April 18, 2014, 11:28:23 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 - ereka

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
31
Software & Accessories / 5DMkIII tethered shooting with LR4.2
« on: October 13, 2012, 01:50:03 AM »
I've just started using tethered shooting for product shots, using a 5DMkIII with LR4.2

I have a couple of queries that I haven't been able to resolve so far and I'd be grateful for any advice.

1) Tethered shooting carries on OK for several frames, but then everything 'locks up' i.e. the camera controls stop responding (e.g. live view, shutter release - basically, everything freezes); the only way I've found to resolve this is to close LR and start over - has anyone else experienced this and if so, do you know why it happens and how to avoid it?

2) There doesn't seem to be any way to focus or to control the camera settings (e.g. aperture, ISO etc) directly via LR, other than the shutter release - is this correct?

3) Is LR the best option for tethered shooting (in particular for product shoots) or do you prefer a different solution - if so, why?

32
The Digital Picture resolution tests were posted yesterday. Obviously results are good, but not quite as good as the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II.

Also according to the tests, the results of the lens deteriorate significantly at 70mm. They appear to be worse than the old EF 24-70 f/2.8L at that focal length.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0


This does highlight what an amazing lens the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II is!

I think I'll stick with my 24-70 f/2.8L I and my 70-200 f/2.8L IS II - I can't really see any compelling reason to shell out another £2000 for the 24-70 f/2.8 L II

33
Portrait / Re: Reverse Engineer this please
« on: August 07, 2012, 07:12:07 AM »
Hi guys, Im having trouble taking my portraits to a level im happy about. Could someone explain to me how these were done, the first link being my faveourite. Has he used flash? If so would he have used an ND filter for shallow DOF?
Also if you look through his 'Strangers' Collection here im impressed with most of the light. Quite soft. I cant avoid worse shadows and hot spots when i try. Maybe im not post processing enough?
Some thoughts on this would be excellent.

Maybe I'm stating the obvious, but is there any reason you can't just ask Mat?

34
EOS Bodies / Re: 5dIII hot pixel question
« on: August 04, 2012, 01:25:45 AM »
This is very interesting. I've had my 5DMkIII since March. The first time I used it, I shot RAW + jpeg as I was only able to use the jpegs because I was travelling abroad and also didn't have any RAW conversion software with me that was capable of converting the RAW files. The in camera jpegs showed a few seemingly randomly placed black dots surrounded by lighter pixels - they looked a little like 'X' marks the spot! I'd never seen anything like it on my 1DMkII. They were quite noticeable at 1:1. When I returned to the UK, I upgraded from LR3 to LR4 and developed the RAW files in LR4. I haven't noticed the dots in any of the converted files, not that I've looked very hard but there's nothing that immediately stands out. As the in-camera jpegs are too mushy due to overly aggressive noise reduction (even with noise reduction turned off in camera), since I came back to the UK I've only shot RAW and converted with LR4. I've been reasonably happy*** with IQ and haven't noticed any hot pixels/dead pixels at all - not that I've been actively looking for them. When doing beauty retouching I often work at 1:1 or even up to 4:1 on occasion, so I'd have thought I would have noticed any hot pixels if they were there. To be honest, I'm not going to go looking because even if there are a few hot pixels/dead pixels they obviously aren't affecting overall IQ without a lot of pixel peeping (even with). I am intrigued to know though what my particular type of hot/dead pixel is/was - can anyone enlighten me? Until reading this thread, I'd assumed they were some sort of artefact produced by the in-camera jpeg conversion, particularly as I haven't noticed any (yet) in the RAW files.

*** I don't want to go off topic, but I say only 'reasonably happy' because IQ from RAW files converted with LR4 are quite good but the RAW files are noisier than I'd like even at low ISO (400 or less) and need quite heavy NR settings in LR4 (e.g. up to luminosity 70, detail 60) which results in loss of some fine detail. Also, although I don't use in-camera jpegs it would be nice to be able to do so e.g. for client proofing. I'm of the mind that this is not quite good enough for a camera at this level and I'm hoping for a firmware update that will improve the in-camera NR. I'm also hoping for a LR4 update as although I like the results, it is very sluggish when doing local adjustments.

35
EOS Bodies / Why so many different camera bodies?
« on: June 29, 2012, 02:35:49 AM »
A wide range of lenses has to be a good thing and is often stated as the reason for sticking with Canon when other manufacturers come up with a cutting edge camera body. However, it's not so obvious to me why Canon needs such a wide range of camera bodies. I'm guessing its purely a marketing thing i.e. keeping sales going by always having something new and 'better' to offer. I also understand having similar bodies, some with crippled features at lower price points to maximise market share. Are these the sole reasons for the bewildering array of Canon camera bodies on the market at any one time or have I missed something?

36
Lenses / Re: ND Filter system for landscape photography question
« on: June 19, 2012, 03:39:57 AM »
Free (almost) answer: learn how to black card.

You can pull more stops than is feasible with even the most diverse filter collection.
You can grad at any rate your heart desires.
You can even match terrain if you you're handy with a scissors.

You'll probably still want a modest collection of ND filters for when you need to adjust the overall exposure dramatically, but you wont need the grads.


Sorry, but you've lost me there - how do you 'black card'?


In a typical high DR situation of a dim foreground and bright sky, you expose for the ground and use a piece of non-reflective black cardstock to cover the sky for part of the exposure to effectively reduce the exposure of the sky.

A quick Google search for "black card photography technique" yielded this reasonably good explanation:

http://hanjies.blogspot.com/2009/10/black-card-photography-part-i.html

If you've ever done darkroom work (ok, I haven't either), you're effectively doing a dodge while taking the exposure instead of when making the print.


Thanks for the explanation - I might give that a go!

I could only afford to buy the Lee starter kit with 2 stop hard GND filter, so this technique could come in very handy for higher contrast scenes and scenes without a straight horizon and save me having to fork out for more very expensive GND filters. Anyway, I do like the idea that the black card can be cut to fit the horizon - much more flexible than the straight lines on a GND filter, if more fiddly, but there again landscape photographers spend a lot of time waiting around for the right light so I guess time spent customising a black card is not so much of an issue?

37
Lenses / Re: ND Filter system for landscape photography question
« on: June 18, 2012, 02:46:28 PM »
Free (almost) answer: learn how to black card.

You can pull more stops than is feasible with even the most diverse filter collection.
You can grad at any rate your heart desires.
You can even match terrain if you you're handy with a scissors.

You'll probably still want a modest collection of ND filters for when you need to adjust the overall exposure dramatically, but you wont need the grads.

Sorry, but you've lost me there - how do you 'black card'?

38
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5DMkIII 'just for fun'
« on: June 08, 2012, 02:14:13 AM »
Lol, those got yanked.

Hey, you remembered that too! :)
I don't try not to make the same mistake twice!

39
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5DMkIII 'just for fun'
« on: June 08, 2012, 02:12:37 AM »
deliberate mistake is you left her top on this time  :P

Not what I was thinking of, but well remembered! ;)

40
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5DMkIII 'just for fun'
« on: June 07, 2012, 05:38:37 PM »
Can anyone spot the 'deliberate' mistake?

Uhh.... the shadow continuity?  On her left arm, where the bag has a gap, for example.
Am i thinking too narrowly?

No and yes :)

41
5D MK III Sample Images / 5DMkIII 'just for fun'
« on: June 07, 2012, 03:32:52 PM »
Just for fun :)

Model: 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II
Sweet Candy bag: 24-70mm f/2.8

Can anyone spot the 'deliberate' mistake?


42
Software & Accessories / DxO Optics Pro 7 and 5D Mk III
« on: June 06, 2012, 03:01:35 PM »
Has anyone used DxO Optics Pro 7 with 5D Mk III RAW files and if so, how does the resulting image quality compare with other RAW processors e.g. DPP, LR, ACR, Capture 1 etc?

Pros and cons?

43
Software & Accessories / Re: ProPhoto RGB
« on: June 02, 2012, 12:44:34 PM »
That could explain a lot, although regarding sRGB being set in camera I thought this only affected jpegs and not the RAW files.

44
Software & Accessories / White balance tool in LR4.1 final release?
« on: June 02, 2012, 08:56:11 AM »
Has anyone noticed any problems with the white balance tool in LR4.1 final release?

On a recent studio shoot with my 5DMkIII and 24-70mm f/2.8 IS II, as usual I set a custom white balance in camera before shooting (as a starting point for developing the RAW files as I was shooting only RAW, no jpegs) and also shot a colour rendition chart to fine tune the white balance in post. I also used this chart to create a custom camera profile.

Strangely, after selecting the custom camera profile and using the white balance tool to reset the white balance, this was wildly different from the custom white balance that I'd set in camera i.e. much, much warmer (c. 6500K as opposed to a custom white balace of around 5000K). In fact, it looked way too warm, so I had to manually adjust to cool it down so that it looked good on my monitor, which is a regularly calibrated Eizo CG245W.

Could this be a problem with the white balance tool, or is it more likely I screwed up somewhere else in the workflow?

I could do extensive comparison tests using different software, but thought I'd just ask first if anyone else has noticed anything amiss in LR4.1

Edit: I've been using the same colour management workflow for the last couple of years and haven't noticed this big shift in white balance previously.

45
Software & Accessories / ProPhoto RGB
« on: June 02, 2012, 08:43:21 AM »
Does anyone edit in ProPhoto RGB and if so, do you see any real practical advantages in doing so?

When you save images for web display, do you leave them in ProPhoto RGB or convert them to sRGB? I'd have thought convert to sRGB as most monitors wouldn't be capable of displaying anywhere near the full gamut of ProPhoto RGB, but I inadvertently uploaded an image in ProPhoto RGB recently and the colours didn't look discernably different from the sRGB file I replaced it with when I realised my error. The only differences were that the image didn't show up in the thumbnail preview on one particular website (just a little question mark in a small box, which was what prompted me to check the file type) but the full size image displayed fine when the thumbnail was clicked and whilst the thumbnail did actually show up on a different website, it had a noticeable green cast, but strangely there was no green cast in the full size image when the thumbnail was clicked.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10