July 26, 2014, 07:16:55 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 - sanj

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 96
271
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 26, 2014, 12:45:57 AM »
If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree...

Nope. Don't have to agree.

A photograph is a thing. The person who makes the thing is a photograph-er. The thing is not made until the image captured by the camera is made visible on the paper or other viewing surface. This "making" consists of the entire process from choosing/arranging/lighting the subject, adjusting/aiming/operating the camera and doing what one will to get it onto the paper. Ansel has already been mentioned as an example of a "back in the day" photograph-er who certainly made use of his dark room, his enlarger, and whatever other tools he chose, to create his "art". The photographs thusly made have  been greatly admired by many, and few of the admirers fail to call him a "photographer", rather than an "editor". (Ansel the dodger/burner?)

Adams and the numerous other "photographers" one could mention as widely recognized and acclaimed, used the tools available to them in their time, just as we do today. I don't doubt that they would envy us our new tools.

It hardly seems appropriate to try to differentiate a carpenter from a measurer, a sawer or a hammerer. Perhaps we should further distinguish him as a laser level technician, an adhesives  applier, or a plumb(vs. apple)-bobber.

Are we having fun yet?  :-)

Larry - I need to totally disagree with you. Photography is the skill of producing photographs. There is a big difference between a photograph and digital picture.  "digital art" produces stunning pictures - which more often then not do NOT reflect anything real.

Photography as I understand it - is about recording a real moment or object in the most accurate way.

Yes I understand that some tweaks can be allowed - but these should be minor and unnoticeable. The "photo" should remain something real that the photographer saw. Photography is about VISION - NOT about enhanced photoshop / lightroom skills.

My 2 cents

Your understanding, as per my understanding, is totally wrong. Will find a photo I saw yesterday on this forum on a TS lens which was beautiful and far from accurate. Will find it and post next so you can see better.

Hi Sanj...thanks for posting that, not sure who shot it, did you?  It is beautiful no doubt, but I will venture a criticism...the phrase I would use is "they got happy with the black slider a bit"...I admit it creates a lot of negative space which makes the rest "pop"...but true enough, it looks hyped and unnatural.  If I were doing it, I would have some shadow detail, but try to let perhaps only 30 to 40% of what is total "black" here, be black.  As for the hyped color, well that's typical of what people do with digital photos these days.  This one is really not all that bad though.

Not my photo, I just put it there to make a point that photography is not only documentation but an art expression as well. :)

272
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 25, 2014, 09:34:59 AM »
If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree...

Nope. Don't have to agree.

A photograph is a thing. The person who makes the thing is a photograph-er. The thing is not made until the image captured by the camera is made visible on the paper or other viewing surface. This "making" consists of the entire process from choosing/arranging/lighting the subject, adjusting/aiming/operating the camera and doing what one will to get it onto the paper. Ansel has already been mentioned as an example of a "back in the day" photograph-er who certainly made use of his dark room, his enlarger, and whatever other tools he chose, to create his "art". The photographs thusly made have  been greatly admired by many, and few of the admirers fail to call him a "photographer", rather than an "editor". (Ansel the dodger/burner?)

Adams and the numerous other "photographers" one could mention as widely recognized and acclaimed, used the tools available to them in their time, just as we do today. I don't doubt that they would envy us our new tools.

It hardly seems appropriate to try to differentiate a carpenter from a measurer, a sawer or a hammerer. Perhaps we should further distinguish him as a laser level technician, an adhesives  applier, or a plumb(vs. apple)-bobber.

Are we having fun yet?  :-)

Larry - I need to totally disagree with you. Photography is the skill of producing photographs. There is a big difference between a photograph and digital picture.  "digital art" produces stunning pictures - which more often then not do NOT reflect anything real.

Photography as I understand it - is about recording a real moment or object in the most accurate way.

Yes I understand that some tweaks can be allowed - but these should be minor and unnoticeable. The "photo" should remain something real that the photographer saw. Photography is about VISION - NOT about enhanced photoshop / lightroom skills.

My 2 cents

Your understanding, as per my understanding, is totally wrong. Will find a photo I saw yesterday on this forum on a TS lens which was beautiful and far from accurate. Will find it and post next so you can see better.

273
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 25, 2014, 09:32:16 AM »
Oh no, I'm too late to the thread, it's already page 3 and the mudslinging has already started :-p

I actually surprised it took that long.  Photographers tend to be rabidly opinionated. :)

People just need to learn to do what they want.  If they want to shoot JPEG, shoot JPEG.  If they want to shoot RAW, shoot Raw.  Same applies to FF vs CS.  There are people shooting with either system and shooting fantastic pictures.  There others shooting either system and shooting crap.

Pick what you can afford and get out there and start honing your skill.

This is why I snicker when some people claim that it is the photographer and not the gear, but then spend time arguing about gear.  LoL

Well said.

274
Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 23, 2014, 12:40:02 AM »
Over time you may discern that teh desire changes from Cameras and Lenses to other gear like lighting. That Broncolor Parabolic umbrella sure looks nice.....

Happening to me....

275
Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 23, 2014, 12:39:21 AM »
If you start doing meth... your will probably care less about getting gear... then you will probably start selling off your gear to buy more meth... so that's one way to battle GAS.

This advice should work.

276
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 22, 2014, 10:06:59 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree... Seldomly, do we all take good pictures anymore, we all take half-assed pictures then throw it in lightroom to correct it, then crop it so they frame it better and lastly do a bunch of touch ups to make it clean and/or artsy.

Does not apply to me for sure...

277
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 22, 2014, 10:05:23 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree... Seldomly, do we all take good pictures anymore, they take half-assed pictures then throw it in lightroom to correct it, then crop it so they frame it better and lastly do a bunch of touch ups to make it clean and/or artsy.

No man. No no no.
Photography to me, in todays world means:
Knowing limits of the sensor/files and also how to enhance that. Without knowledge of proper benefits of RAW, the photographer will not be able handle exposures etc in low/extreme light situations.
Being very well versed with lenses and knowing which will work best for the story telling is a must.

And how about people who want to shoot wildlife? They MUST have proper telephoto... Landscape guys would need a proper wide... Ya?

Of course composition, lighting, and learning to see are fundamentals. Which I believe was the point being made but to disregard lenses and post is a very simplistic and limited approach.

278
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 22, 2014, 08:47:32 PM »
The ISO capability has no connection to full frame or APS-C, it's a function of sensor age.  The 70D would have given you as big a bump in ISO capability at nearly half the price and allow you to continue using your APS-C lenses.  I could compare a 5D classic with a 7D and conclude that APs-C is superior in many ways.

Sorry, no.  The maximum ISO setting available tracks with sensor age (loosely), but having a setting available doesn't mean it produces usable images.  'High ISO capability' depends on sensor size.  The 7D is a better camera than the 5D in many ways...but at the same ISO setting, the 5D has less image noise despite being a much older sensor.

The 70D offers less than 1/2 stop improvement over the 500D, and the 5D is about 1/2-stop better than the 70D.  A current FF (6D, 5DIII) is over a stop better than the 70D.

Basic fact!

279
EOS Bodies / Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« on: February 22, 2014, 08:44:21 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

280
Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 09:10:14 AM »
I need help! Spring is in the air and I am coming down with GAS, I am spending to much time looking at lens reviews....how can I rid myself of this affliction?..? ;) ;)
Dude, are you nuts? ... it's like, you just came to a bar, full of the world's best drunkards, and asking for help on how to be sober ;D ... there is no cure for GAS ... just go spend the money and when the money is over, you will get temporary relief from GAS. ;D

Hahahaha

281
Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 09:09:01 AM »
Just sell the gear you no longer need/want and you will feel better...

Yep

282
Lenses / Re: Affected with GAS, Gear Acquisition Syndrome
« on: February 22, 2014, 03:32:34 AM »
it will never end. It will grind you to the polish. When my L lenses collection got over I started with Zeiss. Now I keep upgrading my 'family' camera searching for the perfect one.

This will never end

283
Reviews / Re: Why the DxO bashing?
« on: February 21, 2014, 12:37:58 PM »
This has to have the highest ratio of arguing to useful, informative comment of any thread I've read on this forum.

I see you're new around here.   :D

Welcome to the forums!

hahahha

284
Lenses / Re: lenses cut in half @ dpreview
« on: February 16, 2014, 07:47:17 AM »
Graphics. Right?

285
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Minolta 58 f1.2?
« on: February 16, 2014, 02:40:02 AM »
To me 50mm is a mandatory focal length.

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 96