|
I always loved the niche end of photography, I did a bunch of 360º bubble walkthroughs when they were a brand new thing - made back the cash I put down for the 180º lens, the modal tripod head and leveling widget, and probably could have spun it off into more returns if I wasn't so chained by inertia. Of course you can make them with simple kit and a days training for real estate, its the 'money for shovels' tail end of that particular market now. This made me  when I saw it the other day thoughhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJAr7SbVGBg perfect 180º SBS 3D video direct to your CF Card without needing a giant hollywood rig. also a pic; sometimes just snapping stuff behind the scenes / during downtime can get you an all-time favourite. 
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 10:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 23:24 |
|
|
incredible shot
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 10:44
|
|
|
not that anyone gives a gently caress but my rating system is like this rate images 4 if they're good enough and 5 if they're standout. anything blurry or blinking gets an x and rejected. I don't know what to do with the remainders yet. hd isn't yet full
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 10:45
|
|
|
NoneMoreNegative posted:I did a bunch of 360º bubble walkthroughs when they were a brand new thing hm, I found the old project code (never throw anything away, folks) but it's all Flash-based for the rendering & controls, so I don't think you can even host / view it in a browser any more? Adobe's Flashviewer tool let me at least capture this for posterity though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POIvPJajSBI but its a shame you can't control the view and explore yourselves. (venue is the then-brand-new Maggie's Center at Freeman Hospital - The FH has the regions big Oncology department just over the road and the Maggies is a welcoming space for patients to chill and take some down time. Did this as a freebie, wouldn't ask for a payment)
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2022 11:31
|
|
|
heh this dude entertains me https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ8VodC19-g
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2022 11:47
|
|
|
someone today who used to shoot real photos for money told me they thought my photography was good and morons make money taking way worse photos that I do so maybe I should just start charging money and see what happens
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 05:56
|
|
|
do wedding photography
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 06:35
|
|
|
budget wedding photography thats a big committment. I am confident enough now to feel like I won't waste someone's time, but no not confident enough to be trusted with such an event
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 06:46
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:someone today who used to shoot real photos for money told me they thought my photography was good and morons make money taking way worse photos that I do so maybe I should just start charging money and see what happens right on dude!
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 07:46
|
|
|
what can go wrong
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 08:54
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:budget wedding photography by the end of the wedding everyone is way too fuckin smashed to be able to tell if a photo is just good or the best thing ever committed to film go ham, my bro
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 09:14
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:what can go wrong if its crap, just pay for them to have the wedding again as insurance
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 09:22
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:by the end of the wedding everyone is way too fuckin smashed to be able to tell if a photo is just good or the best thing ever committed to film huh. pretty sure I’m not shooting photos of the service to show to the people at the reception? is that a thing fart simpson posted:if its crap, just pay for them to have the wedding again as insurance i didn’t mean weddings lmao. imagine getting married and then echi takes a picture of you
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 16:08
|
|
|
god drat don’t do weddings. they are so much loving work, way way more than you’re anticipating and oh god the pressure to produce good results can be a lot. and it’s like a 12 hour day. I’ve done three or four and never again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 16:13
|
|
|
doing weddings is the “i like computers, i should get a job in IT” of photography. you will never enjoy it again
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 16:52
|
|
|
i like drugs, i should be a pharmacist
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 17:00
|
|
|
scottch posted:god drat don’t do weddings. they are so much loving work, way way more than you’re anticipating and oh god the pressure to produce good results can be a lot. and it’s like a 12 hour day. I’ve done three or four and never again. gently caress im not doing weddings jesus lol polyester concept posted:doing weddings is the “i like computers, i should get a job in IT” of photography. you will never enjoy it again but I am trying to do this
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 17:29
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:by the end of the wedding everyone is way too fuckin smashed to be able to tell if a photo is just good or the best thing ever committed to film uh, pretty sure they're sober by the time the proofs come back, and then the bride gets to decide that you ruined the most important day of her life
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 17:40
|
|
|
there’s a reason photographers charge double their rate for weddings. it’s also what keeps most professional photographers in business
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 18:05
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:thats a big committment. I am confident enough now to feel like I won't waste someone's time, but no not confident enough to be trusted with such an event find local wedding photographers in your area, cold call them with your portfolio, and see if they're looking for assistants. the better ones don't do it solo. if you polyester concept posted:doing weddings is the “i like computers, i should get a job in IT” of photography. you will never enjoy it again yah that's why it's the division between a hobby and a job op. the job version uses the same skills, it just ain't fun when i did a lot of photography i did concert photos cause it was (a) stuff i was going to anyway (b) a fun change of pace that meant i wasnt just listening to the set for 45m straight and (c) guaranteed to have no commercial potential whatsoever, because indie musicians have no money whatsoever. this let it still be fun
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 20:04
|
|
|
if far rather get paid for photography than dealing with old people because getting paid to deal with old people really has sapped the joy out of it when you first meet an old person they’re nice but it’s only a short matter of time if they’re in the entitled boomer majority when something doesn’t quite go their way and yeah I’ve just lost the joy since getting paid to listen to their poo poo echinopsis fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Jan 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 20:28
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2022 22:08
|
|
|
a dream of mine is one day use a lens too heavy to hold
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2022 22:11
|
|
|
c camera s: apparently my local London Drugs still has a 1-hour 35mm photo lab. might have to go get myself an SLR or something to shoot some film with
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 10:37
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:c camera s: apparently my local London Drugs still has a 1-hour 35mm photo lab. might have to go get myself an SLR or something to shoot some film with I am surprised they are still offering it. Back in 2014 they were the last drug store photo lab operating in canada and I used them to develop a roll here or there. even back then it was too expensive for anything other than the novelty. everywhere else will mail it out somewhere. be warned though that they don't do the traditional analog RA-4 minilab process for prints anymore - they do a digital scan and print it like any other digital photo. The LD I went to had the worst digital scans imaginable, DNR'd to death and all the detail was turned into mush. and then they charge you extra for the digital files, which were complete garbage. and if you don't ask, they might throw away your negatives. polyester concept fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Jan 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 18:37
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:c camera s: apparently my local London Drugs still has a 1-hour 35mm photo lab. might have to go get myself an SLR or something to shoot some film with when you find out how much film costs now you may want to look into a better lab
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 18:40
|
|
|
i’m curious how the dynamic range of modern sensors compare to that of film recently learned that one feature of film is that images will have lower contrast, usually anyway, spose depends on the film, but this seems reasonable considering they have a high dynamic range and it’s the only way to observe a high dynamic range is low contrast I find contrast one of the hardest to nail subjective edits of a shot. I’ll increase it a bit and think yep that’s good, but then decrease it and think nah that’s better, then increase it again and think nah now I’ve hit the spot, and it’s like whatever I change it to looks better than before. idk it’s so utterly subjective to me in a way compared to exposure, I can normally find an exposure I am happy with quickly and leave it at that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
digital sensors are measurably better than film in pretty much every way but people don't always want the most hyperreal image and the "character" of film is something all the digital companies spend tons of time on [especially since only like 3 companies make all the sensors everyone uses] in practice you can make an image look however you want but the film ~experience~ appeals to a lot of people
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 18:59
|
|
|
Modern digital sensors objectively have more dynamic range than film, but like vinyl records versus CDs, some people like the effects you get with the analog medium better. Film and digital are both linear and comparable in the middle of their range, but at the extremes film experiences reciprocity failure and kind of rolls off in a way that's different from digital clipping. Compare an overdriven analog tube amp to an overdriven digital signal. Neither one is more "correct," but the analog one might sound more pleasant. Also digital is better at capturing detail in deep shadows and film has better handling of blown highlights, but you probably knew that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
the way that values clip at the top of the range is where I kind of got inspired for the principle behind that led code of mine, but in a very hosed up way I really like the idea of 3d luts because they should in theory be able to take the digital data, as long as it’s not clipped, and replicate the way film deals with highlights, including if it creates colour shifts. but if there are light bleeding effects in film which I believe there are, that’d require a bloom like filter which I am still in search for (a bloom filter that works with high dynamic range stills and has a shoulder not a threshold) I enjoy the post shooting process as much as shooting so I shoot raw, straight to jpeg would take half my enjoyment away. and whenever I take any raw image into photoshop or affinity photo it makes me “develop” it before using it so you can’t really play around with the high dynamic range, at least well maybe Im just too stupid to work out how to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 19:27
|
|
|
The two best film stocks available right now are fuji 400h (no longer available in 35mm, only medium format) and kodak portra 400. you can reliably over or under expose these films by 2 or 3 stops, but you really need a good quality scanner to pull out the detail. this page has some good examples of what it can look like. a consumer scanner won't look this good http://canadianfilmlab.com/2014/04/24/film-stock-and-exposure-comparisons-kodak-portra-and-fuji/ at 35mm it will look pretty bad, though. mostly everyone who uses this film in a "professional" sense uses them in medium format to reduce apparent noise. and consumer grade film stocks will do way worse, obviously. you can still buy a 3-pack of kodak gold 400 at walmart for like $16 in canada, which is not bad. portra 400 is like $10+ per roll. there was a time when digital sensors weren't as good as film but that's absolutely a thing of the past. polyester concept fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Jan 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 19:59
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:
the "develop" stage is moving the image from bayer pattern into RGB, after which you lose the ability to do certain things but you shouldn't necessarily lose dynamic range. adobe lets you click the format text at the bottom of the window and bring the image data into Photoshop as 16-bit fixed point (the default is 8) which should be able to preserve the full range of any camera raw, assuming you don't wildly blow it out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 20:37
|
|
|
this might not be the right thread for this, but how do y'all (americans) buy lenses? i ordered a telephoto one from bonanza and it was cheap and worked out fine but it took like 2 actual months to arrive. I've been thinking about buying a faster, wider lens for dim/indoor shots but every time i try i get analysis paralysis because there are so many different places to buy lenses and i don't know what i'm doing i wish my local economy was functioning as well as echhi's because renting lenses sounds fun as heck
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 20:46
|
|
|
I ordered a lens adapter in november and it arrived today. I didn’t know lens rental was a thing until recently, sure gear rental exists where you do? [quote="josh04" post="into Photoshop as 16-bit fixed point (the default is 8) which should be able to preserve the full range of any camera raw, assuming you don't wildly blow it out. [/quote] yeah I need to look into this. well. it’s hardly important but it’s fun right now I need to find a better portrait lens. my gear rental dude has loaned out the lenses I wanted, 85mm f/1.4 and 135mm f/2 might have to get a 70-200 for the time being. I have a small handful of people lined up to shoot in the near future but without a good lens obv that’s gonna be a bummer also need to think seriously about a light. I seriously prefer natural light but last shoot I did there’s some nice shots that would be great shots if there was more light on the subject. not all but some of them. but .. that also seriously changes the vibe of the photoshoot too, toward something I am not trying to achieve necessarily, so idk. might try to rent something and see if it meshes with my style. never used external lights before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 22:36
|
|
|
if anyone cares for any reason https://instagram.com/wavefrontphotographynz
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 22:44
|
|
|
buy a cheapy Yongnuo flash compatible with whatever system you have, a 5-meter flash sync cable that will fit the flash-head and your camera, a monopod or folding lightstand*, a cold-shoe threaded flash holder to go on top of the monopod / lightstand, and a shoot-through umbrella. You can get all this hella cheap, and it will be a good learning tool. I've known a bunch of photogs who proclaim they are 'natural light only' shooters and everyone knows that actually means 'won't learn / are scared of trying flash' *the lightstand you can plonk down with the cold shoe, brolly and flash head on as a one-man shoot, but if you swap the lightstand for a monopod you can get an assistant to VAL (Voice Activated Lightstand) for you and move your lighting without having to stop and move your lightstand
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 22:49
|
|
|
thanks for the advice. I’ve been looking at some of that yongnuo gear and looks very cost effective. I’m not really a fan of photography that is obviously artificially lit, but I guess there’s a lot of stuff that is subtly lit that keeps the natural look, and I suppose I need to be able to do this for when the sun isn’t doing what I want where and when I want
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 23:00
|
|
|
the quality of light you get out of a non-direct flash is lightyears better than natural light in 99% of indoor situations. I wish it wasn't weird as gently caress to set up a bounce flash at every family event I go to where i usually take candids. i mean, people always appreciate when I send them cute photos of their kids and pets but it's certainly distracting to be firing a flash all the time. everyone thinks with a flash you'll get that terry richardson deer in headlights look, or something super artificial or staged, but a single flash bounced off a wall or ceiling just looks so good and way better than whatever lovely LEDs people have in their house. the strobist lighting 101 guide is often a recommended read https://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101.html the first time you try it out and see the result on your rear LCD it's like  , so exciting and rewarding.
polyester concept fucked around with this message at 00:22 on Jan 25, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2022 00:04
|
|
|
yeah absolutely. I can imagine why it’s awkward lol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2022 00:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 23:24 |
|
|
echinopsis posted:the way that values clip at the top of the range is where I kind of got inspired for the principle behind that led code of mine, but in a very hosed up way this sounds like what they call convolution in audio gear. is it the same thing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2022 03:17
|
|