November 26, 2014, 12:43:05 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 - agierke

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 25
136
Technical Support / Re: Help me save this photo!
« on: July 02, 2013, 11:05:29 AM »
Quote
Scanning with a scanner or enlarging with an enlarger is the same thing: make a positive from a negative.

Um...if you are trying to deal with removing scratches then scanning versus enlarger prints is two entirely different problems.

I'm guessing something is being lost in translation here so I'm gonna let it go.

As for the OP, scratched negatives suck but be glad you do have the digital option to correct them. The healing brush is probably the best tool to deal with it but if you want to try a potentially easier solution, check out the content aware fill features in PS. I think they started getting pretty good in CS5. If your version is earlier then you are stuck with healing brush.

137
Technical Support / Re: Help me save this photo!
« on: July 02, 2013, 08:40:32 AM »
Quote
Lines are black!! Scratches in the negative are always white

Scratches in the negative are white true...but they turn black when a positive is made. Like a scan.

As others have clearly noted...this is such a minor issue especially since you were gonna need to use the healing brush like crazy to clean up all that dust.

Now if you wanted to have an enlarger print done...that's a different story.

138
as a wedding photographer i would have to recommend the 5D3 as your highest priority. it was built for doing weddings.

the focusing system is so good in that camera compared to the 5D2. it will add functionality to all of your current lenses and change the way you are able to shoot in a very good way.

139
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Wedding Bloopers; Grab Your Popcorn!
« on: June 30, 2013, 01:14:09 AM »
i got two off the top of my head....

the first i came across was actually when i was working at a commercial lab. i ran all the E6 and C41 film so i saw ALOT of photography from many sources. one memorable roll came through with a 3 shot series that just dropped my jaw. 1st shot was bride and groom coming out of the church with arms raised about to walk down the steps (see where this is going?). 2nd shot everyone starts throwing rice, grooms arms still in the air and smiling....bride has started to stumble and is going down. 3rd shot everyone faces show realization of what disaster is about to happen, grooms face has an "oh @#%&" look and his arm is being pulled down as he starts to stumble while the bride has both arms completely outstretched and her face about an inch off the ground about to eat some serios pavement. there was no 4th shot.

the second instance i was a 2nd shooter on. we were at the brides place with her getting ready. the flowers arrive and are placed on the coffee table. the main shooter starts shooting the bouquet and arranges some small candles that were lit on the table around the flowers (mind you they were already there and lit...we didnt initiate that). she finishes up and goes back to shooting the bride. a couple minutes later someone comments on smelling something burning...we all start looking around and then suddenly POOF! brides bouquet bursts into flames. we scrambled to put it out and with some creative trimming and rearrangement the bride still had a bouquet.

140
Lighting / Re: photographing paintings that have thick paint
« on: June 29, 2013, 08:57:51 PM »
For large artwork an H-frame easle is indespensable. Got mine for just over 100.00 but you can certainly spend up to 1000.00 or more for a heavy duty one. Sandbags to secure the bottom and a level to square artwork up and you can fly through large pieces.

Shooting raw will allow you to take advantage of ACRs lens correction features to eliminate vignetting and barrel distortion so that you can really square it up. Use the crop feature with perspective on so that if the artwork was off axis you can correct that as well.

As boring as copy work may seem it does present a bunch of interesting photographic challenges to overcome

141
Quote
This is a forum where I can express my opinion

can anyone else express their opinion here as well without being put down by you? or should we change this forum to CarlTNRumors....

142
Software & Accessories / Re: Camera RAW
« on: June 27, 2013, 11:01:55 PM »
not really sure why raw is such a big mystery. its fairly straight forward and you see what is happening instantly.

when i taught beginning students digital photography, their biggest hurdle was understanding what adjustments to make and how much. most were very clumsy and heavy handed with their adjustments...naturally their edited images ended up looking much worse than OOC.

this had nothing to do with a perceived complexity of raw but more to do with a lack of understanding about the aesthetic qualities of density, contrast, color balance, and tonal gradations. i came to understand that these concepts were better grasped while learning on film as you really needed to pay close attention to what you were doing or your results would be disastrous. it is almost too easy in digital to make adjustments.

i would end up giving demos to my students showing how subtle adjustments combined together could really make an image stand out while large heavy adjustments would end up looking awkward. it takes time to learn these subtleties and to employ them effectively but it is by far worth it. raw also doesn't negate the necessity to know what good lighting is and how to expose properly.

you may find that raw is not for you and that you get more enjoyment out of just shooting jpg, but don't be fooled...a large segment of photography is putting raw to use very effectively and find it necessary to get the results they cant get from jpg.   

143
Software & Accessories / Re: FoCal Target Image
« on: June 25, 2013, 04:56:41 PM »
just downloaded the manual today. it helps to read it. you may want to print a larger target.

http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/why/documents-to-download/

144
as others have noted, your primary problem is you are using bad light. great photographers get great results first and foremost because they find/create good lighting conditions. even the best camera and lens will give crappy results in crappy light.

that being said, the 50mm 1.8 (while being a great budget lens) is pretty lackluster when compared to the best lenses canon has to offer. i have used it in good available light and studio lighting and i personally dont find its rendering of color or contrast to be sufficient. its sharpness also falls short for my preferences. some may find it perfectly suitable but to a more discerning eye it will fall short.

the lens is not your biggest problem though. you need to learn to identify what great light is first and understand how to get the best results once you have good light to work with. i would not run out yet and buy speedlights as others have suggested though. if you dont know what good available light is yet you are just as likely to produce bad results with speedlights.

i would suggest doing two things first. one, shoot in bright shade and two, shoot with a large window to the side of your subject while placing a piece of white foamboard close to the subject on the opposite side. these are basic lighting scenarios you should become familiar with first before running off and dumping money into strobe lighting.

after that, you need to understand how to post the images to pull the best results out of them without overdoing it. do not expect your images to match what you have seen from pros published in magazines straight out of your camera. top pros consider images straight out of camera as "digital negatives" in that the information has been recorded but needs to be processed to really make the image sing (so to speak). adjustments should be subtle if you got the lighting and exposure correct but a small amount of tweaking can still make a big difference in the final product.

145
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software
« on: June 12, 2013, 08:58:18 PM »
Quote
The "Eliminate the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model petition" now has over 29,500 supporters

https://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model

signed

146
you seem to not want to acknowledge that adorama is not culpable in this matter. in fact i think them refusing the wire transfer gives me peace of mind that they are dilligent in their practices against fraud.

i'm not suggesting that your attempted purchase was fraudulent, but in all my online transactions i have had to have the address associated with my bank account match the address that i am receiving the bill. its a security measure that i appreciate as a consumer. no address associated with a wire transfer that large would send up red flags immediately in my mind. they did the right thing in the grand scheme of things.

that being said...does this continue to be an appropriate thread for this forum? i'm not so sure.

you need to stop wasting your efforts on Adorama and Helen and put all your efforts into hammering your bank.

147
Landscape / Re: How would you edit this?
« on: June 09, 2013, 10:57:27 PM »
i wouldn't edit it as the focus missed. i would curse under my breath and then check my calendar for when i could go shoot again.

148
i have experienced this phenomenon using the 5d2 in conjunction with DynaLites and pocket wizards during VERY meticulously controlled before and after shots for QVC clinical trials.

we use the same heads with the same modifiers (each on their assigned head) with all light positions tape measured and power settings recorded. same camera and lens shooting tethered through canon utility using the Kelvin WB setting. shots are typically a series of 3 shots over the course of 1 to 2 months. always against a white seamless. we measure and record all lighting/modifier/camera positions every time so that each shoot is as identical as we can possibly get them.

all shots are scrutinized by the legal department and must be identical in lighting or they get bounced and the client loses the ability to use the photos to promote whatever product they are pushing on air. 

under these controlled circumstances i have occasionally seen color shifts during same day shooting. it is a mystery to me as well but we deal with it by correcting the Raws in ACR. i would chalk it up to either inconsistent light output or just the nature of how the sensor works. it would be nice if the sensor performed exactly the same every shot for tens of thousands of consecutive shots but it is more likely that on occasion there could be a slight inconsistency. such is life...perfection is elusive if not impossible to achieve. 

149
Quote
The best zoom I have ever used is the 24-105, so I guess I feel a hint of skepticism regarding their performance versus primes.

i have always felt this lens was overrated. even the 24-70mm V1 was better than it and anytime i ran across a colleague who had the 24-105 i would let them take the 24-70 for a spin and they always preferred it better.

the new 24-70mm F2.8 seems to be pretty remarkable in its quality. i dont have it yet but i have seen plenty of reviews and shots that support this.

but the 70-200mm F2.8 IS 2 seems to be equally remarkable and again broadens your coverage by quite a bit.

Fast Primes are a different animal....they take more patience to work with. if you don't have them dialed in and you don't shoot appropriately with them wide open they can miss badly. can lead to alot of frustration especially with a subpar focusing system. BUT...when they do hit at F2.0 or wider they are simply stunning.

the 70-200 is easier to work with and can provide that stunning quality even if it is just shy of that 2.0 and wider look.

150
from a focal range point of view the only lens that adds to what you already mentioned is the 70-200mm.

the 24-70mm would definitely outclass your 24-105 and be much sharper but it wouldn't really offer too much of a new point of view for you. the 85mm from what i have seen is a spectacular lens but i think you can still get a look in a similar ballpark using the 50mm you already have.

the 70-200mm is also a very special lens but it offers great versatility. i would get that one if i were you.

if i were starting from scratch the two lenses i would get first are the 24-70mm and the 70-200mm so that i had a good range across focal lengths with the highest quality available for zoom lenses. i would then start addressing lenses for those special eye catching looks that you can get in fast primes. finally i would get specialty lenses such as a 15mm fisheye or the 100mm macro.

get coverage first then go for "the look" then go specialty. my 2 cents.   

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 25