|
Mightaswell posted:You guys are loving dorks, sports photography is THE use case for shutter priority mode. You don't need an SI photographer to tell you that. Are you being obtuse on purpose? I've never understood the attraction to shutter priority for sports, never felt a need to use it. If I found myself shooting sports in mixed light, it was almost always outside during the day time, which meant that Av stands virtually zero risk of returning a "too slow" shutter speed, and gives better return than the risk of Tv, which is winding up with dark images or poor background seperation. Maybe something magical has happened in the years since I've done sports work, but I only ever used Tv for panning. The point is that it's a matter of preference, no matter if you're a PUBLISHED WIRE PHOTOGRAPHER or just a dad shooting kid's soccer.
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:55 |
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:The point is that it's a matter of preference, no matter if you're a PUBLISHED WIRE PHOTOGRAPHER or just a dad shooting kid's soccer. This. In all honesty, if you are competent and you know your camera well, it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what bloody mode you use. So don't take a pissy attitude if someone else prefers a different method. It's just as valid as your choice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
i like camera
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Has anyone tried... Exposting To The Left? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EwViQxSJJQ Ok also I made the idiot shut up so if everyone else could too (regarding said idiot and his ballin sports cards which I totally care about because I am a literal child) that would be super great.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
megalodong posted:i like camera
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
megalodong posted:i like camera This is the greatest post this thread has ever seen
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EwViQxSJJQ Before the crapstorm hit, I think someone asked about metering modes: I don't think I have ever managed to get Evaluative/Matrix/Whatever to expose the way I want to. It seems to take great delight in picking that one 4x4 pixel area of bright sky and saying 'yup, that's it - better close everything down' I find centre weighted remarkably reliable, with spot/4% getting pulled out of the bag in weird situations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:You guys are loving dorks, sports photography is THE use case for shutter priority mode. You don't need an SI photographer to tell you that. Are you being obtuse on purpose? I saw a tutorial on getting the milky way to show up in light polluted skies that suggested the use of ETTR + heavy post processing (including a separate foreground exposure) in order to get results. No idea how necessary the ETTR was but it seemed like a reasonable thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
megalodong posted:i like camera wow no way me too
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:wow no way me too hosed up if true
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Dren posted:I saw a tutorial on getting the milky way to show up in light polluted skies that suggested the use of ETTR + heavy post processing (including a separate foreground exposure) in order to get results. No idea how necessary the ETTR was but it seemed like a reasonable thing to do. It really depends on the sensor and the light situation. There are times I will find myself using ettr but it's rather minimal these days. The xtrans sensor doesn't really need it in jpg mode if you understand how the highlights and shadow adjustment settings work. I guess if I shot raf files I would use ettr a bit more when shooting into the sun, but I shoot jpg. Like. A. Scrub 
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:hosed up if true This but unironically.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
Weird rear end question: I want to have a small, adjustable focal length/FOV viewfinder, so that I could test the composition of the scene with different "lenses" before I commit to taking out my big rear end camera - does such thing exist? Maybe as an iPhone app or something?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
http://www.erikfiss.com/foto/cams/turretfinder/e.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
Putrid Grin posted:Weird rear end question: I want to have a small, adjustable focal length/FOV viewfinder, so that I could test the composition of the scene with different "lenses" before I commit to taking out my big rear end camera - does such thing exist? Maybe as an iPhone app or something? I know there's this for iOS - it looks pretty great but I'm sure there are cheaper options: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/mark-ii-artists-viewfinder/id711280537?mt=8 I use this on Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jfdupuis.photography.viewfinder
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
Putrid Grin posted:Weird rear end question: I want to have a small, adjustable focal length/FOV viewfinder, so that I could test the composition of the scene with different "lenses" before I commit to taking out my big rear end camera - does such thing exist? Maybe as an iPhone app or something? https://www.alangordon.com/sales/our-products/pocket-mini It covers from 18-200mm. I have the KMZ turret viewfinder. It covers roughly 28-85mm if I remember right. It's not bad for the price, though prices on Russian optics have risen to the point where you might as well get a non-Russian equivalent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Is a camera without a serial a bad idea? I have the chance to get an x100s for super cheap but it doesn't have an SN. I've read that sometimes manufacturers take them off for warranty work, but also won't do repairs on cameras without SNs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Is a camera without a serial a bad idea? I have the chance to get an x100s for super cheap but it doesn't have an SN. I've read that sometimes manufacturers take them off for warranty work, but also won't do repairs on cameras without SNs. Maybe someone knows better, but when I was getting my original X100 repaired for the sticky aperture issue years ago, one of the first things they asked when I was on the phone with them was the serial number. It sounded like they wouldn't touch the camera if it wasn't from North America, so I doubt they would do work on it if you couldn't tell them a serial number at all. Besides, super cheap + no serial number sounds like stolen poo poo anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
That sounds like it didn't even fall off a truck, more like straight up theft and resold. In short, do not loving buy that unless they have rock solid, admissible in court, proof the sticker just fell off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
Best case scenario is a grey market camera Don't buy it
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Since there is no print thread, I will ask this here and hope someone can help me out because I am lost. So I have access to an HP Designjet Z3200 and an Epson Stylus Pro 4880. How do I not make my prints look like butt? Last I had access to the HP, I was using Epson Ultimate Presentation Matte paper, and while the paper itself was low quality, the prints that came out were close if not exactly how it looks on my screen. This is mostly due to the fact that someone had created an ICC profile for the paper that I used that looks really good. Now I am using Epson Velvet Fine Art paper and while this is supposed to be a better paper, my prints just look awful on the HP. The Hp has the ability to create a ICC profile for my paper, which I did, but it just looks bad. This sucks because this paper is pretty drat expensive and I hate to be just wasting it like this. The image I am working on is this one: Untitled by Dev Luns, on Flickron the printed image, my blacks are nowhere near as deep, in fact it almost looks like the blacks were somehow overexposed and the white trailer is more of yellow-white than straight white. The shadows on the back of the trailer are also completely lost and the color there is very rough. I haven't had a chance to sit down with the 4880 yet. Does anyone know if I need to create another ICC profile with this printer? There are some ICC profiles that come with the printer driver for the Velvet Fine Art Paper and I am hoping when I go into the lab tonight that I can just use the ICC profile and the drat thing will look magical. Anyone well versed in making their own prints? What do you recommend? If I let photoshop manage my colors under the print menu and my ICC profile matches my paper than I should theoretically be all good right? pootiebigwang fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Aug 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
Make sure your monitor is calibrated, too. Black point is something you'll need to set for each print individually, profiling really won't help you out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Make sure your monitor is calibrated, too. Black point is something you'll need to set for each print individually, profiling really won't help you out. Monitor was calibrated about 6 months ago, any reason I would need to do it again? So treat me like I am ignorant (because I am) as I am very used to darkroom printing and I am very used to editing for black and white and not really for color. So how do I go about setting my black point? Is this something I would do in the print menu or is this an overall edit I would make in curves/levels in photoshop? I also assume that this means I will end up with two edits, one for web and one for print? Is there anyway to edit based off what it will look like when printed? Sorry for what I am sure are dumb questions, just a complete novice when it comes to color printing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
Well, my monitor calibration tool reminds me every 30 days to recalibrate, so that might be a start I guess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Well, my monitor calibration tool reminds me every 30 days to recalibrate, so that might be a start I guess. I did it monthly when I had a CFL-backlit screen, when I got something with an LED backlight, I started doing it every like 3 or 4 months, then not at all, because it pretty much never actually changed anything after the first calibration. Maybe once a year if I can find my calibration thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:I did it monthly when I had a CFL-backlit screen, when I got something with an LED backlight, I started doing it every like 3 or 4 months, then not at all, because it pretty much never actually changed anything after the first calibration. Maybe once a year if I can find my calibration thing. Yeah same for me too, I use to do it monthly, then quarterly, now I only do the calibration before a major project, which is like once or twice a year.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
I do it once, at the beginning of wedding season every year.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
So I looked up how to set my black and white points and I then used the paper in the Epson printer and holy poo poo. These are the most gorgeous and vivid prints I have ever seen. My blacks are deep and velvety and my colors are popping off the page. I don't know, maybe it was that HP printer and the profile it had installed but it is a night and day difference between the two. Just happy to be able to get the quality I was initially after.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
Where are you setting black points? In the printer software somewhere? I recently got more ink for my Canon printer and am not that happy with the results - any links on where to start with better printing technique? My monitor is calibrated and the while the colours on the prints seem to be fairly accurate the shadow detail looks like poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Does anyone have Canon Professional Services Gold or Platinum? How are they with their equipment evaluation loans? If I'm able to give them the at least 2 week lead time, is it pretty consistent to expect something within a few days? I'd like to evaluate stuff when I actually have shoots planned, like weddings. Also, do they get mad if you request stuff often?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
dakana posted:Does anyone have Canon Professional Services Gold or Platinum? How are they with their equipment evaluation loans? If I'm able to give them the at least 2 week lead time, is it pretty consistent to expect something within a few days? I'd like to evaluate stuff when I actually have shoots planned, like weddings. Also, do they get mad if you request stuff often? You basically get put next in line to when that particular piece of equipment is available. You don't get to pick, and it won't be in a couple days. In your email to them, it wouldn't hurt to tell them exactly when you need it though, maybe they will make it happen. Also be specific which generation of the equipment you want (Mark 2, etc) or you may end up with an older generation eval. They don't get mad, but you are only supposed to use the service twice a year. I've done it 3 times before and they didn't care.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:You basically get put next in line to when that particular piece of equipment is available. You don't get to pick, and it won't be in a couple days. In your email to them, it wouldn't hurt to tell them exactly when you need it though, maybe they will make it happen. Also be specific which generation of the equipment you want (Mark 2, etc) or you may end up with an older generation eval. Oh, where'd you see the twice a year thing? Just looked through the terms and conditions and didn't see anything about that. Maybe it's changed? Or is it an unspoken rule?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
So I thought hdr seemed pretty cool, watched a video tutorial, downloaded the suggested application, and was hoping to try it out soon. Then I saw a hdr photo posted in the landscape thread and it got poo poo on. Do good photos come from hdr or they all horribly over processed crap like what you see on 500px?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
On the broad plains of the Intarwub, 99.99999% of HDR is radioactive garbage, which is why we dump on it. Done *right*, it's a useful technique. The problem is, very few people are able to resist the urge to slam those sliders to the wall. Take whatever value you were going to dial in and divide by 10. Feel like slamming it to 100? Try adding just +10 and see what happens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
If you can tell it's HDR, then they hosed it up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
HDR is a useful technique. When done sparingly, you won't even know it. for example, this is garbage:  don't make your photos look like that and you're already doing better than most people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
The problem, though, is that the unwashed masses (i.e.: non photographers) think that HDR photography is awesome and looks good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
ZippySLC posted:The problem, though, is that the unwashed masses (i.e.: non photographers) think that HDR photography is awesome and looks good. When you hate on HDR you're hating on DEMOCRACY.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
ZippySLC posted:The problem, though, is that the unwashed masses (i.e.: non photographers) think that HDR photography is awesome and looks good. Everything on 500px front page is so ugly, but so loved. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 01:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:55 |
|
|
Do you want to have popularity, or do you want to have your artistic integrity? (joke's on you, you'll have neither)
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 01:17
|
|