September 01, 2014, 08:34:42 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 - Skirball

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 23
Canon General / Re: New Speedlite Coming? [CR2]
« on: July 17, 2014, 04:29:40 PM »
Let me rephrase that- how much cheaper will Canon be willing to price the 4X0RT anyway? (considering Canon's general inclination towards R&D roi and profit)

You don't want to hear my answer, I'm Mr. "Canon is too greedy" around here. Though I have to admit the 600rt is a very good piece of equipment, they have to get back their r&d investment and Yongnuo just showed us how not to do it with the terrible st-e3 transmitter clone.

It is a rhetorical question anyway.
I think Canon will NOT price the 4X0RT low enough that too many will be inclined to settle for that instead of another 600 (especially if refurbished).

Which is why I think it won't be a 4X0RT.  Canon will keep the 600exRT as the entry fee if you want to play the integrated RT eTTL game.

I'm going to put my money on a thoroughly uninteresting new flash.  Color me a skeptic.

Lighting / Re: Questions about octo/brolly/boxes...
« on: July 15, 2014, 05:59:48 PM »

quick questions about octagonal modifiers, all the octobrollybox versions...

1, which way do you prefer the octobox to be lit up (and is there a difference)?
what I mean, I found basically the same shape/size octobox, but one has an umbrella like pole in the middle, closed back, the strobe sits behind the diffuser and aims back on a reflective inner back... the other has a hole in the back, with the strobe aiming at an (inner) diffuser screen (so it doesn't block the light and is naturally more accessible)

The answer to this applies to several of your other questions.  The cheap brolly's aren't much more than a reflective umbrella with a diffuser on the end, where as the Octo is a more traditional soft box that you shoot through.  As someone mentioned above, it comes down to portability, setup/tear down time.  The brollys setup almost as quick as an umbrella; I never take my softboxes apart, it takes too long.  If I travel, I use the brolly.  At home, I prefer the softboxes, because my flash is accessible at the back.

As far as light quality, they're essentially the same.  I'm sure it varies by manufacture. but I was surprised to find that mine attenuate the light about the same.  Technically my brollyboxes have better light, in that there is less of a hotspot in the center.  But the only time I see this is in spectral highlights, and it's rare that the highlight is big enough to be noticeable.  Even if it is, it takes 2 seconds in Photoshop to fix it.  I see no difference in the softness, though I find the boxes to feather a bit better.  I use cheap softboxes (Fotodiox, really well made for the cost) and cheaper brollys (cheapest I can find).

The effect of different shapes/sizes depends on your subject.  Softness is a relative term, dependent on the size of your light vs size of your subject.  I wouldn't worry too much about shape to begin with.  Photographers that like dramatic lighting often have various sizes and shapes so you can really control your lighting relative to your subject, or a specific shape to catchlights and spectral highlights.  Just get a couple of rectangles to start with - they work well with speedlights, easy to manage, and feather well.

Bonus points to Michael for working the word crepuscular into the conversation.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon Pixma Pro-100 $34 at Adorama
« on: July 02, 2014, 03:58:16 PM »
A great deal, and I'm in for one, but I still think a MIR is a PITA. Plus, in my area at any rate, finding places that will take an AMEX card is another PITA.

You can use the AMEX card to buy an Amazon gift card for yourself, that can then be added to your account.  Obviously that doesn't do much if you're not an Amazon user, but for those that do I've found it a very easy way to deal with those damn prepaid cards.

Sorry to speak against 3LT, but I had purchased the Adrian, and I wasn't impressed by it. Here's why:
1. It felt rather flimsy compared to my then tripod, Manfrotto 190X ProB. My current GT2541 is much sturdier, too. The leg joints flexed too much, especially when fully extended (w/o center column).
2. The ballhead allows movement even when fully tightened with bare hands (i.e., not utilizing the torque of a heavy lens).
3. All the materials, knobs, etc. just felt cheap and poorly made.
Now, for the price point it's probably fine, since Gitzos and RRS are much more expensive. But try before buying, and compare with some other brands, would be my advice.


so this one is good for my tall also light for travail ? i'm 186cm ...

Even the 4 section version of the 190X "PRO4" is still a little short.  The 3 section more so.  Although, I don't really care how high the tripod is relative to me, I care how high it is relative to the picture I'm trying to take.  Personally, I'd move up to this one:

It's a bit bigger, but just about anybody who owns a tripod will tell you about the one they bought before the one they have now.  And maybe even about the ones before that.  A tripod is there to hold your camera steady, get a sturdy one.  It's worth a little extra bulk and weight to get a good one, IMHO.

Also, get carbon if it's for travel. 

Lighting / Re: Midsized Flashlights to work unleashed
« on: June 24, 2014, 11:31:41 AM »
I forgot about the LumoPro.  It was highly recommended.  Although, that's quite old now (2008?), back when Yongnuo seemed to have a lot of QA issues.  I haven't had any problems with any of my Yongnuo equipment - (2) 560 III, a 560II, a 565ex, a 460 II, full set of RF-602, and set of RF-622s.  I think they're still fighting that stigma a bit.

Regardless, if you're going to stick with manual, I don't think anything competes with the 560 III, for the price.

Lighting / Re: Midsized Flashlights to work unleashed
« on: June 24, 2014, 11:10:15 AM »
First off, I have to say, I love the term "unleashed flash".  It sounds way cooler than off-camera.

As to which flash, you have to make a decision of whether or not you want to use eTTL (automatic flash) and High Speed sync (HSS).  Most people new to flash are going to want eTTL, if for nothing else, to ease the learning curve.  It's nice to have at least one flash that can do eTTL and HSS for on-camera use.

But you mention off-camera and portraits.  I never use eTTL for portraits, always manual.  And I use manual most the time my flashes are unleashed  :)  If my flash is off camera it's stationary, so I probably have a good idea where my subject will be, thus I like the predictability and reliability of manual flash.  I also don't have much use for HSS in what I shoot.  Actually, I don't like the power decrease, so I make a point to shoot within my sync speed.  But other people have different uses and need HSS, and others like to shoot portraiture with eTTL.  It's a personal choice, neither is wrong, but if you want eTTL it gets more expensive.

If you want eTTL just get the Canon 430exII.  It's a great eTTL flash for a reasonable price.  The nominal difference between generic and namebrand flash with eTTL isn't big enough for me to go generic.

If you're ok with manual flash the Yongnuo 560 III is by far the best value there is at $75.  It has built in radio triggers to work with RF-602 and RF-603 systems.  It's well built, has a good sized LCD screen, and most the functions/features of Canon.  But it's manual and can't do High Speed Sync.

Oh, and I highly, highly recommend going to Strobist and reading.  Just about all the info you need on flash photography.

As far as the 20gb storage and Bahance site, please view the actual page linked in this very thread - this is a quote from the 2nd paragraph:

The plan includes access to the Photoshop CC and Lightroom desktop applications with free upgrades when they are available, mobile and web apps, 20 GB of cloud storage and a Behance ProSite for £8.78/US$9.99/AU$9.99 per month when you sign up for a one-year plan.

Seems pretty clear to me.

Can you point me to a link on Adobe's website that shows that?  The link you're referring to is from some digital camera website.  Easy enough for them to print that mistakenly given that I can't find anything on Adobe's website explicitly stating that.  Whereas, it was quite clear about having those additions before 'the big announcement'.  If they were still offering those benefits I'd expect them to make a point about advertising it.  Regardless, I don't think it's pretty clear at all.

Permanent only if you define permanent as until Adobe thinks they have their customers hooked and then raise the price for more profit. ::)


Quote from: Adobe
The price is valid for a full 12 months. After that, we'll renew your contract automatically unless you cancel. The price is subject to change, but we will always notify you beforehand.

 I really don't see any difference in this offer over what they previously had, other than they reduced the storage and online options.

If you sign up for the yearly subscription you get 20Gb of cloud storage and a free Behance site. Not that 20Gb means much in terms of storage though! Could be enough for your portfolio though.

Are you sure about that?  I'm pretty sure they changed it, although the website is strangely terse on details.

I had a bookmark to the deal they had before, with the 20 gb and Behance, it was supposed to be good until June 30, but the page is gone and takes you to the new offer.  It claims 2 gb and no mention of Behance.

I was starting to warm up to the CC idea, but hesitant because the price was temporary, and I don't like locking myself into a photo organization system that I can only lease.  Locking the price is nice, but they also stripped out the free website (Behance) and reduced your storage to 2 gb.  Not a huge deal, but I was considering moving away from things like Flickr and trying out Behance, and admit it really was motivation for me to consider going to the cloud.

Photoshop updates don't really mean much to me, but they rarely do.  Mostly they seem to make more and more advanced tools that just do what I can do manually.  I think the tools work well for beginner to intermediate users, but have limited impact for more advanced use. 

Other than that, no Lightroom update, and a bunch of stuff for an iPad that I don't have.  Meh.

Lighting / Re: Small container for holding spigots/studs?
« on: June 16, 2014, 06:10:31 PM »
The specs say that that thing is 4.5" tall with a 2.5" diameter; and has a fraction of that storage space.  Not exactly small.  I'd think you'd have just about endless options with tupperware.  I have tupperware half that size.  Like this:

^^ Can't you export sidecar xml files to preserve your work?

Are all the localized edits stored in the .xml files?  I thought that was just the metadata, I thought the actual edits were in the LR catalog. 

So can another editor like Capture One read the .xml files and apply the same edits?  It seems like many of the localized edits would be proprietary to Lightroom.
The reason for the sidecar files is to store the edit information.  However, it only works with Adobe, so you can't necessarily take them to a different software.
You do not need the catalog if you have the sidecar file.  This is handy for preventing loss of edits in the event that the catalog gets clobbered and you do not have a backup.
There will be a announcement on June 18.
As to prices, The price for old Photoshop versions went sky high when they stopped selling them.  Lightroom is a lot more prevalent, so I doubt if prices will go thru the roof, but they will increase.
I have photoshop and lightroom CC subscriptions, but also have LR 5 and Photoshop  CS5
The lack of a Lightroom 6 beta has a lot of people worried.

Yeah, that's what I assumed about the side-cars, being Adobe specific.  But that's what information I was looking for - historical prices.  I guessed they'd probably shoot up. Which is why I bought CS6 when it was announced that it'll be the last box copy.  Maybe I'll just pay the $80 for the upgrade and be done with it.


If you look around the Internet then you will find various comments and statements from Adobe that there are currently no plans to make LR a CC only product.

If you want to look at what Adobe's prices have done in the past with respect to price then that would be a good indicator of what they will do in the future.

Of course there is always free products to use on Linux such as Dark Table.

Yes, I know what they said about their plans.  And no offense to Adobe, but that doesn't amount mean anything whatsoever to me.  All companies big and small have plans, and many intend to act with their customers best interest in mind, but that doesn't mean they always do.  They're a business, and ultimately all businesses come down to the bottom line.  If they cared about me saving money they would continue to sell standalone product. 

I have no problem paying for software, such as Capture One.  It's this leasing of software that I'm hesitant about.

^^ Can't you export sidecar xml files to preserve your work?

Are all the localized edits stored in the .xml files?  I thought that was just the metadata, I thought the actual edits were in the LR catalog. 

So can another editor like Capture One read the .xml files and apply the same edits?  It seems like many of the localized edits would be proprietary to Lightroom.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 23