December 21, 2014, 06:29:26 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 - agierke

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 25
Lighting / Re: How to Extend Flash Performance (Life on Site)
« on: September 09, 2014, 11:49:56 PM »
Is there any risk of these external packs (not the cp-e4 but the Godox etc.) blowing out the strobe?

i had a quantum turbo sc blow a 580 EX and a 580 EX2. switched to PowerEx/Imedion rechargables after that.

i also do what RLP does and run an Einstein on a VML to handle the heavy lifting. my speedlight is only responsible for providing fill light on my subject. i'll go through an entire reception on one set of 4 AA's with them only getting sluggish if i shoot really heavy.

Canon General / Re: How do you cull your photo's?
« on: September 07, 2014, 11:49:24 PM »
i regularly deal with 4000+ images from a wedding between 2 shooters.

to reduce culling time i have begun using Adobe Bridge. on a Mac you can hit the space bar and it will enlarge the image to full screen (large enough to quickly tell if critical focus was achieved). you can then cycle through images with the arrow keys. i delete anything that isnt in focus, has blinks, flash misfired, etc. once i am confident the remaining images are all acceptably usable images, i hit space bar again to return to the thumbnail window where i then start removing redundant images. i try to get it down to about 800-1000 images total. from there i upload the raws into lightroom where i make my final adjustments and then output the final Jpgs.

i used to do this all in lightroom but it took too long even if i did the 100% preview on upload. the bridge method cut the culling time by 2/3rds for me.

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
« on: September 03, 2014, 11:53:40 PM »
Why has this made it to page 30?

Because there is an extremely high correlation between Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and frequency of internet postings.

Take some OCD, coupled with a matter of life and death, plus a lack of humour.... throw in some raging testosterone and keep the whole mixture simmering over a troll baited flame.... Add DR for seasoning.... and you get enough posts to choke the server.

Don Haines
Posts: 3084


And of those 3,084 posts, 3,083 have been cheerful, humorous, positive, constructive and/or peace-making. I'd say 3,084 were that way, but hey -- nobody's perfect.  :P

I was going to ask Mitch if he is experiencing Deja Moo... (The feeling that you have seen this bull before) :)

Unfocused: 2044 Posts. The only reason for posting this is to start one of those quote within a quote within a quote sequences that can look pretty cool when they get to about 20-30 quotes. Time to have some fun, demonstrate the absurdity of this thread and maybe break the Internet!

Neuroanatomist: just a few posts, really.

What? No one else wants to play?

I spy something with my little eye...

I can't, I am on a self imposed exile for a week or so. But, intriguingly enough, I have a friend coming to stay who has a D800 (shame it isn't an 810 or E though) and a 24-70 so I am hoping to do some comparison images for my own piece of mind.

What better to make of such a thread than a kaleidoscope....  :o

Good read to pass time... I wonder if the forum will eventually put a limit on how many levels you can quote, or run out of memory and crash...

Probably not—that's all just handled with CSS in your browser—but eventually it will probably get to the point where the innermost quoted message is only one character wide.  :D
That would be fun!

Not a Kaleidoscope, and not an Aneurysm, it's a Squirrel!

thank god...this will surely get this thread closed. please, please, please, please.....>.<

I've never used a battery pack, but I've done day-long portrait sessions with lots of flash use. I could be wrong (and I frequently am), but I thought that speedlites have internal circuitry to extend the interval between firing and ready status when they get too hot, regardless of the power source.

Now, if the battery pack is defective and serves up, i.e., too high a voltage, that's another story.

sry for the side thread piggy backing this thread...but i feel this is important. yes, modern flashes have safety measures to prevent damage from overheating with each generation seeming to get better at it. and yes, the problem with a battery pack is that it can send a much higher surge to the flash resulting in an overload.

the first flash i had fried was the 580EX v1. i'm not sure if it had safety measures to prevent damage from overheating (i dont recall and if it did i very well may have ignored it). the second flash that got fried was the 580EX v2, and it died twice...once on the battery pack and then again (after repair!!!) on rechargables. at that point i did some research and i recall reading that the 580EX2 had a faulty design in the head that didn't allow it to vent properly and ultimately caused the flash tube to arc...thus frying the head.

anyways...after 3 meltdowns on 2 heads i decided to be more careful about how i powered and used my flashes. sold the quantum and picked up some powerex AAs. no issues since and i only rarely run across instances where those batteries cant keep up recycle rate.

now i run with 600EX-RTs and they do have a clear warning system that the flash is overheating. love those things.

There's a reason why pros use battery packs, which is something you might consider

Battery packs can actually contribute more to flashes overheating as they dont limit recycle rate as much as AAs. That's why I DONT use battery packs and instead use highly rated rechargeables. I had a quantum turbo SC completely fry two 580ex flashes before I made the switch. Haven't had a problem since.

Does the aquarium charge patrons to see their exhibit? Is the event free to the public or do they have registration fees? If the aquarium and presumably the event coordinators will be using the images to promote themselves then how does that constitute "not for profit"?

You are right to be concerned about photographing children without may go fine, but if i was a parent of a child attending this event and you photographed my kid with the intent the images would be used for promotion i would raise holy hell!

Why do "photographers" allow themselves to be put in these positions? It boggles my mind. This sounds to me like a serious job with many risks and technical challenges...if it isn't, then bring 1 body 1 lens, snap a few pics and be done with it. If it is serious and they will be benifitting from your images then why are you doing it for free???? (Not to mention at considerable risk to your expensive gear).

Sounds to me like you just got suckered into working for free. Sry if you think this sounds harsh....

Portrait / Re: HELP... Can anyone show me how to edit like this?
« on: September 02, 2014, 01:00:16 AM »
The "look" being acheived in those engagement shots has a lot more to do with the quality of light and lens choice. You cant "post produce" quality of light.

Dylan is correct that VSCO film packs were likely used to get the tinting. Applying those filters to shots that dont have good light quality wont replicate what you see in those engagement photos though.

Light, light, light and then light again. Thats the key. Then lens, exposure, composition, subject, emotion etc production is the very last a huge margin...that you should be thinking about to "replicate" the look of those photos.

Maybe some of the pro photographers can enlighten us.

my best month to date was just shy of 12,000.00. my minimum goal per week is 1000.00. i meet that goal more often than not, sometimes exceeding it greatly. year over year, i have had on average about a 15% increase in revenue for the last 4 or 5 years.

i do work that can range from 25.00 an hour to 100.00 an hour and from 150.00 flat rate to over 1000.00 day rate. it varies greatly.

i work with another photographer who exceeds 100k easily. another photographer i know is salaried at at least 80k. a very successful and talented wedding photographer i work with generally hits around 80k per year.

in the last 4 years i have personally known 3 photographers whose once successful businesses completely crashed.

many full time photography positions i see (typically studio ecommerce) pay anywhere from 12.50 an hour to 20.00 an hour.

there is still good work out there if you network to find it. its not quite what it once was for as many people and there seems to be more people in the mix now but i have seen plenty of situations that don't reflect the numbers in the original post.

EOS Bodies / Re: popup-flash - made a "pro feature"?
« on: August 13, 2014, 09:55:38 PM »
It's still the worst place for light to come from regardless if its the primary light source or fill.

If that were true, no one would use ring lights.  But they do.

when a ring light is used the light is coming from top, bottom, right and left of the lens position creating a unique look entirely different than the look from a pop up flash. you cant be serious with that post...

Architects same as the Great Chef , who can use the Chicken's S___ to make a great Chicken Salads"---Yes, Some time Useless Pop-up flash can be the Life saving Photos for the photographers like us,  if we know how to use them.

PS, All Photos are no Post processing , except reduce the size to fit below 1 MB.

with all due deference to your ingenuity surapon, the quality of light from your fill flash is still poor. you can season chicken S___ as much as you like....its still chicken S___ that you are eating.

regardless of how you spin it, quality of light has a great deal with the direction it is coming from. directly over the lens is about the least desirable position for light to come from. size, intensity and ability to shape your light source also contribute to quality of light and pop up flash fails to achieve any merit in any of these criteria.

photography quite literally translates to "writing with light". understanding quality of light and how to manipulate it is paramount for professional photography. a pop up flash is so far on the other side of desirable that its hard to put into words. put it this way...once one is introduced to lighting, lesson #1 is get the light off the camera.

sry, i just can't fathom anyone that is remotely serious about lighting defending a pop up flash on a professional level body.

EOS Bodies / Re: popup-flash - made a "pro feature"?
« on: August 13, 2014, 01:54:57 PM »
Direct light coming off the camera is horrendous.
I honestly can't think of a useful way to use a pop-up flash (other than blinding people in dark rooms so that you can run away).

Fill flash?

It's still the worst place for light to come from regardless if its the primary light source or fill. In every conceivable circumstance i would want my fill coming from off camera..even if its slightly off axis.

To me pop up flash doesnt belong on the pro bodies simply because of the location in which the light is coming from (directly above lens). The optical master argument is a thin one, every flash is an optical master (which is the problem with optical cant prevent other sources from triggering your strobes).

Would having a pop up flash on the 5d or 1dx bother me even if I never used it? Yes. Those things inevitably and stupidly seem to end up popping up on their own causing distraction and getting in the way.

Count me firmly in the camp of pop up flash hater.

Site Information / Re: Small or Large Thumbnails - Poll
« on: August 13, 2014, 07:34:57 AM »
I'm fine with the large thumbnails but I think max 3 images per post is more than enough. 6 is too much and 10 is completely unnecessary. If you have that many images you want to show, post a link to your flicker page or website.

Business of Photography/Videography / Re: Who owns the photo?
« on: August 11, 2014, 06:13:40 PM »
So i just went back and read the ex if data that tolusina provided on the first page.

DateTime - 2013:11:01 13:55:43
Artist - David J Slater
Copyright - Caters News Agency Ltd

It appears Caters News Agency owns the copyright. After considering this further, the biggest question looming is how did Wikipedia come to acquire the image?  Did the news agency release it? (Doubtful) or is it more likely that Wikipedia "lifted" the image off the internet?

Based on the exif data, mr Slater has no claim. Caters News Agency on the other hand does...if they even care to take action, which I doubt they do.

Lighting / Re: HSS with Einsteins win!
« on: August 10, 2014, 12:13:20 PM »
Can you post some shots? I'm very curious about achieving hss with studio strobes.

Business of Photography/Videography / Re: Who owns the photo?
« on: August 07, 2014, 02:45:34 PM »
Great summary tolusina! This is my understanding of intellectual property as well. Its shameful what wikigreedia is trying to argue in this case.

Site Information / Re: Critiques
« on: August 06, 2014, 12:44:14 AM »
A critique to me is an opportunity to tell me what I missed, did wrong, or could do better. It's the probably the best way to improve and grow IMO. What is gained by meaningless affirmation and empty back slapping? Nothing...

There were always two things i hated in critiques. One, if poeple said "i like it" or two, if poeple said nothing at all. Unfortunately I agree with PBD. I think there are too many big and fragile egos on this site to handle an honest critique session and it would most likely devolve into simple affirmations.

But heck...if you desire a critique, throw an image up and see what happens!

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 25