October 25, 2014, 01:01:28 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 - LarryC

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
The photographer and videographer for my stepdaughter's wedding two years ago cost ~$6K.  She picked the photographer after interviewing 6 photography studios.  She was shown a number of very impressive wedding sets by the photographer she ultimately went with.  The resulting end product, however, was mediocre, at best - and I'm being polite.  It turns out the photographer she interviewed was a junior photographer from the studio and what she was shown at the interview was photographs taken by the principle at the studio - NOT the photographer that was interviewed and showed up on the wedding day!   

I would make certain that the photographer you get is the photographer you interviewed and that the work you're shown is actually the work of the photographer who will do the job.



3
My first sale, as I can remember,  was in 1987 or 88.  It was a head shot of a model from a modeling school I walked into looking for anything to make a few dollars while a graduate student in Albany.  I think I charged her $40 for the session and gave her 4 or 5 shots.  I spent probably 10 hours in the darkroom trying to get that first job right.  The model and the school loved the shots and sent several dozen girls my way over the next couple of years.  It paid my rent. 

4
Business of Photography/Videography / Re: 4K, 5K, 6K and Up Video
« on: October 09, 2014, 05:39:31 PM »
One limit is the resolution of our eyes. If you look at a 42'' Screen from 4 meter, between 720p and 1080p there is no visible difference.


42" for 4 meter is not right distance.  I believe 55"+ is suggested for 4 meter distance.  For me I can clearly tell the different between 720p and 1080p from my 58" TV from about 6 meter in my living room.  I really need a 65" to 70" 4K or 8K TV for my living room.  The only problem is the input source is not ready yet.

I agree.  I can readily tell the difference between 1080p and 720p on our 65", and could also on our previous 55".  I can also see the improvement at 4K at BB, though with their made-for-4K sample content.   The thing is, my wife and daughter don't care at all about resolution and are perfectly happy watching SD versions of TV broadcasts, and usually won't bother to switch to the HD versions of the same broadcasts. When I switch for them and extoll the amazing increase in detail, they just stare at me like I'm describing an invisible 6' pink rabbit.  I think they are in the majority. 

5
I only moved up in cameras because I lost shots, or just couldn't capture what I wanted to, due to poor AF, low ISO, slow lenses, and low resolution.  In fact, I have plans to return to several vacation places in part so I can re-shoot some of my favorite  images with better gear. 

That said,  I am very happy I started with lower level gear because it made me appreciate and understand the limitations of AF, ISO, DR, etc.  And most importantly it made me convince myself I was sufficiently committed to photography before moving up to the more expensive gear over several years.

6
It makes little sense for Canon, Nikon and Sony to develop their own increasingly complex sensors for what is a diminishing market.  If we want to see 100MP sensors with great DR and processors capable of handling the throughput or simply improved performance 22-36MP sensors and processors, it makes more economic sense for the technology to be developed collectively.  Let sensor companies, like Aptina and Sony, compete for customers and let Nikon and Canon tailor those sensors and compete on the overall camera product, as Nikon does now.  It's no different than every computer manufacturer using either Intel or AMD chips while still being able to distinguish their products.  Remember when Apple went to Intel for processors?  They still seem to be able to distinguish themselves with their computer while not even designing the single item that defines a computer!  Few even care anymore where Apple gets their chips.  Nikon figured out the economics a while ago and made the right decision, for them at the time.  It is inevitable that Canon will sooner or later realize it makes more sense to outsource sensors to the sensor companies and focus on what they do well; lenses and overall camera design.

7
Canon General / Re: DRones vs. anti-DRones: how to resolve the controversy
« on: September 25, 2014, 03:49:31 PM »
how to resolve the controversy
Only two possibilities:
1. Canon designs or buys a sensor equal or better than exmor.
2. Canon to file for bankruptcy and will stop designing sensors and selling cameras.

I vote for "1." ;)

PS.: And even if "1." would happen soon, the sensor wouldn't be good enough to them... I suppose.

+1.  It's interested that everything that Nikon beats Canon at is unimportant to good photography but everything that Canon beats Nikon at is critical.  It's assured that as soon as Canon surpasses Nikon/Sony in DR, MP DXOmark scores and resolution (any they will at some point) those will become important features.  Unless you shoot Nikon, at which point Nikon shooters will argue that 36MP is more than enough and existing DR is plenty, and DXOmark favor Canon. 

8
Mirrorless has it own special - small, light weight easy to carry around on certain lenses.

I would switch to mirrorless if my kids weren't in sports. For landscape and everyday photos, current mirrorless is good enough for me.

Interesting conclusion, at least some mirrorless camera, e.g. Nikon V3, can shoot at 20FPS with a vary high reported focus rate.  I would think the speed and compactness of mirrorless would be ideal for family sporting events with the DSLR best for landscapes for their IQ and DR.     

9
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D750 to be Canon 5D3 competitor?
« on: September 09, 2014, 11:14:16 AM »
Why are we getting sidetracked by a dodgy analogy?

Hey, it's something new. Better than reading the same progression of posts time and again.

Haha, fair enough. FWIW I don't think food or cars are a suitable comparison.

You would be correct. People (at least in western cultures) eat three meals a day. Each individual meal matters very little and the cost is low, so little consideration other than convenience goes into the decision.

Automobiles, in most first-world countries, are ubiquitous and both a necessity and a luxury, depending on disposable income and interest. While cameras are certainly common in most countries, they are not a necessity and in recent years a suitable alternative has surfaced for the bulk of consumers (cell phones). There is no universal transportation device owned by most people that can easily substitute for a car.

Analogies are almost always flawed, but these two are particularly flawed.

Can you name one market where the best selling, most well marketed product is also clearly the "best" product?

10
Post Processing / Re: Photoshop eye retouching
« on: August 15, 2014, 04:57:57 PM »
I probably use the same high-pass/hue sat approach as you, but I will also add a gradient masked levels adjustment layer and usually dial the whole set back to no more than 10-25%.  That's usually just enough to add a little clarity, brightness and attention to the eyes but no so much as to make them look fake or, worse, "Photoshopped" - ugh!  Even then, I don't do it for all portraits.

11
[urlhttp://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/900550-REG/Holdfast_Gear_mm02_ch_Camera_Harness_Chestnut.html][/url]

this is what i use.well, not that model, but this system. it isn't inexpensive at all, but i find it works well, and looks good. in fact as it ages it only looks better, as opposed to most other things that get dirty and make you look like you are a member of the SWAT team. although you might look like an old school detective or something. anyway, i like it and get positive comments about it at most weddings i work.
 

Wow, thanks for the link.  I use, and have been very happy with, an older single camera Carry Speed for my one camera, but I think I would buy one of these in a minute if they made single camera version. 

12
Canon General / Re: What do you Splurge on?
« on: August 01, 2014, 09:54:41 AM »
1. Tesla S to drive my camera gear around.
2. Prada purses and Louboutin shoes for my wife so she won't complain about my camera gear purchases.

13
Software & Accessories / Re: Camera bag for camping
« on: July 17, 2014, 10:28:56 AM »
you are much better off using a proper backpack and putting your camera gear in it. or strap a small camera back to your backpack. you will not have a good time trying to pack weight in a camera bag. i just put my lenses in their soft cases in the lid of my gregory pack, and hang my camera in a dry-sack (brooks bag) off a shoulder strap, or on a capture clip if its dry out.

you arent going to get a hiking backpack on as carryon

+1   If you're car camping or day hiking it really doesn't matter.  If your backpacking, neoprene lens bags for storage in your pack is the way to go.  I will often also strap a lowepro lens bag and a top loader to either waist strap of my Osprey, or put the top loader on my pack's chest harness.  Tripod goes on the outside. 

14
I've been using Adobe cc for photographers for a while now.  Its $10 a month and is great.


+1.  As long as it stays at ~$10/mo, I'll remain very glad I made the move to CC. 

15
Sorry to hear about your loss.  I don't know how things work in Germany, but in the US home owners and renter's insurance policies usually cover, at least partially, loss of personal property while traveling, unless the owner is a professional photographer on business. 

Pages: [1] 2 3