|
I make it to the end of this thread, and there's a discussion about polarizers. Perfect! A couple of weeks ago I took a series of pictures using my 2 polarizers. When I recieved the third (of 3) lenses I bought through ebay, it had a Tiffen polarizer on it, that says "TIFFEN CIR POLARIZER 49mm JAPAN" on it. I already had a 49mm polarizer for my old Minolta X700, also at 49mm diameter - it says "TIFFEN 49mm POLARIZER U.S.A." Not realizing the significance of that "CIR", I thought perhaps I had the potential to assemble my own goofy infinitely-adjustable neutral density filter, by taking advantage of the straight darkening effect of two overlapping polarizers tilted to different angles. I was wrong. I found something that fucks with colours, instead. 1.  filter, "49mm" facing up. 2. filter, "49mm" facing left. 3. Both filters, up, Japan up 4. Both filters, up, Japan left Is the circular polarizer from Tiffen Japan doing all the work here? Playing with it now, just holding it up to my eye and spinning it, it has no obvious effect on reflected light, such as my white walls or my neighbour's white car (or any of the various coloured things around me), but has that blueing / oranging effect on emitted light, especially from my computer monitor (a cheap Acer laptop), though little effect looking directly at my compact-flourescent lamp. What's going on here? And would a pair of linear polarizers actually function like a neutral density filter, or am I missing something? Also, this is the first discussion I've seen where the  seems to fit. And somebody needs to create a  smilie, too.
|
#
¿
May 21, 2010 04:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 22:08 |
|
|
GWBBQ posted:Looking through the circular alone, you're seeing how non-uniform the emission spectrum of those sources is.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2010 00:59
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I'm sure he'll love it not only for the camera itself but that you guys put a lot of thought into it. Best christmas present from a goon this year, in my opinion.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2010 02:39
|
|
|
I have a stupid question. How much of a total waste of $8 would it be for me to buy a cheapo IR filter? I've got a Pentax K10D, and I'm thinking of getting an IR filter for the kit lens, 18-55mm. Googling leads to some vague descriptions of IR-cutting glass in front of the sensor, and much talk of modifying cameras, which I do not wish to do. Will an IR filter just result in blackness and boredom, or is there a possibility I can get some interesting / fun pictures, even at 2 or 3 stops penalty?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2010 07:24
|
|
|
Casu Marzu posted:Let's talk gloves. I shot some stuff tonight, spur of the moment, and it was 29F. My hands were frigid after 20 minutes and it was hard to work any of the functions on the camera. Any recommendations for thin gloves that will keep my hands a bit warmer> Mine happen to be from Under Armour, but really you're just looking for a pair of liner gloves. These are thin gloves with a grippy material on the fingers and palm, designed to be worn inside heavier gloves or mitts. The idea is when you need to be able to use your fingers, you pop off the heavy outer gloves, do what you need to do, and don't lose anything to frostbite. I have several different pairs of gloves built along these lines, and for manipulating camera controls you definately want something with something other than just cotton or polyester on the fingertips. Lots of gloves have a leather or something patch on the palms, but this is much less useful than grip material covering the fingertips of at least the first 2 fingers. Get a loose-fitting pair of heavy outer gloves, too, and put your hands in them to warm up during periods of inactivity. You can get out of such gloves in less than a second when it's time to work again.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2010 22:10
|
|
|
The only reason I could think of beyond what's already been posted is if you're shooting through glass. The logo tends to be white text on black background, and shows up really well in reflections if shooting through a window. Cue the "open the window / move outside" replies in 3... 2...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2010 17:56
|
|
|
I used Recuva when I accidentally deleted about 200 photos from my SD card (Windows Explorer works slightly differently in Windows 7 compared to XP). It was time consuming, mainly because the pictures were all RAW and Windows had trouble figuring out what to do with the files as they came off. But it worked, and it's free.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2010 05:18
|
|
|
Lazy like a Fox posted:So any help about quickly and easily cropping photos in GIMP would be really helpful.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2010 01:06
|
|
|
So today I ordered a dozen pictures printed, some in luster finish, some in metallic, all at 8 x 12. They couldn't mount them on foam-cor for me in time for christmas (because I have a Master's degree in procrastination), so I'm just getting them printed, and my plan is to find frames for them. [Rant mode] Why are picture frames in such dumb sizes? 135 film produces images that are 24x36 mm, a ratio of 2:3 that most digital sensors seem to have maintained. 4 x 6 inch prints are a standard size, but other standard sizes with plenty of choice available for frames wander away from this ratio - 5 x 7 and 8 x 10 would require way too much cropping. It's nearly goddam impossible to find 8 x 12 frames. [\Rant mode]. Well, I needed a mini-vent there. Sorry. My new plan is to buy a bunch of 11 x 14 frames without glass (because putting a metallic print behind glass kind of defeats the purpose) and glue my prints to black heavy card paper and fit them in the frames. Has anyone else solved this problem in ways that don't involve re-cropping the pictures?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2010 00:36
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Thankfully a lot of places have started printing at 2x3 ratios in recent years. Given this the lack of frames matted to match this seems very odd to me. You can certainly buy a larger frame and get a mat, but I completely agree with ExecuDork. I keep waiting for someone to start selling them and clean up on all the DSLR photographers, but if it isn't happening by now we may be waiting a while. My local camera shop is Don's Photo; they've got my pictures right now and say they'll have them back to me as 8 x 12 prints next Monday (not tomorrow, a week later). Getting them mounted on foam core would have approximately doubled the required time. They offer:
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2010 06:05
|
|
|
I take my DSLR with me to work every day, and I'm slowly filling my flickr site with page after page of sunrise and sunset pictures as a result. I also take it, with all of my lenses (4) on my usually-weekly Sunday Drives. On a weekday I might take 5 or 10 pictures, then none for a few days, on my drives I'll take a couple of hundred (mostly landscapes and poorly focused and poorly composed shots of birds flying away from me). So, I do both the carry-it-for-the-unexpected thing, and the go-out-specifically-to-shoot thing. And in-between activities, like earlier today I went outside (to the great confusion of my assorted relatives) to shoot the little birds on the back-yard bird feeder, for about 20 minutes. The advice already suggested of just borrowing a camera (film, digital, p&s, or SLR, whatever) and going out to see what you like / want is the best. I'm also curious about my fellow dork-roomers, so it's nice to see the responses. But I think an hour or two wandering around will tell you much more. Pick up a second-hand digital P&S from craigslist or a pawn shop for less than $50 and play with it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2010 22:33
|
|
|
Just wanted to say thanks to the Dorkroom for the suggestions and advice on my christmas presents a couple of weeks back. The 8 x 12 foam-core mounted pictures were very well recieved by everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2011 03:13
|
|
|
I'm worried that I'm becoming my family's go-to photographer when I'm around, and something similar is happening at work. At the department christmas party, it was announced early in the evening that since I clearly had the nicest / largest camera there, I was the event photog. On christmas day, similar story. Now my coworkers are bugging me for the party pics, and my mom wants me to email her the christmas pictures ASAP. The problem is, I still basically suck at this and I'm frankly not very happy with many of the pictures I took - I keep blowing focus, or miss-judging the boundaries of my depth of field, or not paying attention to what's in the background behind my subjects (e.g. my uncle's hands behind my cousin's head, or trees / poles / doorframes coming out of people's heads). Given I can't reshoot these event photos, does anyone have any suggestions for a quick-and-dirty cleanup procedure that goes some way to hiding these issues? Is there a mask technique that blurs or darkens backgrounds without making the photo look really dumb? I don't have Lightroom, but I plan on getting it sooner-or-later so this might be the issue that pushes me over the edge on that purchase.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 01:37
|
|
|
ThisQuietReverie posted:You're probably gonna have to suck it up and post 3 or 4 so people can see what is salvageable. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3053912&pagenumber=47 Cross_ posted:If all else fails, use Clone Stamp and replace bad pixels with good ones.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 03:12
|
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:Do you have photoshop? If not, download GIMP. Masking with selective blur is certainly possible, just be careful with it. Unsharp mask might be able to salvage some things too... and if they just want facebook pics, you'll have much more leeway with destructive editing than you would if these were for print. My mom said she wants the pictures specifically to send out prints to everyone. Presumably this means 4x6, but larger is entirely possible. spf3million posted:Just wanted to chime in and say that I too hate this and feel your frustration. evil_bunnY posted:Pro tip: explaining that you'd like your photography to stay a hobby instead of feeling like a job also goes a long way. This does require talking to people. I suppose I could try this. My efforts in this direction have so far been mostly passive-aggressive, such as telling my coworkers their foreheads are too drat shiny. I doubt this is effective. Also, I got my first "you camera takes nice pictures" comment on my Facebook, though it was from a good friend of mine who might have said it knowing full well what it means, just to bug me.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 05:07
|
|
|
brad industry posted:Everyone here owns thousands of dollars worth of cameras and lenses so 100 bucks for a scrim that will last forever and has a million uses doesn't seem like a big expense to me. You can also rent them for like $15, and they are obviously DIY-able to look professional without having to resort to stuff you pulled out of the trash. Lots of people get paid, and paid well, to do this, and that's fantastic - enjoying one's job is a wonderful thing. This is why we have a photo-business thread, right? But not every shutterbug goes on to professional status, or even makes a few bucks here and there to help cover expenses. I'd like to be able to spend thousands and buy really top-of-the-line stuff, but it's not going to happen.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 02:57
|
|
|
That is also true. I think if Psylent wants to impress the jewelry store and get repeat business taking pictures of their wares, he would do well to show up with something that isn't a cardboard box. Renting some gear seems like a good middle ground between pour-on-the-money and dig-thru-a-dumpster. \/\/\/ Fair enough. Certainly we're in agreement on the point about cardboard != professional-looking. ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 02:56 on Jan 28, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 04:46
|
|
|
Why do *you* feel bad? You've done nothing wrong, in fact it looks like you've done everything very right, and there's this other social dynamic happening that has nothing to do with you and that you want nothing to do with. Also, "drama vampire" is now saved in my personal lexicon. Nice one.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2011 20:56
|
|
|
I take pictures out the window every time I fly, if I have a window seat or am sitting next to somebody who will let me. I've never had a problem, except for the filthy and scratched-to-hell multipane plastic windows I end up shooting through. As was said above, your camera will not interfere with the aircraft in any way at all, the flight attendants are worried about a) idiots, b) a sudden jolt causing the camera to fly out of your hands and smack into somebody else, and c) if the poo poo does hit the fan, you'll waste time dealing with your camera instead of getting the gently caress out. Remember, 90% of the people a flight attendant says more than "hello" and "would you like a drink?" to are blithering morons, so don't take it personally if they act like you're drooling on yourself when you're adjusting the white balance.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 03:01
|
|
|
I personally don't much like Irfanview (link), I find it a bit counterintuitive and awkward, but it's free, fairly popular (so there are people out there who know how to use it), and several people have recommended it to me. It's pretty good at big batch processes, like resizing a couple hundred photos to the same size or renaming files. At the very least, it beats the default Windows Picture Viewer for most things.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2011 04:05
|
|
|
Fists Up posted:Just buy more SD cards. Cheaper and lighter. Or, torture yourself but live in style, and bring a generator.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2011 07:32
|
|
|
If you already know where you'll be staying in South Africa, and it's still 6+ weeks away, could you mail your Bigma to yourself care of your hosts in South Africa? Shipping that beast slow-and-cheap ("International Economy") would get it there in time if you send it approximately now (not super urgent, you have time to pack it really well). This way you don't lug it around Europe but you get to use it where the pretty wildlife is. Or, as others have suggested, rent a 100-400. Nobody has ever used that lens on an animal and later said anything bad about it. It's massively popular, and must be available for tourists like yourself in South Africa. As long as we're on photo-gear-when-travelling, there's a better-than-even chance I'll be going to a conference in the Netherlands in the first week of July. I'm hoping to fly into Amsterdam 4 or 5 days ahead of the conference and bash around the country and see what there is to see. I have a Pentax K10D, the 17-55 kit lens, a cheap 35-80, a Sigma 100-300, and a manual-focus (and quite heavy) Vivitar Series 1 28-105 which is also my fastest (f/2.8 at the wide end) and probably favourite lens. I will probably be able to talk myself into buying a $400-$500 lens at some point in the next 3 months. I also have a Sigma EF-530 DG Super flash that seems unlikely to be very useful doing the tourist thing in Europe. Anyone have any recommendations for what to bring, or an ideal lens to buy? Currently considering (for different purposes, obviously):
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2011 06:37
|
|
|
Munkaboo posted:Going to St. Thomas Virgin Island tomorrow for a few days. Give me some obligatory beautiful beachy/islandy shots to take! I can only think of the lawn chair + beach view shot. There are other cliches, but I'm tired of typing these while it's -20 C and snowy here.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2011 04:26
|
|
|
GODDAMN FOOL posted:Yea, I'm talking just jumping out, taking a few shots, and driving off, not setting up a tripod or anything. I live in Saskatchewan, though, where the ratio of road-length to residents is the highest in the world - more than 2 km per man, woman, and child here. It's massively empty in this province. Even on the "busy", main highways I frequently see people pull over just to take a leak. A few times people have slowed down or stopped beside me when I'm taking pictures, they're asking if I've broken down and need help. I point at the camera and say I'm just out taking pictures and I get smiles and "OK, have fun!" in return. Perhaps it's me, and I just look like a dim-but-harmless fool. The bridge picture in Understanding Exposure was taken from the side of a very major road in a near-urban part of Germany - a nice vista in the Appalachians on some State Route is nothing like as risky (fines and / or collisions).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2011 03:20
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:The craft/hobby stores (Michaels and such) around here have a few 8x12 options, though usually nothing matted. I'm surprised there aren't more out there, it seems very odd that there are so many 4x6 but so few 8x12. I found exactly one 8x12 frame at my local Michael's, and they were also selling mats to fit an 8x12 in an 11x14 frame (in one colour - white). I also recently discovered basic black frames in 12x18 at my local London Drugs (Canadian drug & department store with a large photo & electronics department). Michael's also sells the mat-cutting equipment and blank mats that would let you cut your own, it worked out to about $120 if I'd wanted to get set up to do that. I too am surprised and annoyed that frame manufacturers haven't picked up on the 3:2 ratio that's been the most common aspect ratio in consumer cameras for 50 years, yet. Custom framing is very expensive, I was quoted $70-100 per picture at a nearby custom framing shop; I didn't ask at the Michael's.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2011 02:50
|
|
|
I bought an assortment of low-grade filters, including a green Cokin-A filter. I remember seeing somewhere that green filters are useful for B&W film. Can somebody confirm this, and let me know what kind of effect colour filters have when shooting B&W? Do these effects carry over to digital, with a B&W conversion in post?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2011 22:06
|
|
|
I could certainly do that, but I'm annoyed that it's necessary. Thanks for the explanation, it makes sense that weirdo dimensions (like 11x14 - a loving prime number?) are based on something from inside the industry that I'm not exposed to. Are picture frames in metric-using countries (Europe) more commonly available in other sizes? I don't understand mats at all. Presumably this is just me and my total ignorance of all things artistic, but I want my photos to go all the way to the edge of the frame, and not have an inch-wide border of empty space. This is easily achieved at 4x6, but not at larger sizes without cropping.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2011 04:14
|
|
|
I get that, too. I am also interested if anyone knows what's going on.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2011 06:26
|
|
|
Irfanview is free, runs in Windows, and has several batch functions including resize. I've never tried it with 10mb files, but it handles 3-4mb just fine. If you have Lightroom, you can import the photos, then export them and specify filesize and / or pixel limits in the export menu.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2011 01:25
|
|
|
A couple of years ago, using my Nikon Coolpix 5200 handheld above me in the crowd. You can do much better than this (obviously), but it's surprisingly easy to get the fireworks in frame. Also the drifting smoke can be interesting.  016 Fireworks 3 by Execudork, on Flickr  013 Mist not Fireworks by Execudork, on Flickr
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2011 20:31
|
|
|
I hardly ever shoot RAW either. I'd guess my white balance is auto about half the time, otherwise the cloudy daytime preset, or I'll switch it to fluorescent lights or tungsten or whatever if I'm shooting at night/indoors without a flash. Lightroom tends to make things warmer than I'd like when I hit auto, my usual quick-and-dirty-for-Flickr is to cut the Lightroom auto values in half - if it bumps a JPG +10 warmer and +6 tint, I'll bring those down to +5 and +3. But that's just me and my imperfect eyes on my cheapo laptop monitor.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2011 04:38
|
|
|
(Part of) The windows next to the back seats in a Bell Jetranger (i.e. Bell 206 and 206L, 407 series) can usually slide forward or back enough to stick a lens through; this is one of the most popular civilian helicopters in the world. The front seats have windows under your feet, right at the very front of the helicopter; since you're shooting almost straight down through those it's usually pretty easy to avoid glare (unless you're flying over water). The front-side windows also slide, but they're pretty small. You *should* be able to stick a lens through one, though. Otherwise grab a black cloth you can drap around your camera, and some tape to stick it to the window, to cut down on reflections from bright surfaces inside. Civilian models generally don't have those convenient sliding doors. Vibration will be a problem. Helicopters shake, violently and constantly. And it's easy to get airsick if you spend too much time looking straight down, especially when the chopper starts swooping around. Barfing on your camera will provide the pilot with a good story, and a couple of hours cleaning it up. Every helicopter pilot I've ever talked to (about 3) has been tremendously laid back and accomodating. Ask the pilot where you should sit and what you should do to get the best shots. Will you be the only passenger? EDIT: This is one of the only shots I have that shows part of the helicopter's window; it's a Bell 206L. I was sitting in the back seat, on the left side. The square part that slides back was about 6 inches across.  Helicopter Window and the Dome by Execudork, on Flickr ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 05:28 on May 5, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2011 05:19
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:A Jetranger is fairly roomy inside. About the cabin size of a 4 door car. If you're just by yourself you should be able to fit your bag This. They squeeze 6 seatbelts in two facing rows, but like a typical car the middle seats are best avoided. Think the back seat of a full-size American land-barge sedan, like a Ford Crown Vic or a Buick Park Avenue. Plenty of room back there. Up front isn't bad, but a bag would get in the way - you don't want to rest anything on any controls, and nearly every surface has something important on it. If it's just you sliding around back there you'll be able to switch sides pretty easily, switch from facing forward to facing back, basically bounce around as long as you don't move too quickly (sudden movements piss off pilots). Even with two people in the back, everybody could have a medium-sized camera bag and it wouldn't be too crowded. If your boss wants to come along, stick him or her up front to chat with the pilot and have the whole back seat area to yourself. Everybody gets a headset so everybody can hear everything, you don't have to be looking at someone to talk to them. ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 05:45 on May 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2011 05:42
|
|
|
Auditore posted:So I got told I suck at composition and need to improve, which I do recognize. I know well how to expose (read Understanding Exposure when I was starting out), so what's the best books for improving composition. Hint: I'm into landscape photography and a bit of street stuff.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2011 01:11
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:A favorite of mine, too, hauntingly beautiful. Since I have Technical Pan good for ISO25, I can get some nice long shots stopped down a bit with a Neutral Density filter.  The roll of Tech Pan 25 you sent me is hanging in my bathroom, drying - I took mainly landscape pictures, nothing that creative.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2011 05:24
|
|
|
Like Molten Llama, I put the pictures into date-stamped folders (YYYYMMDD), but then I import into Lightroom. When I want to go back to working in a folder that I imported some time ago, I just jump to that import, rather than digging through every picture I've ever imported (currently just north of the 10 000 mark). Most of my folders have a few hundred pictures ("spray and pray"), but if I get motivated, go through the folders, and assign star ratings it's easy enough to just show 4 stars or 5 stars and then take those into Lightroom's develop mode. Exported photos go into event-named folders (e.g. "Sunday Drive 060" or "Brian and Amanda Wedding"). I don't have "deliverables" as I am not a professional, but I drop exported photos into Flickr as I put them together. \/\/\/ You're doing better than me. I think I average around 2-3% that I'll give 5 stars, and of those maybe 1 in 10 is something I look at and really think I got it. ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 05:44 on May 31, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2011 02:26
|
|
|
NoneMoreNegative posted:I usually open the preview in LR3 and thumb the → key while keeping my hand on the numpad; 1 is 'Delete', 3 is 'Keep for a rainy day', 4 is 'Use' and 5 is 'Use + extra love in Photoshop'
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2011 05:01
|
|
|
A couple of months ago I was trying to take quick shots of a bird, and it flew across the sun (probably deliberately, birds are jerks). I was looking through my 105mm macro; that was a scary moment, but no pain and no apparent visual problems. I've also had my eyes checked by my optometrist (annual check-up for my contact lenses, nothing to do with this incident) recently and he said everything looks fine. Pointing your camera at the sun is a really bad idea. Sunrise/sunset the light is coming through so much more air / dust / water vapour that you're unlikely to hurt anything, but I wouldn't make it a habit outside of times when the sun's disk is touching or partially obscured by the horizon.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2011 01:34
|
|
|
Delorence Fickle posted:Newbie question: Where do you guys get your business cards from? If you only need a few dozen, you can make them yourself by buying some pre-perforated sheets and designing them in MS Word or Open Office or something - you just need access to a decent printer for 20 minutes. \/\/\/ Good point, forgot about that. ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Jul 20, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2011 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 22:08 |
|
|
Yakety-Sax. That's all you need to know, really.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2011 04:53
|
|