July 31, 2014, 05:26:32 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 - privatebydesign

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 140
46
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 22, 2014, 09:37:17 AM »
Aglet, sagittariansrock and notapro, thanks for your guesses.


I'll post the correct answers tomorrow.

Aglet:- out of your 14 guesses off the two sheets, 4 are correct.
sagittariansrock:- I am not certain which two girls you mean, sorry. The leaf is not a composite, if that is what you meant by photoshopped. If I score you on your two firm guesses it will tell anybody else what was used, but I will post the answers later.
notapro: Same as sagittariansrock, if I say yes or no to one image it tells anybody interested what that one is or isn't, so you'll have to wait a little longer.

47
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Adopting a MF system.
« on: July 22, 2014, 08:57:52 AM »
Thank you PBD. This purchase is out of pocket and I've already made the money to afford a older body system. You are right about the h2 systems and I had already decided to go with a minimum of an H3D system and am currently negotiating a H3D-II 39 system.

With a piece of my 35mm kit sold and the funds already put away for it, it's time to jump to MF. I had a depreciation write off on my 5d3s as they did drop from 3500-2800ish these past 2 years but this camera has already depreciated most of its value and will be slower to depreciate any more.

The street value has nothing to do with the business write down percentage, I own a house that I rent out, I can depreciate it and write it off against taxes (though not the land it sits on) even though it is going up in value.

Please speak to your accountant, MF systems are well into serious capital expenditure and maximising the tax benefits are a critical part of that. There is a huge difference between a $3,000 5D MkIII and a $10,000 Hasselblad from a business point of view.

Glad you are thinking at least the H3, the H2 really was a tweaked H1, nothing noteworthy at all, whereas the H3 was the first truthfully digital from the word go H, of course once you go to the H3D II you abandon any film possibilities, but really, who cares?

But sit down with your accountant, he will be able to tell you from your photographic income what is the best price range option to maximise the tax advantages. If I said to you you can either buy an $8,000 camera and have no cash and pay taxes at the end of the year, or buy a $15,000 camera have cash in your pocket and not pay taxes at the end of the year, most would explore the second option! Seriously, the money you would pay in taxes can buy your camera, it would effectively cost you nothing. Of course there is nothing to stop you doing that to an $8,000 camera too  :)

48
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 22, 2014, 02:58:23 AM »
On the computer monitor you only know what you are being shown if you use an external meter (and that is subjective)

Are you saying there is reason to doubt the colour calibration tools commonly available? Otherwise I've already covered the topics you describe.

Yes and no, different calibration tools will return different absolute values, but the point is not as esoteric as that. If the flower was in sunlight it was being illuminated by anything between 2,500K-8,000K, if it was strobe lit it will be around 5,500K, most people calibrate their screens to 6,500K, the screen will have a different colour to the flower under both flash and most times of the day.

So your point is that the colour of an object will change depending on circumstances. This has nothing to do with the objectivity of colour (whatever colour you see at any given moment can be measured).

You seem to be missing the point, if the screen isn't calibrated to the same colour as the original subjects illuminant then the colours can't match, and nobody changes screen profiles for every image. Yes you can measure the flowers reflectance value, and yes you can measure the screens illuminant value, but even if you make a custom camera profile for that shot and adjust your image until one shade is the same, if your screen is not calibrated to the original subjects illumination, then the other shades will not be the same.

This is where rendering intent becomes so important.

49
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Adopting a MF system.
« on: July 22, 2014, 02:48:27 AM »
Congratulations Ramon,

MF really is a massive step up and the truth is MF files are as beautiful as those MF slides were back in the day.

As for kit, I wouldn't get either, the H2 is old and you will have inevitable service issues with it. You must be doing this through a DBA or better yet an LLC, speak to an accountant first, there are no tax advantages to spending your capital like that and it will take you years to write it down, get a lease purchase agreement and get an H5D kit http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/893189-REG/Hasselblad_H5D_40_DSLR_Camera_With.html and 100% of your payments are tax deductible, including the down payment. With the tax breaks you get for lease purchase you save way more than the interest, way way more. You also maintain some of your capital to get whatever inevitable thing you need, batteries, software etc and get you through a rainy day.

I am not one to borrow money, but this is a gilt edged business purchase because you can maximise the tax breaks and always have a camera worth more than your business owes.

I know we don't see eye to eye often but trust me on this, speak to your accountant first.

50
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« on: July 22, 2014, 02:13:57 AM »
Hi Surapod, thanks for trying.

Of the five you said were, or probably were, the 1.2 one is. I'll hold off on the ones you said definitely were not until anybody else who wants a try does, don't want to give out too many clues!

I'll post the actual answers in a couple of days.

51
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 22, 2014, 01:24:46 AM »
PBD

how about, you show us group of images, shot from different lens (50L and others), then we choose which group of photos belongs to which lens.

because we consider a few magical photos before we say that the photo came out unique not just consider one photo. And no post processing.

How about you do? I made the discussion, I gave the demo that nobody, not one single person, has got close to right. 28 images, thousands of looks and one person got one right. Probability gets you 33% right, that means a blind person could have done a considerably better job of picking out the "unique look" than all you aficionados have so far.

52
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 22, 2014, 01:19:35 AM »
To answer the question more seriously: I've owned all 3 of the current Canon 50mm lenses. The f/1.8 was great for the price. I liked the f/1.4 quite a bit more than the nifty fifty. The f/1.2 produced the pictures I liked the best. So, that's the one I kept.

I sincerely hope that meets with everyone's approval... I'd hate to be judged harshly for spending my money in such a foolish manner.  ;)

My approval means nothing, even if you wanted it which you clearly don't, and I doubt if you are a fool :-)

The 1.2L does several things better than any other 50, my only grip is with people who profess a "unique look" but can't actually identify it.


53
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 22, 2014, 01:12:51 AM »
Two words: weather sealing:P

A very good and patently justifiable reason to get the 1.2L

54
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 22, 2014, 01:10:48 AM »
On the computer monitor you only know what you are being shown if you use an external meter (and that is subjective)

Are you saying there is reason to doubt the colour calibration tools commonly available? Otherwise I've already covered the topics you describe.

Yes and no, different calibration tools will return different absolute values, but the point is not as esoteric as that. If the flower was in sunlight it was being illuminated by anything between 2,500K-8,000K, if it was strobe lit it will be around 5,500K, most people calibrate their screens to 6,500K, the screen will have a different colour to the flower under both flash and most times of the day.

55
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 22, 2014, 01:02:52 AM »
Your insistence, that because we can't tell what lens made each photo, we don't really need the 50L, is what is hard to understand.

Tom, I have never said that, I have repeatedly said there are several good reasons to buy the 1.2 over any other 50, what I have stuck to is the fact that not one person has correctly picked a 50 f1.2 image out of a gallery of 50mm images, I think that speaks very loudly by itself.

By definition how could it give a unique look if not one person can correctly distinguish it?

56
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 22, 2014, 01:00:06 AM »
I'll have a stab at PBD's challenge seeing as no one else will, but only two. I think the picture of the girl has a Sigma signature, and the picture of the dog is a blurry mess so I presume it is meant to look as if it was shot at f1.2. In truth I cannot tell the difference between the EF 50 1.2 and the 1.4 unless you shot the same subject at f1.4 - 1.6 and then compared the central image sharpness.

Hey there Sporgon, thanks for trying. Both wrong.

57
Lighting / Re: large softboxes for speedlights - what are you using
« on: July 21, 2014, 11:44:53 PM »
For big the 50" Westcott Apollo is difficult to beat and at $169 isn't too expensive considering its quality and size. In this thread I gave some test shots of the output:- http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20523.msg388422#msg388422

58
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 21, 2014, 04:46:33 PM »
.... but the man behind the camera can tell.

What does any of that, and your disdain for my illustrative images have to do with the point? You can be as insulting as you like, I will not get drawn into it.

However as for the part of your comment that you keep saying, why then do you keep failing to actually do it?

Your answer to the question I ask you, show me you can discern the "unique look" of the 50L is not met by guesses, it is met with insults.

I hope I never attain your level of professionalism.

59
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 21, 2014, 03:30:38 PM »
PBD,
So what is the point of your comments, and those in the other thread?  Should we all be saving money and not renting/buying/shooting the L lens?  The only way you will convince me of this is by showing me the same scene shot with the different lenses in question, wide open and with no post processing.  If it is a complex scene with some depth and some small points of light in it.  I guarantee I could tell the difference. 

Anyone have multiple 50mms to do a test?

Tom
Don't expect too much from PBD experience wise. He after all doesn't use the gear to the extent to know and see the differences. From. From experience, if you take the 1.4 and 1.2 out to shoot, you'll like the 50L every time if that's the look your going for. Something that PBD won't ever be able to understand.

You are so sweet, I probably sold my last (owned) 50 1.2L before you knew what a camera was, but that is fine, stick to the personal insults rather than try and guess which images have, in your words, a "unique look", because lets be honest, you are far better at insulting people than proving your point.

As far as we know, you haven't shot the inside of a paper bag but if others like to take your opinions with weight based on zero actual photography made, that's none of my business. However, my opinions are based on my work and how the lens works for me. If you disagree, that's cool but don't attempt to justify yourself with zero actual photography.

I don't, I have posted hundreds of images here, I just choose not to link to my websites or try for YouTube and blog hits. But I am not the one proclaiming a "unique look" and then failing, 100%, to actually be able to pick it out.

As 3kramd5 says "But the common assertion is that there is a specific unique look to the 50L. If that assertion is true, and if the viewer knows what that specific unique look is, he need not have a side by side comparison, he only need look at a single photograph to determine whether or not that specific unique look is present. Right?"

Why can't you, or any other self proclaimed aficionado, answer that question?

60
Lenses / Re: Something with 50mm L lens that make it different
« on: July 21, 2014, 03:21:43 PM »
Remind me an instance. I am sure the color of petals is near to orange but she insist its near to red.
thus the argument. I can not give up because its really near to orange than red. but she insist sees otherwise.
maybe we are both correct, its how we see it.

That was a missed opportunity. In this day and age there should be no room for arguments over what colour is.

Colour is a wavelength of light, it's not subjective in any way. Going a step further, when you're looking at it on your monitor most editing programs have a string of numbers that tell you the exact colour of any given pixel. In this case it's hard to say if the colour being produced is just like the one that was captured, but at least you can say quite precisely what colour is being displayed.
The last step to ensure accuracy is to have a calibrated monitor, but even if you don't it's probably not going to be that far off.

At the danger of opening another front, that is a vast oversimplification.

The flower is reflecting light, the colour of the light being shone on it will affect the colour it appears to be. A similar problem happens with prints, metamerism is an issue that has largely been overcome with modern digital ink sets, but not entirely.

On the computer monitor you only know what you are being shown if you use an external meter (and that is subjective), an internal colour picker is not telling you what you are seeing, it is telling what that pixel should be before your screen profile, and every screen has a profile. Do this, open PS and put the colour picker on a pixel, now adjust your screens brightness, the pickers value doesn't change but the actual pixel does, same thing if you change the WB, the colour of the pixel you see changes, but the pickers values don't.

Colour is a huge can of worms that most of the time is best left alone!

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 140