July 23, 2014, 02:28:24 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 - Drizzt321

Pages: 1 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49 ... 112
691
You say your monitor is uncalibrated? And then you export as JPG to sRGB I'm guessing? Is your image viewing application color aware? Sometimes when shifting between color spaces and your viewing application doesn't have any concept of color space, the viewed image can be off from what it really is.

692
Lenses / Re: 24-70mm upgrade?
« on: April 17, 2013, 12:30:05 AM »
I've rented the Tamron 24-70 a few times now (still saving up for it) as needed, and it's quite a good lens. AF can sometimes be a touch slower to get going than most of the rest of the L lenses I have, but in general it's quite good. Heavy though, but so is the Canon 24-70 v2.

693
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 16, 2013, 02:51:48 PM »
It's slow going due to general buggy-ness

My experience when trying it is quite the opposite: LR5 feels like turbo-charged, as if the build a wait loop into LR4 to make people wish for an upgrade :-> ... this and some new features like the heal/clone brush are enough to upgrade, let's hope the RC phase doesn't take the better of a year's time.

Out of curiosity: OSX or Windows? I've thus far only used it on Windows 7. May load it up on my Mountain Lion machine this evening.

It does feel peppier than 4, and I'll note that I always work each photoshoot in its own fresh catalog, so there's no "few hundred versus tens-of-thousands" effect at play.

What I meant was: getting through the entire set is slow going, because I have to restart LR every couple of frames. Most common failure has been the adjustment brush. It repeatedly stopped working, i.e. I'd select the tool but when I clicked to place it it merely zoomed in an out. Restarting the software remedied it. Other times it crashed outright.

Ouch, that sounds quite buggy. If I keep hearing this, I might wait for the next beta or RC before trying it out.

694
Lenses / Re: EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Availability
« on: April 16, 2013, 01:33:29 PM »
So over 8 lbs? Yikes. :o

Holy cow, not that I'd be in the market for a 10k lens, but I'm wondering what users Canon has in mind - at this weight, most photo-journalistic or quick action shots seem to be impossible?

But probably it's really a small pro sports (and maybe wildlife?) market, and those few people are fine to shell out that money for top notch iq & reach flexibility.

Until you put it on a monopod/tripod and shoot from the side of a major sports event or out stalking wildlife. Or you're a paparazzi and needs to be able to go from shouting "Hi there" to being so far away as to be unnoticeable.

695
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Confusion about Macro Photography
« on: April 16, 2013, 12:39:29 PM »
The definition I've heard is when your subject is reproduced on your recording medium (film or digital sensor) near or at 1:1 or better. So if your subject is 5mm long, it's near or at 5mm long on your recording medium. Or possibly more, so if it's 2:1 magnification, it's 10mm long instead of 5mm.

696
Technical Support / Re: MacBook Pro : Best RAW Processing Software?
« on: April 16, 2013, 12:36:26 PM »
Well, there's RAW processing, and then there's assent management (e.g. keeping track of all those photos you're taking). DPP is pretty decent software for general RAW processing. Not fantastic, but for a free tool it's quite good. Then there are other standalone processors like Photoshop (really Adobe Camera RAW which imports into Photoshop). Finally, there's full image processing & catalog management such as Lightroom, Aperture, and Capture One. Most people choose Lightroom or Aperture, although having just checked Capture One actually isn't too expensive at $300, but from my understand it's definitely geared towards the working professional and tethered capture for photoshoots.

For myself, I use Lightroom with very occasional edits in Photoshop.

697
You're welcome! Comes from hanging around film guys too much. Sometimes it seems that's all there is here in LA, but really just the friends I have.

I'm in L.A. too. I hear you... seems like half my friends are either shooters, editors, or screenwriters. After years of resisting the dark side, I'm looking at getting into the business myself. But I still have a lot to learn.

Good luck, there is some _expensive_ equipment out there for video. Even more so than for stills, especially if you start going cinema lenses and such. I've flirted with it a bit here and there, but so far mostly stayed away unless my friends said "hey, we need your help", which really means I have a 5d2/5d3 and they want to borrow them :)

698
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 15, 2013, 08:03:01 PM »
From what I read it looks like performance in general, and especially in the Develop module has been a major focus of this version. Definitely going to check this out!

699
I'm a video noob. And I'm curious... What's wrong with shooting at 60fps?

I understand how ND filters work with aperture, but if slo-mo is what you want, why would you shoot at 30fps with an ND filter, rather than 60fps without one?


Nothing wrong with shooting at 60fps, in fact it's often used so that in post-production you cut the output framerate in half to get 30fps output so you double the time it takes, which give slow-motion.

Beyond that, the general rule in video is to get a 180-degree shutter which gives a nice, smooth look you shoot at 1/(shutter speed * 2). So for 30fps you shoot with a shutter of 1/60, and with 60fps you shoot at 1/120, or as close to that as you can get (so 1/125 on most DSLRs). So the only way to control exposure is with ISO or aperture, or to use ND filters to cut the amount of light. Since the OP wanted a very shallow DoF he needed to use some ND filters to cut the light to allow his aperture to be wider since he undoubtedly had his ISO set very low (100-200). Since he had no ND filters, he had to raise the shutter speed significantly. This can give video a more stilted look, since every frame is much 'sharper' and there won't be any motion blur like you can sometimes get with the slower shutter speeds.


Very well explained! Thank you. I'm saving up for a variable ND filter.


You're welcome! Comes from hanging around film guys too much. Sometimes it seems that's all there is here in LA, but really just the friends I have.

I'd take a look at http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=14219.0 thread in which there's a good video about variable-ND filters. They may be useful, but they also have their downsides.

700
i don't know much about video, but i've heard of a 180degree rule, but it had nothing to do with shutter speed.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutter_speed#Cinematographic_shutter_formula, it comes from the mechanical rotary shutter traditional video cameras have used. I suppose it's not really called the 180-degree rule, it's just that's what stuck with me in my head from the traditional 24fps @1/48s shutter speed.

701
I'm a video noob. And I'm curious... What's wrong with shooting at 60fps?

I understand how ND filters work with aperture, but if slo-mo is what you want, why would you shoot at 30fps with an ND filter, rather than 60fps without one?

Nothing wrong with shooting at 60fps, in fact it's often used so that in post-production you cut the output framerate in half to get 30fps output so you double the time it takes, which give slow-motion.

Beyond that, the general rule in video is to get a 180-degree shutter which gives a nice, smooth look you shoot at 1/(shutter speed * 2). So for 30fps you shoot with a shutter of 1/60, and with 60fps you shoot at 1/120, or as close to that as you can get (so 1/125 on most DSLRs). So the only way to control exposure is with ISO or aperture, or to use ND filters to cut the amount of light. Since the OP wanted a very shallow DoF he needed to use some ND filters to cut the light to allow his aperture to be wider since he undoubtedly had his ISO set very low (100-200). Since he had no ND filters, he had to raise the shutter speed significantly. This can give video a more stilted look, since every frame is much 'sharper' and there won't be any motion blur like you can sometimes get with the slower shutter speeds.

702
Quite nice, and a very good job keeping the focus where you wanted it at f/2. What supports/focus puller/etc did you use?

703
what makes you think the canon broke the card?

counterfeit sandisk cards (approximately one third are fake says sandisk) show this behavior quite often.

The card was bought from an "authorised store"  and was pretty fast. I do not think it was a counterfeit one.

And I think that camera broke the card because did the same think when tried with another card.

Perhaps time to contact Canon Support? If you have another camera you can take a video with, maybe take a video and show exactly what you are doing and the way in which are doing it.

704
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Please share your camera settings
« on: April 13, 2013, 03:26:25 PM »
Sometimes I run out of disk space. Even having a ton of hard drives, shooting RAW doesn't always make sense. If I'm going to print something, then always RAW. Otherwise, M JPG has worked well in many situations (candids, landscape).

I think M RAW is actually a pretty good compromise, and you're getting noise reduced via interpolation.

Sometimes, I make so many photographs and can get so sidetracked by manual RAW conversion that shooting JPG speeds up my ability to catalog and review everything.

Actually, you can get that noise reduction via interpolation from the full raw, just export as a smaller JPG.

Definitely takes a lot more space, and takes longer to sort through at times because of waiting for LR4 to prepare the preview images on import, even the standard previews. But, for me, that's why I built a 8TB RAIDZ NAS where I keep everything and backup to CrashPlan from that.

705
The entry level Manfrottos are very good for the money. They're quite sturdy and well built, though a bit heavy (around $120). Top it off with a Benro B1 off of ebay for around $95 and you will have solid support that will last for a little over $200...


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/479927-REG/Manfrotto_190XPROB_190XPROB_Pro_Aluminum_Tripod.html

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Benro-B-1-Ball-Head-PU-60-Quick-Plate-Kit-Set-T014-/120654153390?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1c178c46ae


That looks like a pretty good combo for the price.

Pages: 1 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49 ... 112