July 29, 2014, 04:11:05 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - mycanonphotos

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Where do you buy 5D Mark iii?
« on: July 22, 2014, 12:08:47 AM »
That price is a good price. I bought my second body from get it digital without any issues. It came in a kit box but that's ok...I paid $2,810 for it. The day before the 6D came out, I bought my first 5D3 for $2,749 from Adorama via Ebay...For me that's a worthy price compared to standard retail via B&H etc...including any rebate

2
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: My kind of HDR
« on: July 19, 2014, 04:53:56 PM »
I don't do very much HDR anymore but when the scene warrants I'll process it accordingly

3
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: My kind of HDR
« on: July 19, 2014, 04:49:32 PM »
Here is another done about the same time frame...one of my favorites..Again in print its amazing as well..this is how I saw the scene in my head before I shot it...going with a more "Natural" look woud have not done it justice in my opinion..



Technically speaking, and not to be callous, but this isn't HDR. It is actually the result of improper tonemapping during conversion from HDR (which in the truest sense is an image that stores 32-bit floating point values for each RGB subpixel) to a lower integer bit depth (such as 16-bit or 8-bit). It is the use of high precision 32-bit floating point numbers that makes things "high" dynamic range.

This "classic" HDR "look" is effectively the result of a mistake, or a mistaken understanding of proper HDR processing when converting from "HDR" to "LDR". It is entirely fine if you are purposely doing this for the sake of art...but just to be correct here, calling it HDR is technically incorrect. The images here actually have very low contrast, and therefor very low dynamic range.

High Dynamic Range means exactly that. That the actual data in the image contains enough precision and information to represent a high dynamic range.

Personally, I find these kind of "HDR" images to be...well, not my kind of thing. They have issues all over the place that rub me the wrong way. They are relatively "flat"...no real contrast curve...and the lack of contrast actually means there is very little dynamic range in the results themselves. Terrible color in the bright sun highlights is common...I mean, it this case it turns PINK because of the processing. Unusual and unnatural color gradients are common, not just in the bright highlights, but also in the shadows and around areas that would normally have higher contrast. Halos exist around all edges, kind of like a "glow". These kinds of images tend to have this "soft noise" effect to them, which just feels a little weird.

From an artsy standpoint, these kinds of images certainly have artistic flare. I have no problem with people being artistic, and if this look is your artistic goal, more power to you! I just wish we could stop calling it HDR. It really isn't. :P


That's fine if this is not your "kind of thing". But you are dead wrong to say this is not high dynamic range. In this shot the original 4 images contain the one photos single image range. Being able to tone map the image while in Photomatix then further in Photoshop is an added plus for this kind of artsy shot. HDR is widely abused but when it comes down to it the final output was produced through HDR processing weather you enjoy the final outcome or not is in the eye of the beholder.

4
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:
« on: July 18, 2014, 11:02:47 AM »

5
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 13, 2014, 01:52:01 PM »
I too prefer the push/pull...If IQ and IS is THAT much better then I'll drop the coin on it

6
YAAAAAWWWWWWN......

7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Should I buy 6d or 5MkIII?
« on: April 06, 2014, 03:00:07 AM »
Yeah, 6D will be perfect for you.

8
To me it seems like the Bride is looking into you for a better deal because you were the second shooter. Perhaps your prices might be lower. But what I don't understand is how she knows your photos were not included in the original set given by the event photographer...she must have been told by the event photographer or yourself you were a "tag along" so to speak where the photos were separate...I'd give the event photographer a call and let him know what's up with trying to side step him.. Maybe split the difference with him...

9
Sports / Re: Your favourite motorsports events
« on: April 01, 2014, 03:17:45 PM »
Panned at 1/160 with the 5D3 and the 100-400






More at my site: http://jasonsphotography.net/f512183673

10
Lenses / Re: Hard choice the 50 1.4 or 85 1.8
« on: February 19, 2014, 03:21:53 PM »
I have booth and the 85 1.8 is better regarding focus and sharpness. I shoot them on my 5D3 and 7D, more on my 5D though. Keeping my fingers crossed for the new Sigma 50, hope its as good as their new 35...anyway, it totally depends on what your shooting to justify eather one.... "NEURO" is right though, try shooting the different lengths first then buy...but since you have the 40 I'd go with the 85....its a killer lens for the price!!

11
Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 advice
« on: February 17, 2014, 04:03:00 PM »
I've heard the 70-200 2.8 L IS I isn't as sharp as the IS II or non-IS versions. True?

True!

Yes, It's not as sharp BUT its still pretty dang sharp.

12
Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 advice
« on: February 17, 2014, 02:17:08 AM »
Try to grab a nice used 70-200 f2.8 IS I (one) the first 2.8 IS from canon. I bought one and save a bunch, wish I never would have bought the Sigma 70-200 2.8 os hsm...it was good for about two years then started having IS issues and ring issues...anyway..luck of the draw I guess...I'd rather send a Canon in for repair then a Sigma. Plus the Canon always has a higher resale value, just take care of it

13
Canon General / Re: Why Scott Kelby Switched to Canon
« on: January 21, 2014, 03:19:52 PM »
I have been to four NAPP seminars down here in LA and loved each one of them, most recently with Joe McNally, before that with Mr. Kelby..at no time did eather one push a Camera brand, of which is nice because their work speaks for itself. The first one I went to was with Ben Willmore and he is a Canon User... Joe McNally was having issues with his Nikon Flash units as they are line of sight...They work over quite a distance but have issues when something remotly gets in the way...I was having fun watching him fumble around with his D4 trying to get them to work...
It was intresting to hear Scott's interview, glad he made the video.

14
Canon General / Re: Photographers get physical
« on: November 25, 2013, 09:01:10 AM »
I saw this last night...had to back it up a few times and take another look. The guy who threw his arm out and knocked the other guys camera was there first for sure. The guilty party came in way to fast on his left and  bumped the other guys shot in active sequence. I'd be pixxed too.... I got a good laugh at it.. I watched this a few times last night and it appeared that the other guy knocked the other while behind the QB's..after looking at it again in that link it looks like he didnt come in from the side and was there...none the less its pretty funny

15
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Setting up 600ex speedlite system
« on: October 30, 2013, 11:29:18 PM »
Yeah, I do understand how the flashes work and I love working with them. My problem comes when I want one flash in ETTL and one set to manual...I can't seem to control them from the st-e3-rt very good. Also In manual mode how do I turn On/Off a group?

15min is the time it takes me just to set up the light stands and softboxes :)

Perhaps if you bothered to read the Syl Arena link I posted, you will see there is a very simple explanation of how to put on flash in group A and another in Group B, they can then be set to ETTL and Manual separately!!

I purchased Syl's Lighting for digital photography from snapshots to great shots and really liked it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5