September 02, 2014, 11:35:05 PM

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 - anthonyd

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Post Processing / Re: B&W Process
« on: August 08, 2014, 04:56:56 PM »
If you are not afraid to experiment a bit, and/or you have a limited budget, let me recommend "Gimp".  It is open source software that aims to provide Photoshop like functionality.   Photoshop lovers hate it, but I won't enter that religious war, it does what it does.
Anyway, it offers you a channel mixer option, where you can create a B&W image from a single RGB channel, or any custom combination of channels you want (i.e. 80% R + 15% G + 5% B).  You can even use negative values, which in some cases it makes sense (e.g., negative blue if you want to darken that bright purple shirt that your model was wearing without affecting the skin tone).

If you go down this route, you might also want to install the "g'mic" plugin and play with its channel mixer.  That one allows you to mix in different colorspaces (CMYK, HSV, Lab, RGB and YCbCr).

Happy hacking.

2
Business of Photography/Videography / Re: Who owns the photo?
« on: August 07, 2014, 09:43:56 PM »
...
Mr. Macaque has no revenue or cash equivalents. He throws feces at lawyers.

Priceless!

3
Business of Photography/Videography / Re: Who owns the photo?
« on: August 07, 2014, 05:25:13 PM »
The one pressing the shutter button owns the photo, it is their creative property.

So if you set up a shot on tripod, and your assistant does nothing more than press the button on a wireless shutter release (and doesn't even look through the viewfinder) then the assistant owns the shot?  I find that very hard to believe.

You have an assistant for pressing the button on a wireless release? wow you must be a busy photog. :-D

4
Lighting / Re: Speedlite zoom setting in flash modifiers and camera ISO
« on: August 04, 2014, 04:15:12 PM »
+1 for testing.  However, your setup sounds like it ought to work, unless your flashes are too weak.

In the following shot you'll see a (super-messy) setup I used to do some shots last weekend.  The softbox is about 40''. It was a good 2m away from the subject and the flash (a crappy, old sunpak) was at 1/16 power.

In the first shot the window seems to be casting a lot of light, but as you'll see in the following two (one with the flash on and one with the flash off) the window only provided fill.

The settings I used were: ISO 200, f/1.4, 1/160


5
+1 for YN603C. I have three flashes all hooked to one of these little tranceivers.

And here is a sample (w/ two flashes):

500px



6
Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 29, 2014, 02:53:30 PM »
Guys, you all misunderstood.  This is the year of the lens.  That means that they will release just one lens this year, that's it!  ;D

7
Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 29, 2014, 02:13:43 AM »
It feels like Sony to Canon is like Apple to Microsoft.

Oh...flashy, overpriced and useless versus dependable, reliable and built to get the job done?

That's funny, it almost sounded like you called Microsoft dependable and reliable.

8
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50 1.4 Art NOT bokehlicious?
« on: July 27, 2014, 09:36:22 PM »
"As everything works with lenses, no lens cannot be strong somewhere without being weak somewhere else."

Want to borrow my 200? 8)

Your 200 is weak at zooming, but I'd borrow it anyway :-)

9
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 DG II HSM
« on: July 22, 2014, 11:16:40 AM »
The link to Amazon is broken. Instead of "http" it starts with "ttp".

10
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 135mm f/2L
« on: July 20, 2014, 01:54:42 PM »
You took a shot with a 135 at 1/10 of a sec and it turned out sharp!!!! Either you used a monstrous tripod, or you are my new hero. :-)

Thanks for the review, some of us like this type of review much better than charts of numbers.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How disappointed will you be if . . .?
« on: July 07, 2014, 11:23:47 AM »
it has the same sensor as the Eos70D but with just more bells & whistles?

I have a sneaky feeling that maybe its going to be the same image quality as the 70D just more robust, full frame viewfinder, gazillion frames per second, wifi, gps and class leading video...So just how disappointed will you be if that is the case?

Neither surprised nor disappointed.  It seems pretty likely, to me.  If there's a significant IQ boost, I might be tempted to get one as a backup body...but the kind of IQ boost I'm talking about likely defies the laws of physics, so I'm not holding my breath. 

Really? You think this is the end of the line for IQ? Sure, some sizes inside the sensors might be reaching the limits set by physics, but most problems are a question of engineering.  I don't have a way to prove my claim, but I bet you if you look back in 10 years, you will agree with me that the IQ now and the IQ then will not be comparable.

12
Software & Accessories / Re: Tripod centre column - yes or no
« on: July 01, 2014, 06:53:56 PM »
Raising the center column *up* adversely affects stability.  I think that is pretty self-evident.

But what about lowering the center column *down*?  Down as extending below and in-between the legs of the tripod?  Is that equally as unstable as raising it.  Is there any stability concerns with hanging the camera below the lowered center column?

I will often flip the center column when I am taking pictures of low flowers.  Is that a wise thing for me to do?

Wouldn't that lower the center of gravity of the entire apparatus... and much like hanging a sand bag on a hook on the column... it should have the same effect of adding stability.  I say go for it.

The overall stability will certainly be improved, especially with a heavy camera+lens. However the resistance to vibration will depend on how tight the tolerances are between the column and whatever it is that holds the column in place.

13
Photography Technique / Re: Taking HDR shots
« on: June 30, 2014, 11:24:27 AM »
You should also look into LuminanceHDR.  It's an open source software that produces anywhere from subtle to cartoonish results depending on the settings you choose.  The interface might be a little confusing at first (too many options), but it's a powerful tool.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/anthonygr/sets/72157606594716451

14
I had it for 2+ years... and I really liked the 60D.  I do like shooting at shallow depths of field though... and the 60D doesn't have AFMA... But if you are shooting at reasonable depth of fields, you should be golden. 

Like this you mean?

15
I've had it for a few years now and I love it.  I rented a 6D to do a wedding, next to which it felt clearly inferior, but it feels much better than the T2i I had before.
Most pictures in my flickr page are done with it.
I'm not a pro, but I would argue that light, composition and lenses matter more than the body.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5