|
The camera store where I get my film developed also does gallery prints, prints onto canvas or aluminium and so forth. My girlfriend also got a bunch of her photos printed onto large canvas frames as Christmas presents, she went through an online printing service that does business cards, etc. Helen Highwater fucked around with this message at 01:13 on Mar 6, 2016 |
#
¿
Mar 6, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:28 |
|
|
Dumb Lightroom question: Is it possible to title individual photos from the Develop tab? I know you can rename as a batch when you export and you can edit the filename and add a title in the Library tab, but is there a way to do it per file in the Develop tab? I ask because I'm running LR on a dying MacBook Air and switching tabs sometimes takes a while. It would be handy to be able to apply some adjustments and rename all in the same scene if possible.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Google photos will do all of that. If she's using an Android phone then it'll all be automatic. If she has an iPhone then she just needs the app on her phone and a gmail account. She can have it automatically backup her phone pics and then they are available, searchable, rateable etc from her Mac (or anywhere).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Eesh that's not great. I always turn the camera off, but usually leave the OS on on my 50-150. Maybe I need to rethink that going forward. Tripod on the lens collar definitely for something that size. As for carrying it around, It should be ok. I guess that you aren't carrying it with the lens horizontal a whole lot, so the leverage the lens exerts on the mounting ring should be minimal most of the time and, when you do have it horizontal then you are probably supporting the lens with your other hand while you compose a shot anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Also the Bandsintown app.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
I use a 2011 Air and it's fine. I have all my libraries on a Thunderbolt drive too. The hard drive on mine died about a year ago and I've been running the OS from an external drive and even that isn't too bad (as long as I don't have anything else running on the machine at the time).
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I have a 2011 MBP from work and it's really showing its age.. mostly due to the hard drive. Apple apparently put a drive in it powered by hamsters and it hangs badly during heavy I/O, such as generating previews. Don't get the new MBA though, it has no card reader slots and no USB ports. The only connection option is a combination power/peripheral slot so if you want to plug in additional drives or a USB cable, you need an adapter. Luckily the 2014 MBA is still available with 2 USB3 ports, a Thunderbolt port and (on the 13" model) an SD card reader.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
You can (with Canon Connect) view the photos on your SD card on your phone without importing them - even if they are in RAW format. You could then use that as a basic delete/keep pass but I'm not convinced it's worth it compared with just checking them out on the camera's LCD. You can import RAWs from the camera to your phone/tablet to be edited on the device but that's a separate instance of the image so you'd need to either publish them from the phone or have something like a Dropbox sync or Adobe Cloud to retrieve them later on a different device.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Comrade Red posted:Leaning more towards a full manual old school (analogue?) camera. Not looking for anything high end professional but just as another side hobby, if that helps. Everything that isn't digital is analogue. Some analogue cameras have more automation and electrical stuff to make your life easier, some are purely mechanical and require you to do everything yourself. If you really want a Contax II, then buy one and practice with it. Shoot lots of rolls and learn from how you gently caress each one up. If you're a bit nervous about dropping the money on a Contax just to discover that you hate it, then buy a cheap Soviet rangefinder on eBay and play with that until you figure out if you want to go on with it. The Kiev cameras are based on the Contax so shooting with a Kiev 4 or something will be very similar to the Contax experience, but a Zorki or FED rangefinder will also give you the feel of what shooting with a pre-war rangefinder camera is like. If you are interested, I might even be able to hook you up with a suitable camera.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Ken loving Rockwell posted:To focus in Manual focus mode, tap your camera's AF-ON button What?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Captain Dilly posted:My favorite is the picture of his Mercedes S550 wheel that links to a review of his personal brand new S550. At the bottom of that review... "Help support my growing family!" Jesus. That's not a review, that's a cry for help. He compares it to offerings from other manufacturers at the end of the review. quote:Versus BMW
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2016 09:40
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:What does "Getting the real thing" even mean? Other cars are actually real as well. I'm pretty sure that any car manufacturer you care to name has a poo poo-ton of patents under its belt. If you google Ken Rockwell, these are the front page results (after his actual site). 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:oh my god, that dpreview thread is golden. pretty sure this guy is krock himself The Another Angle link is better. It has examples of actual dumb stuff that K-Rock has said. About the A7RII (a $3,200, 42MP camera). quote:11MP is the lowest resolution setting. I usually prefer to shoot at around 6 MP for my people pictures to allow me to process more of them faster. Even with all the junk in the menu system, it only has three resolution settings. Good to know that no-one ever needs to buy a FF camera again. quote:The only real difference between APS-C and full-frame cameras is that full-frame lenses are much bigger and heavier, and that APS-C has more depth of field and full-frame has less. That’s what really matters; the pictures and overall operations outside of the extra A7R II features are the same. Pro-photographers don't shoot RAW because you can't send the pictures straight from the camera to your clients. quote:Raw is a waste of time and space, and doesn't look any better than JPG even when you can open the files.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:make sure to use papyrus font Atelier Bart Radfucker.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:So I picked up a sigma 50-150 f2.8 recently and love it, is the 17-50 f2.8 just as good? That lens is almost permanently on my 70D. It's a great lens as long as you don't shoot with a full frame body. Lovely bokeh wide open, nice and sharp stopped down and the constant max aperture means you can zoom in and out in busy times without worrying about how your exposure is changing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
TastyLemonDrops posted:Nah, Life is Strange just reminded me that it was something I was interested in a while back, but never got around to. I'd rather have something I can save photos on/transfer to my PC than instant development anyway. Portable is relative. If you want something that you can slip into a pocket or a small handbag, then that's a mirrorless or compact camera. If you don't mind having something that weighs around a kilo hanging around your neck or stashed in a bigger bag, then a DSLR becomes an option. Compact cameras are usually all in one cameras that are about the size of a box of cigarettes. They don't usually have the ability to swap lenses and they are usually designed to automate as much of the picture taking process as possible. They are very cheap and small. Mirrorless cameras look similar to compacts but are usually somewhat bigger. They usually have interchangable lenses, a full suite of controls and fall into a range of capability somewhere between a good compact and a decent DSLR depending on the price. They are a slightly less mature product however so decent ones are quite expensive and older ones aren't as capable. DSLRs are the workhorses of the photography world. You get a lot of control over your images as well as the best range of lens options. You can get pretty cheap ones if you don't mind going back a generation or two. If you want to explore photography and learn about image production, then you'll want a camera that lets you gently caress about with as much as possible. That's a mirrorless or DSLR. You'll find that the capacity to change lenses is super-powerful and, when you figure out what it is that you like photographing, you can tailor your gear towards that thing without changing the camera body. When I started to get interested in photography, I bought a used, low-end DSLR that was about 6 years old with a kit lens* on Ebay and gradually increased my collection of lenses and gear for it to accommodate my growing understanding of what I wanted to do with it. I'd suggest that approach would probably serve you well unless you really need something very small. *Kit lenses are the fairly cheap general purpose lenses that are often shipped as a bundle with low/mid-range cameras. There's nothing wrong with them, but you'll find their limitations after a while and want to upgrade to better lenses.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2016 10:19
|
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:This might be a dumb question and I didn't see a thread for it but recently I saw some medium format 120mm film prints that were done with a toy camera and I've become really fascinated by the look of the pictures it produced. I've been looking at different ones online but I was wondering if anyone here had a suggestion for medium format toy cameras? The classic would be the Lubitel which is a TLR camera that uses 120 film for a (selectable) 6x6 or 6x4.5 frame size. You can get reproduction ones new from Lomo for $300 or, you can take your chances on eBay and get a real one that might not work for about $20. There's also the Diana which is a lot more reasonable in price when new but looks more obviously like a toy camera and doesn't have that TLR hipster vibe.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2016 09:59
|
|
|
If the camera has been unused for a long time, I'd check it over thoroughly before putting any film in it. Take the lens off and look through it, if you can see anything that looks like dandelion fluff or candyfloss in there, then you have a fungus living in the lens which is quite common for cameras that have been stored for a while. You'll want to get that cleaned out so that it doesn't spread to the rest of your gear. While you have the lens off, open the back and cock the shutter a few times to see what state the curtain is in and if the mirror moves smoothly. A CLA (clean, lubrication, adjustment) on a manual camera shouldn't be more than about $30-40 and could be worth it if there's any sign of stiffness or corrosion. Get a new LR44 battery and check that the battery compartment is still in good shape. There's probably a place near you that still develops 35mm film unless you live in the middle of nowhere. Most of them will scan it for you as well but your own film scanner will be a good investment if you plan to shoot with it regularly. Several consumer flatbed scanners will handle 35mm film, the Epson Perfection (V500, V550, V600, V800) range is usually recommended.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
I wouldn't sweat detailing your experiments too much. One thing you might want to do is to check the lightmeter is still calibrated. If you have a digital camera to hand (or can borrow one), check the metering with that at the same ISO as whatever film you have loaded in the Pentax and see if the readings match. Try it in a variety of different lighting conditions (outside on a sunny day, in shade, indoors etc). If the Pentax lightmeter is accurate or is always off by a consistent amount, then you're ok. Otherwise get a lightmeter (app based ones exist for smartphones) or get used to eyeballing exposures. That's pretty much the only thing I would bother to document as you test. Everything else comes down to 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
Popelmon posted:Awww If you want a manual m42 lens with an aperture ring, then look into Helios or Mir lenses on eBay. Most of them are available in M42 mount, the Helios 32 is a 15mm f/2 lens and the Mir 20 is a 20mm f/3.5.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2016 00:22
|
|
.
|
Annath posted:So, I messed around with the old Pentax K1000 I found, but the lack of quick feedback on my photos, ie having to wait on development time, was more frustrating than I thought it'd be. The wider one (18-55) is going to be better for walking around shots, because it gives a wider field of view so you can be closer to your subject. They both do the same thing just at different ranges though. So the one you use will depend on how far you are from your usual subject and how you want to frame it. if you're shooting sports from the stands, you'll want the long lens. if you are shooting landscapes or pictures of the dog, then you'll generally want the wide one. Does Pentax have some proprietary image editing suite that it bundles? I don't know but honestly, most people use Lightroom. It's not free, you pay a monthly sub of $11 or so (depending on the subscription term) but it also gives you Photoshop and you won't need anything else. There's a My First DSLR thread which will probably answer a lot of your questions. The main things though are understanding the exposure triangle and developing an eye for composition.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
life is killing me posted:I feel your pain WRT slow upload speed. I run Lr on a 5 year old MacBook Air that boots from an external drive, has the catalogue on a different external drive and the photos on a third external drive. It takes a loving age for Lr to open and I can't be running anything else on the machine (not even a browser), but once it's open, it is reasonably fast as long as I'm not doing stuff like HDR composites or stitching panoramas. I'd suggest finding a workflow that doesn't involve using Ps and Lr at the same time. Either cut Ps out or do all your Ps edits at once then export them in batches to Lr once you are finished.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
dakana posted:Nah, dawg. I've got 250k+ in my catalog and it runs just as well as if I work with a new one. Yeah, it's worth noting that your photos aren't actually in your catalogue. The catalogue is just a database of file locations and the metadata associated with them - which includes information about edits. The original photos are wherever you import them to and they never get changed. When you export photos, Lr looks up the list of edits and applies them to the photo that you are exporting but your originals never get modified. My usual practice is to import photos to a folder named for the collection that they are going into. I import a second copy to an identically named folder on a second drive and then I add them to the relevant collection - all of which is done in the import dialogue. Lightroom will automatically arrange the photos in those folders into sub-folders named by date of import.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
dakana posted:Yeah, in the Library module in the left pane under "Catalog" you can hit "All Photographs" to get all of your photos in all of your folders in the filmstrip. Then, you can export them to JPG. In the export options you can choose to have them export to the same folder as the original, too. Note that this won't convert all your photos to JPG, it will create new versions that are JPGs. All of your original RAW files will be in the same place and taking up the same space.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
The last part is what happens. The full frame lens throws an image circle which is bigger than the diagonal on the APS-C sensor. Therefore you get a crop of the centre. Focusing isn't affected. The converse situation (an APS-C lens on a full frame body) will result in massive vignetting because the image circle will be smaller than the diagonal on the sensor so the corners won't be getting any part of the image. Edit: a FF lens on an APS-C body doesn't affect focal length (even though most manufacturers describe it that way), what you will have is a narrower field of vision as a result of the crop that will be equivalent to a longer focal length. You don't actually get free magnification. Helen Highwater fucked around with this message at 02:39 on Aug 11, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2016 02:36
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Because you were at f45 which is insane. Open up to f8 or so like everyone said. I'm sure he meant f/4.5 not f/45. I don't think that a lens even exists for anything smaller than large format cameras that stops down that far.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
ButtWolf posted:Nope. 45. What is that lens? I've never seen anything that stops down below f/32 for 35mm bodies.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:It wouldn't be the depth of field preview lever? On manual bodies, there's a lever that is just inside the lens ring that pushes on a pin in the lens that opens up the aperture. The depth of field preview lever disengages the aperture control so that it will shut down to the selected setting. Normally, the aperture is held wide-open by that lever pushing on the pin to help with focusing until you take the picture, at which point the lever in the body moves back to let the pin in the lens back out and the aperture snaps to the correct setting.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
From a format perspective they are, even if it's not an accurate description for what's going on inside. DSLR in this case is shorthand for 'has good sensor, interchangeable lenses and a full suite of capture controls. It's easier to describe mirrorless cameras as DSLRs in a compact body that are in permanent live-view mode than as compacts with all the nice things from DSLRs on top.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Or we could be adults and use the correct technical terms so we don't confuse people with approximations, because by your definition my 8x10 view camera is a DSLR. What's the sensor like on that 8x10?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Pretty good actually 8x10 digital back quote:Nicknamed the Maxback, Feinberg got two of them made so that he could have a backup for a price he calls "equal to the cost of a good size house – before the housing crash." Each unit would go for around "low six figures" if more were to be made, but at that price point and with a very specific purpose, it's unlikely these will ever go for sale. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
What happens if you connect the camera to the computer and read it over USB?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
LampkinsMateSteve posted:Is a USB3 card reader going to be faster than the internal card that I currently have in my machine? The internal card probably connects to a USB bus anyway. If your laptop/motherboard is all USB3 then the chances are that the internal card is also at that speed. If it has a mix of USB3 and USB2 ports then maybe the external USB3 will be faster. Edit: yes I know USB bus is an tautology. Deal with it pedantailures. Helen Highwater fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Aug 16, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2016 13:09
|
|
|
I hope Flickr stays around too. I use 500px for showcasing what I think are my best photos and Flickr is for my regular upload dumps so I can share stuff from outings or my daily walk-around shots with people. Yahoo is pretty loving terrible though so I kind of expect that they'll shut it down eventually - probably through incompetence rather than malice.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
The subset of cameraphone users who care deeply about composition is probably a single circle that completely overlaps on a venn diagram with the subset of people who also own a dedicated camera of some kind.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
hey santa baby posted:Is there any image sharing service that allows somebody to leave comments w/o having to login? Dropbox, Google, flickr all require an account. With aging family members across the pond that's not going to happen. Am I SOL? You could set up your own image galleries on Wordpress and then you can set the commenting rules as you like. Just be prepared to clear out a poo poo ton of spam posts every day.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
I have a couple of Manfrotto tripods. One is crap, the other is very solid but wasn't cheap. What is your budget for this? This is the lovely one. It's light and fold up small so I use it as a walkaround tripod but the wheel lock on the head is a bit temperamental and it uses a proprietary plate that won't always play nicely with all kinds of gear (basically, if you don't have a large, flat surface on the bottom of whatever you are mounting, it won't grip it properly). This is the more expensive one (~$200 iirc) and it's a very nice tripod as long as you aren't loading it up with something monstrous like Soviet MF gear.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
life is killing me posted:I'm more worried about hot weather, I'm in Texas. We'll be lucky this year to get a winter that gets below freezing. Most tripods I've seen have the plate attached with a folding wingnut. That Manfrotto I have (the compact action) is pretty much the only one I've seen that doesn't. The 'plate' in that case is a round button that is gripped by an adjustable clamp inside a circular hole in the top of tripod head.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Soopafly posted:Any advice on sticky aperture blades? I have a cheapo Minolta lens from the 70s that I'm not afraid to take apart and do something about, but I'm not sure what to use on the blades to unstick them, or what the best environment to actually do the assembly / disassembly in. I have done this on Soviet lenses. Use naptha (Zippo brand lighter fluid) in tiny quantities on a cotton bud. You'll want to take the front and back elements off before you do it and so you'll need a clean surface to do that in. Take lots of pictures as you go so that you can see how things go back together afterwards.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:28 |
|
|
I'd suggest neither for storage. I have two external drives for backups and Amazon Glacier for offsite cloud storage. I use both Flickr and 500px for sharing however. I use Flickr as a general photo dump for anything I want to publish as a way of organising my photo collection and having some kind of continuity where I can look to see how I'm improving as well as send specific pictures or albums to anyone interested. 500px is where I put the pictures that I am proudest of so while I have almost 11 thousand photos on Flickr, I have less than a hundred on 500px. Most photo sharing sites let you upload to them from Flickr, so I upload to Flickr from Lightroom and then share from Flickr to 500px, Viewbug, Instagram, etc as I fancy. I suspect that if (when) Yahoo implodes, someone will buy Flickr because it's very monetisable and more valuable than pretty much anything else Yahoo owns.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 23:10
|
|