April 18, 2014, 05:37:58 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 - snowweasel

Pages: [1] 2
Contests / Re: Gura Gear Giveaway!
« on: December 07, 2012, 07:14:29 AM »
I'd like to win!

Personally, I would rather get a larger card at a slightly slower speed (I'm currently using 32GB cards). I prefer fewer cards to keep up with, change out, and download after a shoot. There are those who prefer smaller cards, though, as theyre typically a bit less expensive, and for the whole "all your eggs in one basket" mentality that you lose more in the rare, but possible, event of a card failure or loss.

For non-critical shoots, I have no problem using Kingston cards (I have several elite pro 32GB 133x). I've never had any issues, but have heard enough complaints over the years that I only view them as a last choice if I'm shooting a wedding, or something (if you think you may need an extra card & can't afford another sandisk or lexar). If you have tons of cash laying around- by all means, though, go for the fastest card out there- especially if you have a reader that can make use of it. Offloading to your computer is where you're most likely to see the biggest difference. In shooting, I practically never notice any difference between my sandisk extreme (400x, 60 MB/s) & extreme pro (600x, 90 MB/s). Really the only time I notice any major slowdown is if you are shooting to BOTH cf & sd at the same time. You'll never get over 133x, no matter how fast a sd card you put in (more at http://jeffcable.blogspot.com/2012/06/why-you-should-not-put-sd-card-in-your.html). As for video, either the extreme or pro (or similar Lexar cards) are plenty fast.

Portrait / Re: 5D Mk III 70-200 f2.8 IS II
« on: September 20, 2012, 02:45:15 AM »
My suggestion would be to move the subject up and to the left in the frame, and get rid of the person on the left edge of the frame. Also, if you could move the camera up a bit more to bring more green from the background into the image, it would probably be a bit more interesting.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What to charge for wedding photography?
« on: September 13, 2012, 02:16:03 PM »
Personally, I only let my best (or at least, only my decent) work out into the wild. I usually give them 3 discs (one for the couple & one for each set of parents) with small (for e-mail & facebook, usually with a small watermark in the corner with my website), medium (sized for 4x6 at 300 dpi), and high (for larger print) resolution images of the ones I've chosen (which usually ends up being around 250-350 images out of the 1-2000 I may end up shooting), and a printing release.  I will occasionally include a slightly sub-par image if it is of something particularly important or memorable that I don't have a better shot of. I explain up front that THEY don't want to go through 20 almost identical images to pick the best one or two. I don't like doing it, and I'm getting paid! I also don't want someone potentially seeing the crap shots (which even the best photographers will get occasionally) and judging my work by it. (Along these lines, t also should be noted I shoot RAW, but give the discs in JPG.)

I also offer prints, and explain that while they can get them printed at the lab of their choice, I am more than happy to make recommendations and I STRONGLY suggest they not just go to the cheapest place they can find for that, as you usually get what you pay for. (I still remember the first time I had prints of the same images made at 2 different labs back in the days of film...my first ones came back incredible while I was in Europe and just found a lab near by, which happened to be good. I came home and went to my usual cheap place and they looked like absolute crap in comparison. It had never occurred to me before that point that where you got them printed made much of a difference!)

It certainly is a viable option to charge a little less on the front end and require them to get prints & albums through you at a mark-up and/or charge an additional fee for the disc of high res images with a printing release. Again, be sure to take into account the costs of shipping (if you send them off somewhere) and the additional time of putting together the album or cropping the images for printing. This does give you the most artistic control in the end product to make sure it's what you like/want/approve of.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What to charge for wedding photography?
« on: September 13, 2012, 11:53:55 AM »
I agree on the hours...if I shoot for 8 hours, I count on a minimum of 8-12 hours downloading and post processing. Sometimes more, sometimes less, but it's way more than your time that day that they are paying you for.

Also, if you get a few paying gigs, I would strongly recommend the 5Diii, if you can swing it in your budget vs the ii. The low light capabilities and the silent shutter are fantastic for weddings! Except for going to full frame, I would probably just stick with the 7d for the time being vs the mark ii. Especially with the new firmware. It's the camera I started doing weddings on, and is still my backup camera and the one I use for some better lit distance shots due to the 1.6x crop factor!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What to charge for wedding photography?
« on: September 13, 2012, 11:47:25 AM »
I went about it by looking at competition in my area, and charging more than the photographers that clearly didn't know what they were doing (there will ALWAYS be somebody willing to do it cheaper than you, and there will always be brides/couples looking to find the cheapest...I strongly recommend not targeting them as your clientele). I also don't feel that I can justify charging what some wedding photographers charge, especially if I view them as significantly better than me. I tried to price myself in the low end of what I consider the good photographers in my area. I started out at $750 USD, and have since upped that to $950, which I still consider probably a little lower than I probably should charge.

As a side note, I had a tough time deciding what to charge for "friends" who asked me to do their weddings. Originally, I felt I should give them a really low price, but at the same time, you are working, and they are hiring you, and thus far, I haven't had any of my "friends" scoff at my prices when they asked what I charged. If it's someone you're particularly close to, or someone you know can't financially swing it, well, of course you can come down some for them, or offer them something additional (a free engagement session, some free prints, etc). It appears (without me looking particularly in depth) that you at least somewhat know what you're doing, and if you price yourself low, you're doing yourself a disservice, as well as other photographers in the area that DO use wedding photography as their primary income.

Those are my thoughts...

Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???
« on: September 11, 2012, 04:10:35 PM »
If we're going with lenses I own already, I'd have to go with the widest range & brightest glass, which gives me:

16-35 f2.8L II, 24-105 f4L IS, and 70-200 f2.8L II IS

If I could have my choice of lenses I don't own, I'd swap out the 24-105 with the new 24-70 2.8L II, giving me 16-200mm at 2.8.

I could probably be convinced to swap the 16-35 out for a faster prime and/or a macro lens, as well...

Lenses / Re: Lens align pro or Spyder lenscal
« on: September 05, 2012, 03:41:20 AM »
Totally agree with FoCal. It was fantastic on the 7D, and not much more difficult on the 5D III. I just upgraded from, I think, ver. 1.4 last weekend, but I haven't run any new tests to see the difference, but from everything I've heard, it's much better now than when I used it. I recently got my 70-200 2.8L II IS USM, and am looking forward to running it with both the bodies soon. I went ahead and got the pro version (as I recall, it wasn't much more than any of the physical lens testing ruler devices).

Software & Accessories / Re: Reikan FoCal
« on: May 23, 2012, 08:49:49 PM »
Make sure your camera is supported first.  5DM3 has semi automatic support until they integrate the just released SDK by Canon.

Hopefully that will come about real soon.  It's still useable but you have to manually select the AFMA values between tests.  A pain but it works.  Most of my lenses only took about 20-30 minutes each to run through.  I would imagine automatic would take about 10 minutes or less.

I got some unexpected values on my 5DM3, which I chalk up to operator error. On my 7D (which does have automatic support), I recall it only taking 5-7 min and working great! I ended up with good adjustments on the 5DM3, but if you can wait until Canon releases the SDK and they can add auto adjust, it is much simpler.

Depending on what sort of room you're going to be in (ie- if it's a bit more cramped quarters), you might like a slightly wider lens than the 24-105 (I've loved my 16-35 2.8L so far- though it will distort people towards the outside of the frame). Other than that, you should be good with (primarily) the 5diii & 24-105. If you're in a larger room and you can get wide enough with the 70-200, though, it'd be a great lens to use.

With the 5diii, I wouldn't be afraid to go even higher ISO than the previously mentioned 3200. It does great, and provides perfectly usable images (IMO) up to 12,800 (though that's starting to push it if the shot gets underexposed). If you use the 7d for anything, you'd be pushing it a bit at 3200, though if it were me, I'd probably just have it around in case of catastrophe or if you for some reason needed the longer reach of the crop factor camera.

As far as diffusers, I've been using various versions of the Gary Fong Lightsphere for several years and think it does a great job, though I shoot primarily natural light (almost exclusively, unless I really just don't have a choice). The current collapsible one is much more convenient to pack & carry than the previous versions.

Good luck!

EOS Bodies / Re: How to Edit 5D MK III Raw files in Lightroom(Windows)
« on: April 26, 2012, 03:55:31 PM »
Adobe has released Lightroom 4.1 Release Canidate 2 (RC2). It's available at: http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/lightroom4-1.html

Adobe has released Lightroom 4.1 Release Canidate 2 (RC2). It's available at: http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/lightroom4-1.html

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Lightroom 4 and 5D Mark III
« on: April 26, 2012, 03:53:39 PM »
Adobe has released Lightroom 4.1 Release Canidate 2 (RC2). It's available at: http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/lightroom4-1.html

I've only used LR4.1 a bit so far, but coming from previous versions, my workflow in the develop module is to scroll down and turn on "enable profile corrections" under Lens Corrections if you think you may need it, then pretty much work top down in the develop module. In LR4, things are a bit more understandable than they were in previous versions, but I'd gotten used to the previous versions, so I'm having to relearn a bit, but it's much more "natural" in this version for everything to start out at 0 and then add or subtract from there. In my experience, I just use Lightroom and completely bypass DPP. I've never tried other noise reduction options. I've heard great things about noise ninja, but thus far, Adobe's noise reduction in LR is usually sufficient for me.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Sorry 5D3, Insufficient Value
« on: April 20, 2012, 11:35:03 PM »
People are upset in here.  It would be cool (and rare) if we could all be considerate of that and help each other chill out, even if it means not getting our points across.  That's seems more important.

I tried to change the subject and hijack the thread ... anyone have any advice on my next lens, or am I good to go???

You seem to have a pretty good kit that covers most everything, unless you are looking for something on the longer end (though the TC will help with that).

If you're looking for something to help your creativity, I've been playing around with a lensbaby recently. It's pretty fun, but definitely taking some practice to get used to (I got the composer pro, as well as the edge 80 optic, double glass, and fisheye).

Pages: [1] 2