August 22, 2014, 04:37:23 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 - privatebydesign

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 146
To the original question/
We should think also to the light ray in lens and sensor. bigger sensor, bigger lens, the light rays have more different angle (wide left, wide right).
I think that play a role in the perspective-impression.. or "3d" effect... or "Real" photo/subject.

  /  \
/      \

APSC will be more like this:


Perspective has got nothing to do with focal length, or light ray angle. Perspective is defined by your position, alone.

Post Processing / Re: Merging Multiple Exposures
« on: Today at 02:05:31 PM »
One thing the original image shows up is the way shadows adopt a very cold colour, I have taken to desaturating the blue out of the shadows and then lifting them with a masked colour filter layer.

I really like the Wonderpana for my 17TS-E, but the truth is with so much bracketing I really only use it for reflection controls with the CPL, everything from swimming pool water, to granite kitchen surfaces and wooden floors all often benefit from the use of the CPL.


Even though the FOV and DOF may be the same, the images will never be "equal".  Why is that? For the same reason that a 4X5 image will look "better" than 35 mm--field compression.  Let me explain.

Let's take two cameras a 35 mm and 4 x 5.  A 50 mm lens on a 35 mm camera and a 210 mm lens on a 4 x 5 camera give the same field of view.  However, the images do not look the same because of the apparent difference in distance between the foreground and background.  Even through the field of view is the same, the background will appear much closer to the foreground with the longer lens--this is called field compression.  These images "look better" and have a more 3D feel.  This is why the old master's like Ansel Adams, Ed Weston used large format cameras.  Ansel Adams once quipped when asked what kind of camera he used his response was "The heaviest one I can carry".

The same this is going on with an APC sized sensor compared to FF.  The equivalent field of view for a 50 mm lens on a full frame sensor is about 35 mm on an APC sensor.  The apparent distance between background and foreground for given a field of view is greater in an APC sensor than in a full frame sensor.  Hence, the images do not look as good and lack the 3D feel.

Your instructor should know this stuff.  Maybe he/she should read Ansel Adam's excellent book "The Camera".  In fact, all of us should read the entire Adam's series: "The Camera", "The Negative", and "The Print".  There is still much to learn from the old masters even in the digital age.

Don Barar


With the greatest respect, something I am often accused of lacking, that is a complete load of rubbish.

Perspective is perspective, "compression" is a completely erroneous concept that photographers that don't know what they are talking about use to describe perspective.

Perspective is derived from your position. That is it, nothing else, focal length is a red herring. Shoot the same scene from the same place with a 17mm lens or a 200mm lens and crop the 17mm image to the same framing as the 200mm image and the perspective ("compression") is identical, and that is what you are doing when you use smaller sensors.

I am mostly one shot AF, but when I use Servo I have "Back Button OFF" for AF not back button ON, I find I get better results and my thumb doesn't work a fraction as hard.

Site Information / Re: Posts disappearing or not loading
« on: August 21, 2014, 09:37:57 PM »
I have lost hundreds, literally hundreds of posts at times. I asked the mods at the time but nobody could figure it out.

Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: August 21, 2014, 08:26:24 PM »
I have always liked my 50 f1.4, it is a great little lens, it works well at wide apertures and is incredibly sharp when you stop it down to f5.6 or f8, AF is good and reliable it takes no space in the bag and is light and cheap. It is very good for stitched panos too.

Photography Technique / Re: Issues with focus stacking
« on: August 21, 2014, 10:13:37 AM »
I found very little difference between Helicon Focus and PS CS6, so much so that I don't use Helicon anymore. The key is to work through the layer masks, they always need a touch up here and there in both programs.

Photography Technique / Re: Local Photography Group
« on: August 20, 2014, 10:16:38 PM »
Sorry yes, at the meetings we have a laptop and digital projector and if people have stuff to show that wasn't in a Zenfolio gallery then they bring it on a memory stick.

Photography Technique / Re: Local Photography Group
« on: August 20, 2014, 10:04:38 PM »
My local group/club uses Zenfolio, it is set up so that each member gets a folder and they can make as many folders within that as they like, they also set up galleries for specific evenings, events, competitions etc that all the other members can see. It works very well.

Reviews / Re: What Happened to DxO?
« on: August 20, 2014, 09:24:22 PM »
I used to live in France, the only people who work in August are foreigners and restaurant and cafe workers! I often wondered how the paper got printed for the morning coffee.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810 users are seeing spots
« on: August 20, 2014, 04:33:43 PM »
Does anyone here remember how long it took Canon to address issues with the 5D Mark II? It definitely wasn't this quick!

Does anybody remember Canon getting banned from importing or selling a model because of an unacknowledged fault? Nikon were banned from selling the D600 in China.

No it isn't, that is a perfect example of a camera collector, a person I have great respect for.

I well understand the collecting mentality, and I have been a strong supporter of a slightly different variant of people here who want the best simply because they want the best.

But lets not lose sight of the fact that the 1DX and 24-70 f2.8 MkII are the current production top of the line tools, they are made to do a job, they are not limited edition pink alligator covered Leica's. They are not advertised as hermetically sealed and for people to not only expect them to be, but to be very verbose and critical of them because they are not not only illustrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the product, but a distinct lack of appreciation for what the tool is actually designed and capable of doing.

If R1-7D had put his 1DX and 24-70 in that glass cabinet, one, it wouldn't have got any dust in it, and two, he wouldn't have noticed if it had.

Roger Cicala of lensrentals has dealt with Canon repair a lot, as well as with other repair, for problems that lensrentals staff haven't yet learned to fix in house. He has a VERY SIMPLE SUGGESTION. If you go to the trouble of testing your lens with FoCal or with a home-brew test (even the "brick wall"), you need to send the test photos and the test methods that you used along with the lens, and a list of the defects that you found (eg. "lower left corner consistently soft, see photos #1,3,4..."). Load up your images and text on a $5 thumb drive labelled with your lens SN and your name, and ship it in the box with the lens.

For more details, see his lensrentals blog. But really, this is common sense, service personnel appreciate being shown the specifics of the user's issue with the product, and are likely to look harder when diagnosing the lens's problem - human nature. A lot of people return products with complaints of "it doesn't look sharp" but there may be unrealistic expectations or the product is defective under some conditions but not others, and it is hard to ID some problems in a quick inspection.


I have done that, only I burnt the images to CD, my experience is they don't even look at them, they sent the disc back unopened.

I believe they put the lens on a reference body or rig and draw their own conclusions from the results from those results and that alone.

As for the OP, I did write a rather blunt reply early on in the thread but it got taken down, naughty me! The crux of it though was that these things are tools, they are not hermetically sealed pieces of jewelry. They get dust in them, they get scratches and they end up needing servicing, that is the nature of tools. They are not collectables and they are not precious, they demand to be used as the makers intended, regularly and without compromise, if you do that then you will not only get the best out of them, but you will get dust in them and scratches on them.

Post Processing / Re: Photoshop eye retouching
« on: August 20, 2014, 01:45:38 PM »
Does anyone have an idea how they catch that much details in model's eyes?
That photo taken by Phase One and professionally edited, but still I'm wondering if I can catch that much details with 5D III and 100mm L macro.

Of course you can. The key is not the camera or lens, it is the lighting. Use a good studio light with a medium to large softbox in quite close, use a tripod and optimal aperture f8-f10, and you can do that easily.

There is a core issue that is missed by so many people here, for many types of shooting the important bit is not the camera or lens, it is the lighting.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810 users are seeing spots
« on: August 20, 2014, 09:10:39 AM »
like the last gen's 1Ds series oily mirrors fiasco on canon's side, nikon learned and that is always good.

There is a quantum difference between oil on a mirror, and oil on the sensor or long exposure hot pixels. Besides my 1Ds MkIII's both had and have oily mirrors and I am not concerned enough to worry about it.

Things that don't affect IQ, like oily mirrors, could hardly be called a fiasco, things that do affect IQ, oily sensors (Nikon), hot pixels on long exposures (Nikon), or intermittent unrepeatable AF inaccuracies (Canon 1D MkIII) could. But it isn't really the issue that classifies anything as a fiasco, it is the way the company deals with that issue, Nikon had to be forced to accept the D600 issues by China banning sales of them!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 146