January 30, 2015, 12:17:27 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 - Hillsilly

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 54
Thanks - it was good to see a lot of positive comments about PicturesToExe (and ".exe" software in general). 

bbdigital - I love your site and slideshows.  If I get more into this, I'm sure I'll pick up some of your templates.

In case anyone is curious about how this went, I spent a few weeks playing with various software.  I really liked ProShow Gold, but the was a major problem - I couldn't get the EXE files to generate with good image quality.   I suspect that it had something to do with my video card (despite being a new computer with a fast processor and lots of RAM, I use a a lower end video card).

I ended up buying PicturetoEXE.  It works very well and does exactly what I needed it to do.  In comparison to ProShowGold, it has less fancy transitions, backgrounds, templates etc built in (but you can create your own - and there seems to be a community sharing these).  It is pretty simple to pick up the basics.  And I've had some fun creating my own keyframes and animations.  All up, it is a good program.

In relation to the transitions, while ProShow Gold does have fancier inbuilt options, my thinking is that judges are more interested in the quality of my images than seeing computer graphics generated from software.  Anyway, we'll see how we go.

Lenses / Re: Input on building a prime lens kit
« on: September 09, 2014, 04:37:58 AM »
With a FF camera, I roll mostly with a 40 / 135 combo.  The 135 stays on the camera most of the time and the 40mm is a pocket-able alternative providing a contrasting perspective.   

For wider angles, I use a 17-40mm.  If I was going to replace it with a prime, I'm not sure what I'd get.  Part of me says the 24mm tilt shift would be ideal (but at a high price).  The new 24mm f/2.8 IS is more budget friendly and is getting great reviews.  But really...24mm just isn't wide enough.  20mm?  Pass.  Perhaps the 14mm?  But that also has a high price.  In my case, I think my realistic choice might be the Samyang 14mm.

With my Fuji camera, I use a 14mm, 35mm and 60mm combo.  (In FF equivalents, that's 21mm, 50mm and 90mm in real lens speak).  These three focal lengths are fine for almost everything I want to photograph.

WE are the only people buying cameras, everyone else is using their phone.  I can't imagine everyone here switching to a mirrorless camera for no compelling reason.  Mirrorless cameras will only outsell DSLRs when they offer comparable (or better) features.  And if they do that, then where is the problem?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Features seen in the past and absent today
« on: September 07, 2014, 11:25:35 AM »
Those big, black fabric capes that you see on the back of older view cameras would be quite handy to view camera LCDs when in bright sunlight.

Also, an ISO of 6 would be great for taking long exposures.

Have averaged just over 20k pa for the past few years.  I'm a little surprised it is so high, as I'm mostly a weekend photographer.  But I do the occasional time lapse which would account for quite a few photos.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 02, 2014, 11:49:22 PM »
29 pages now...

My hobby is speaker building and on some audio websites, it's not unusual for threads to be 1000+ pages long.  And there we're often debating sound quality characteristics differences that are highly subjective, can't be measured, and most people don't even believe exist.  At least sensor performance can be measured. 

Portrait / Re: Feedback on these headshots
« on: September 01, 2014, 10:39:42 PM »
Hi John, your shots have a lot going for them.  The eyes are in focus and the lighting is pleasant.  Your choice of aperture also leads to a nice gentle blurring on the subjects shoulders.  My only suggestion is in relation to cutting off the tops of the head.  If you are going to do, I'd cut off a fraction more to make everyone realise it is intentional.  With photos such as 3604, cutting off a small bit makes you wonder if it was framing problem rather than an artistic choice.  With most portraits, you can crop the tops quite aggressively without problems and sometimes this adds a little more impact to the photos.

Software & Accessories / Re: Optimizing your monitor for print production...
« on: September 01, 2014, 03:14:30 AM »
Your plan sounds good.  In addition to your colour bars, I'd also get a few regular photos printed to work with, too.  But you're probably doing that anyway. 

Keep your eyes open for some good printer+Paper deals (such as the Pixma Pro 100).  Having your own printer is very convenient and helps with consistent output. 

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D replacement: What is a "fine-detail" sensor
« on: August 28, 2014, 07:30:26 AM »
What about the Sony Mavica?  Released in 1981, it has a more traditional DSLR look.  Some versions even used Canon lenses.

EOS Bodies / Re: Do Sensors Make the Camera?
« on: August 25, 2014, 08:15:46 PM »
1. No idea, sorry.
2. I hear so many positive things about Sigma sensors, that I'm starting to wonder if Sigma cameras produce the best image quality at the affordable end of the spectrum.  But there are so many compromises in using Sigmas that they are on few people's radar.  There's so much more to a camera (and more importantly, a system) then the sensor.
3. While it is fun to have fun with Sonikon users, Nikon cameras do use different processing technologies compared with Sony.  Then there is the camera design and build quality.  They also have a very different feature set, many of which are at least the equal of Canon's.   As with question 2, there is more to a camera than a sensor.

Technical Support / Time Lapse Tools
« on: August 22, 2014, 11:29:29 PM »
There's a new ferry terminal being built outside my office and I thought it would be fun to make a timelapse movie of it.  I'm thinking of taking one photo per day - probably towards sunset. 

But, this will be my first longer term time lapse movie.  So I've got a query.  With sunset times varying each day, are there any easy programs which will help you calculate the exact time of day to take your photo so that (in theory at least) I'd have the same ambient lighting conditions every day?  Or am I overthinking this and should just use a light meter and wait for the right time or should I just take the photo at the same time each day?

Technical Support / Re: Question regarding sensor size and image quality
« on: August 22, 2014, 11:18:55 PM »
With the Arizona Highway's magazine, can you perceive the improved image quality compared to other magazines with lower image standards?  I'm curious how well their requirements translate to a magazine format, but unfortunately they don't seem to ship outside the US.

Australia / Re: Legal question on photography
« on: August 19, 2014, 11:29:29 AM »
Only a lawyer can advise you of the law and your options, but just because something is printed on a piece of paper doesn't make it legal or enforceable.
Over here it generally does.  I know a bit about Australian law - certainly more than I do about cameras (I did a law degree a few years ago - I'm a bushranger by trade and a little bit of legal knowledge comes in handy.).  Over here, it's pretty settled that as long as the conditions are bought to your attention before you purchase the ticket then the terms are valid.  (Otherwise, what's the point of contracts?)

That being said, as you'd expected, a quick search suggests that Cricket Australia haven't gone around suing people for uploading cricket photos over the last couple of years.  The worst realistic problem is that they won't let you through the gate with a bigger lens.

Australia / Re: Legal question on photography
« on: August 19, 2014, 09:04:47 AM »
You don't watch "The IT Crowd"? (although the show is often a damp squid).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 19, 2014, 06:04:46 AM »
But the XT1 doesn't meet your criteria ... it's not full frame.

But, but.....N-E-G-L-I-G-B-L-E!  APS-C = FF ;) 

The mirrorless question doesn't have to be us vs them.  As consumers, we all benefit from having a diverse range of cameras available from a wide range of innovative manufacturers.  In 50 years, I'm certain people will look back at this time as a golden era of camera design. 

I've got a couple of Fuji mirrorless cameras - X100 and X-E1(and previously owned an Olympus m43 camera).  IMHO, they are fantastic.  I still take ye olde Canons out of the cupboard when I have specialised needs, but otherwise, mirrorless cameras are more than adequate and in many cases are a much better option.

Re Canon and mirrorless - I don't think they are doing themselves any favours.  If they are going to persist, they should be fully committed to the EOS-M system with more lenses being released and a family of camera bodies of differing levels of specs / price levels.  Instead, currently the Eos-M is a fun accessory for a DSLR shooter rather than the stand alone system that it could be.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 54