? White balance? Subtract/multiply yellow? Something else? Try selective color, go into whites, and reduce yellows.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Try selective color, go into whites, and reduce yellows. Won't that only correct for it in the highlights? I would think the effect is across the board.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2012 21:44
|
|
|
Try it, and just experiment around with taking yellows down in the other fields. Not sure if it will work or not, just trying to give you an option.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2012 22:22
|
|
|
Quick method: use the white balance tool and select white background of the magazine as your reference point for the tool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2012 22:53
|
|
|
So I just bought a D5100, which marks my first foray into both DSLR territory and Nikon territory, and I'm loving it. But there's one little issue that's bugging me a fair bit, and that's how auto ISO is buried deep in the menus. I stuck it on the user menu for now, but is there a more convenient way to enable and disable auto ISO?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 08:37
|
|
|
I've never even heard of "auto ISO," that's interesting. How would that even work? That like trying to find the angle of a triangle but having two variables to find instead of just one. ...wow, what a nerdy analogy. But really, I think of shutter speed/aperture/ISO as a triangle - you change one angle, one or both of the other two are going to have to change slightly. I've had success explaining SS/Ap/ISO to people that way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 13:15
|
|
|
 About a month ago, one of my photos had a black line across it. It didn't happen again until Friday, when most of my photos had lines across, using two different CF cards. There were 1-3 lines of slightly different thicknesses and in different places on the image. Has anyone seen this before? I hope it's the cards breaking, but because it happened with two cards, I fear it's the camera.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 13:42
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:I've never even heard of "auto ISO," that's interesting. How would that even work? I use it all the time, it's awesome. On my camera you can set a maximum value for it so things don't get too grainy. It's especially useful for aperture priority mode in low light, as it can ensure you get hand-holdable shutter-speeds while keeping noise at a minimum automatically.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 13:47
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:I've never even heard of "auto ISO," that's interesting. How would that even work? That like trying to find the angle of a triangle but having two variables to find instead of just one. The manufacturer creates an algorithm that places bias on a certain shutter speed/ISO that they think is a good combination. A simple version would be 'always use ISO 200 -unless shutter speed drops to 1/50 when wide open, then bump up ISO until this limit is met'. What I find mildly disappointing is that no body has the option to create your own algorithm and upload it to the camera - I am sure that many serious users already have their own preferences of noise vs shake and given a real world situation, would select a different combo compared to another user. Ric posted:
Looks like a problem with the sensor, sorry. It is how I would imagine it to break if a couple of soldering points on the sensor failed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 13:49
|
|
|
spog posted:Looks like a problem with the sensor, sorry. It is how I would imagine it to break if a couple of soldering points on the sensor failed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 14:19
|
|
|
spog posted:The manufacturer creates an algorithm that places bias on a certain shutter speed/ISO that they think is a good combination. A simple version would be 'always use ISO 200 -unless shutter speed drops to 1/50 when wide open, then bump up ISO until this limit is met'. I shoot people on motorcycles flying around parking lots so I use auto iso all the time, but I use it in Manual mode. I set my shutter speed and aperture and auto iso changes the iso value to achieve the correct exposure. The viewfinder shows you what ISO it has come up with so if I think there is going to be too much grain, I get lower the shutter speed or open up the aperture. I don't see a need for any more control than that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
Legdiian posted:I shoot people on motorcycles flying around parking lots so I use auto iso all the time, but I use it in Manual mode. I set my shutter speed and aperture and auto iso changes the iso value to achieve the correct exposure. The viewfinder shows you what ISO it has come up with so if I think there is going to be too much grain, I get lower the shutter speed or open up the aperture. I don't see a need for any more control than that. This is neat. I wonder if my D700 has it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
The Pentax K-5 has selectable Program algoritms (no user programming though) like Auto, wide aperture, narrow aperture, fast, MTF etc. and biasing for the Auto-ISO, slow, normal and fast. Fast program mode is seriously fast, on a 21mm it'll still bump to 1/1500 even if it means using max ISO.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2012 18:03
|
|
