August 30, 2014, 12:31:57 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 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 24
Canon General / Re: anyone had someone over their shoulder on a job?
« on: February 07, 2013, 11:50:54 AM »
obviously you haven't had to work with a pesky art director, sales manager, marketing manager, or the anal retentive micro managing general manager on commercial shoots...  You can easily be bothered or intimidated by how they can be... Some shoots, not often, my sets have to be approved by top management before I fire the shutter, just so I dont bother wasting my time if they dont like the set or want something changed... It happens

i have. the difference there being that there is usually as much time as you need to get the shot right. on weddings there is typically so very little time that even the slightest interruptions can start cutting into the opportunities for photos. not to even mention that if there is a distraction or someone getting in your way during a moment...its gone. no redoing it.
i love working with art director's because of the collaboration and the ability to craft a shot for a clients needs. weddings don't afford that luxury. there needs to be one person running the show...otherwise you are inviting potential troubles.

Canon General / Re: anyone had someone over their shoulder on a job?
« on: February 07, 2013, 09:34:45 AM »
i am a professional and do all kinds of work including alot of weddings. i always try to handle these situations in a friendly manner but i do have it in my contract that i will be the only photographer there for the day. that is of course not designed to stop family from taking pictures but i have run into situations where a Dj brought a camera guy and they were jumping into the action during the reception....definitely NOT ok.

my take on it is this...i think it is incredibly rude and inconsiderate to photograph during ANY important moments throughout the wedding if you are not the hired photographer. and i don't mean towards the photographer...i mean towards the bride and groom. they have spent a good deal of money to hire a professional. you should not disrespect the BRIDE and GROOM's investment by potentially being a distraction or getting in the way.

i have stopped bring any sort of camera at all to weddings i attend. i'm there to enjoy myself not to be distracted by "working". my wife is beyond thankful for this now.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Emergency wedding, of sorts.
« on: February 06, 2013, 11:52:19 AM »
if the friend is going to be unhappy with the results after asking this HUGE favor of you then i would say it is not that good of a friend. so long as you have thoroughly advised him of your capabilities and offered no guarantees.

if friends stopped asking friends to shoot their weddings i don't think that would curb the enormous amount of bad wedding photographers out there. there are just too many of them....

Lenses / Re: How much would you pay for Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L IS
« on: February 05, 2013, 12:45:41 PM »
IS may not be what you look for or need for your own particular usage, however for others (particularly those focussed on video, or who make significant usage of video) IS is a massive advantage in a lens.

as a still shooter this is something that i have come to understand despite not having any real experience shooting video.

my question is however, how useful is a mid range zoom for video? would a prime be more desirable at those focal ranges? i see plenty of 70-200mm 2.8 IS lenses being used by video guys on the weddings i shoot but they are always locked down on tripods/dollys and as far as i know the focal length is not being changed during filming.

i still contend for still shooting that IS is usually a bad solution for low light at wider focal lengths. i completely understand it for longer focal lengths in all lighting conditions but i think faster shutterspeeds at higher ISOs is always a better solution. IS cannot overcome the physics of motion in the scene below 1/60th of a sec. only faster shutterpeeds can and on occasion strobed light.

Software & Accessories / Re: Need help with developing in LR
« on: February 05, 2013, 01:34:12 AM »
i can second the suggestion of Martin Evening books. he works very closely with Adobe on developing their products so that they are the best they can be. he also writes simply about topics so that a novice can understand some of the more complicated techniques. there are always tons of examples, figures, and charts in his books as well.

as far as the OP's question, it would be much easier to answer if we could see a posted image that you are dissatisfied with. the outline you provided only deals in general terms and there are far too many variables in post production to get an idea of what could "make your photos look better".

my gut feeling is that the minimal amount of post production you apply only yields good results if the lighting in your shots is great and that you might be dealing with poor lighting resulting in lack luster images.

its rare for me (outside the studio) that i get lighting conditions that are so good that i "only" have to apply a lens adjustment and a camera profile. more often than not i am doing that AND adjusting exposure, fill, blacks, then using an adjustment brush for dodging and burning. then i bring an image into PS and apply Nik Filters and sometimes Portraiture filters.

not sure if this is the degree at which you want to go but there usually isnt an "auto" method that makes photos look great. if you don't have that great light to start with it typically takes alot of work to make a photo shine.

for a non pro shooter who is mainly interested in landscapes and group shots, the 5DC is still a fantastic camera. its low light performance is not great...i personally don't like pushing it past 800 iso but will hit 1600 in a pinch.

as far a shutter counts and ratings...even if your shutter does explode its a relatively cheap fix. the shutter on my 5DC blew up at 186,000 actuations and Canon fixed it for me as well as putting a new glass filter in front of the sensor for 200.00. it shot like a brand new camera after that!

so even if you went used 5DC (probably for around $500.00) you could spend $200.00 to put a brand new shutter in it and still have a good chunk of change left over for lenses. or how about a speedlight?

i owned a cropped body for all of about a month before the 5D came out and when it did i scrambled to get it. i could never get over the crop factor killing the wide angle end of my lenses and hated the idea of getting lenses that couldn't migrate to any body i would get in the future. i'm a full frame fool.

welcome  to the world of FF!

Lenses / Re: A Hands on Review of the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens
« on: February 04, 2013, 08:54:36 AM »
yup....but i never use reverse macro for true macro purposes. i only really use it to get a creative look for smaller type objects (like ring shots at a wedding). for true macro work i would never do the reverse technique.

Lighting / Re: Specular Highlights... Feed Back Please
« on: February 04, 2013, 08:51:25 AM »
The black card idea is interesting, but a studio still-life like this seems a perfect candidate to bracket exposures for a composite image.  I don't (necessarily) mean feeding it to an HDR program, but more "old school" style, combining the parts of each image that are properly exposed.  This would give you maximum flexibility to expose each part exactly as you like.

this would not work as you would see still see the reflection of the card/box (whatever it is) on each side of the bottle and glass. the black card use is to eliminate that reflection all together in order to reveal the bottle itself more.

Do not really understand what you asking, but I so do not like the bounce boards being visible...

this is what i'm talking about. this is a problem of Angle of Incidence = Angle of Reflectance compounded by the curved reflective surface of the bottle and glass. to minimize the effect (or size) of the "highlight" on the bottle you have to use a dark object to block that area that is being reflected.

Lighting / Re: Paul Buff Cybersync advice
« on: February 03, 2013, 07:05:22 PM »
the PCB triggers do not assist in any way syncing at higher speeds. i have noticed banding at 1/200th of a sec using PW+Dynas as well as PCB+Einstiens/AB800 on the Canon 5D mrk 2.

Buff himself has grumbled about camera makers insistence on limited sync speed shutters and doesn't seem overly motivated to tackle this problem.

a few of us were talking about this in another thread recently and it seems that the Odin's may provide the best option out there. its a crapshoot though as its highly dependent upon what strobe you use and the flash duration of that strobe.

it does indeed seem to require longer flash durations. unfortunately, the trend seems to be faster and faster flash durations in modern strobes.

a few of us are dying to get some real world reportage on canon+odins+einstien combo if anyone is up to the task. i would do it myself but work is keeping my priorities away from buying new gear and testing right now. i may have an opportunity to test PW TT5/TT1 combo but probably not for a few weeks. i have heard that those units are notoriously unreliable and i'm not holding out much hope. 

Site Information / Re: Moderators: You are Too Sensitive
« on: February 03, 2013, 01:47:13 AM »
that was a horribly useless thread and if it ended the way that was described then should have been deleted. the OP should get a very stern warning if not a ban.

take that garbage to another forum. its not appropriate to a gear forum such as this.

Lenses / Re: A Hands on Review of the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens
« on: February 02, 2013, 01:48:14 PM »
For reverse macro to produce ok results a wider ~24mm lens lens is needed *and* it has to be sharp at the aperture you shoot with - and since the aperture cannot be manually set on the 50mm, that's the very unsharp 1.8 setting.

this is actually not true. you can use any aperture you would like with reverse macro so long as you engage the DOF preview button before you unmount the lens. the aperture will close down to whatever you set it at and then will hold after you unmount the lens. i have used the 50mm at 5.6 to get a bit more DOF as at 1.8 reversed it is ridiculously narrow.

Lenses / Re: A Hands on Review of the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens
« on: February 02, 2013, 09:30:47 AM »
i used to recommend to my students the 50mm 1.8 as the number 1 purchase a beginning photographer could make simply for the value it provided. i know i was enthralled with it for a time when i first got it.

now, i avoid using it for anything other than reverse macro shots. for me its too mushy, has terrible color rendition, and it's slow chunky AF just cant perform under critical conditions the way i would need it to. i would definitely be very interested if they updated the 1.4 version and eventually i will probably get the 1.2L but for now i find that other lenses in the canon lineup jump above the offerings of their 50mms in terms of my priorities.

i do wonder about the 1.4 though. is it really as mushy as the 1.8? i really would be shocked if it were. can the color rendering of the 1.4 be as awkward as the 1.8? i understand the misgivings of the 50 1.2L but i also understand that the design of the lens offers more of a "look" than offering crispy focus.

when i get to the point of feeling the need of getting the "look" of the 50L i'll get it...just not there yet. i do feel my 35L is a bit wide in certain circumstances and my 85 1.8 is a bit tight in some circumstances so i do feel the desire to have a 50mm but i just can't bring myself to use the 1.8. i'm over just doesnt cut it for me.

Lighting / Re: Specular Highlights... Feed Back Please
« on: February 01, 2013, 09:10:24 AM »
i would try to control them a bit more by introducing some black cards to flag of the softboxes to the sides of camera position. the highlights on the bottle are huge and distract from the label somewhat. pushing a card in front of the boxes (on camera side) will narrow the edge light towards the edge of the bottle.

Lenses / Re: Have you one of the new 24-70 f4 canon lenses, Is it good
« on: February 01, 2013, 09:03:28 AM »
I'm confused by how much some people lean on IS for low-light photography. Stabilizing only accounts for one problem of low-light photography. It compensates for camera movement. It's great at doing that, but it can never compensate for subject movement. For me, shooting slower than 1/60th is not an option for available light event shooting. (Of course, with flashes, who needs IS anyways?)

i feel the same way for still photography. IS generally is the wrong solution for so many problems...very rarely is it the right solution. but the video guys i think find it much more useful. not sure how often they are using zooms. i have seen the the 70-200mm 2.8 being employed by videographers but usually it is primes when they go wide. dunno about this lens.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 24