August 20, 2014, 03:02:40 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 145
61
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: August 06, 2014, 12:29:12 AM »
I believe they use a benchmarking system. When a camera sets a new benchmark then it re-baselines the camera score database. If a camera sensor sets a new benchmark in all their metrics then I believe it will get a score of 100 and bump all the other cameras down to lower scores. I might be wrong, but I think that's how it works.

No that is not correct. The score is not limited to 100, cameras will score more than 100 and when they do it just means it is "better" than one that scored less. A difference of 5 points equals approximately 1/3 stop, so a camera scoring 102 is 1/3 stop "better" than one that scores 97.

But as they won't tell us how they equate those 5 points, or 1/3 stop, it makes it all pointless.

62
Site Information / Re: Critiques
« on: August 05, 2014, 11:26:57 PM »
Whilst I like the idea, it never works. Anybody that offers honest critiques, basically anything other than "fantastic shot _____" or "really nice, what lens/aperture/program mode/shutter speed did you use?", gets pilloried by the posters fan base.

Few want a true critique, most want affirmation of the purchasing decisions, and I see nothing wrong with that in its place, but it leads to boring well done, nice shot style threads.

63
Reviews / Re: DxO reviews Sony A7s: king of low light photography?
« on: August 05, 2014, 01:37:15 AM »
So you have harped on about how there is no need to have cameras with high DR because this isn't capable of it or that isn't capable of it but yet your entire workflow is in 16bit.

In various other threads you've commented that Sony are claiming too many stops of DR for the number of bits and since you're working with a 16bit workflow obviously you think you need more than 7 or 8 bits of IQ and since 1 bit equals 1 stop of DR, 7 to 8 stops of DR is not enough for you.

Elsewhere in earlier comments in this thread you've stated that print only requires 7 or 8 stops of DR.

Something doesn't add up here. You're saying that printing only delivers 7 or 8 stops of DR yet your workflow supports 16. Why not just work in an 8 bit workspace since that is all that your printing can deliver?

It is about tonality and the subtleties of moving them around to best be represented in a smaller space. Try working an 8 bit file with large areas of subtle tones, like a blue sky, without getting posterization, or printing deep shadow detail without a curves layer to lift those few darkest tones up a touch, now do that to a 16 bit file with 14 bit information and you can push and pull it where you want with no ill effects, render that edit as an 8 bit jpeg and you are golden, send the edited 16 bit file to a printer in 16 bit or 8 bit and you have no posterization, superb tonal control in B&W etc etc.

What you are arguing is if you can't view more than 6-8 stops of DR in a print then there is no point in capturing it, that is patently not true. You capture as many stops of DR as you want and then choose where to put each of those stops in your output.

It is called photography.

64
Landscape / Re: give us a wave
« on: August 05, 2014, 01:10:00 AM »
Not water I'd care to find myself in...

That looks like Sombrero, and nobody goes to Sombrero! Maybe another Caribbean Atlantic coast?

North east Curacao

Right angle, but not really an Atlantic coast! Never got to the ABC's, only to Trinidad and Tobago and St Vincent and the Grenadines that far South.


Impressive call nonetheless.

I've not been to A nor B, but can't recommend C unless you're a diver. The water is phenomenal, but the land is arid (except the north east), desolate, and littered with half-completed structures. It may be worth going to if it's not a pain, but I am from California and I won't be back unless with dive buddies.

Oh yes, I am a diver. I had a very interesting though not very varied diving career mostly in the Northern Caribbean. Saba has the best diving I did in the Caribbean, though I used to take trips out to Sombrero which is also very good if you can dodge the swell as it is so exposed , I believe I worked for the only company that ever ran trips out there and the Anguilla government has pretty much shut that down now.

I have thread the "eye of the needle" and done the swim through on Shark Shoal at 180', those were the days!

If I lived on the West Coast nothing would bring me East to dive, not the Caribbean, not the Red Sea, nothing, it would have to be your local cold water, though I am not a cold water diver, and all the Pacific opportunities going round to Indonesia.

65
Landscape / Re: give us a wave
« on: August 05, 2014, 12:19:06 AM »
Not water I'd care to find myself in...

That looks like Sombrero, and nobody goes to Sombrero! Maybe another Caribbean Atlantic coast?

North east Curacao

Right angle, but not really an Atlantic coast! Never got to the ABC's, only to Trinidad and Tobago and St Vincent and the Grenadines that far South.

66
Landscape / Re: give us a wave
« on: August 04, 2014, 11:40:09 PM »
Not water I'd care to find myself in...

That looks like Sombrero, and nobody goes to Sombrero! Maybe another Caribbean Atlantic coast?

67
Lenses / Re: How resistant are L lenses against the shocks/vibrations?
« on: August 04, 2014, 11:31:48 PM »
I just finished dropping my EF17-40mm and EF24-105mm, simultaneously, from a height of 1,50m and both are done for!  :o

My EF100-400mm on the other side landed (from the same height) on its mount and I am happy to report that it still works, BUT is stuck in the 135mm position!  :'(

The new Zeiss I recently bought bounced of the tree I threw it at and, apart from minor cosmetic damage, works without any problem. That's GERMAN quality for you!


Anyway, I am looking forward to hearing from the rest of you guys  ::)

No it isn't, it is the luck/back luck of the specifics of the impact. I have damaged L lenses comparatively easily and I have failed to impact my 50 f1.4, a lens with an internet reputation for being more fragile than a badly formed egg, hard enough to ever have to send it in to Canon despite spending over ten years in my bag and having been around the world several times.

The problem with heavier metal lenses is they have more potential energy and they dent, lenses with engineering plastic tend to be lighter and although they deform at the instant of impact they return to their original shape instantly. Many of the newer L lenses have a lot of engineering plastic in them.


Well, TELL THAT TO THE TREE!  ::)

No, the tree already demonstrated it to you.................

68
Lighting / Re: Speedlite zoom setting in flash modifiers and camera ISO
« on: August 04, 2014, 11:29:10 PM »
So I did a series of more systematic test on a new set of batteries. First conclusion, the new batteries solved the power issue. As I don't use my flashes that often, I did not realize how slow the recycling was until I put the new battery set. My bad there...

Second conclusion, the walls of the room I inteded to use for occasional shoots are too light and the flash light just bounces everywhere. I knew it would, I just did not expect it would be that bad. The room is about 3m x 4m (9'x12') so its also a bit cramped.

Finally, the wide angle coverage does even out the light significantly and the general output loss is not that bad I think. However, up to 50mm, it does not look too bad. I'll try to post the resulting images and a more thorough analysis tomorrow evening.

Thanks everyone.

Only way to beat that is to use lower power and put the lights very close and baffle them, either grids, flags, snoots etc.

69
Reviews / Re: DxO reviews Sony A7s: king of low light photography?
« on: August 04, 2014, 11:24:11 PM »
I have tried on my OSX machine, but it doesn't play well with my epson 1400 drivers (surprisingly).

Interesting, I have no issues with my Epson 4900 on Apple, but have a Canon printer, an LBP6000, that won't work on it, despite it being relatively new and Canon listing a driver for it, it simply doesn't work.

70
Reviews / Re: DxO reviews Sony A7s: king of low light photography?
« on: August 04, 2014, 09:20:06 PM »
My workflow is so similar to Jrista's that I copied it and put my bits in brown.


1. Do initial import, library management, development processing in Lightroom.
2. Open in Photoshop as ProPhotoRGB 16 bit. I do all work on RAW files in ProPhoto 16 bit.
3. Perform any additional pre-scaling NR with PS, very occasionally I will use Topaz Denoise 5, but very rarely, maybe 1% of the time.
4. Crop and scale to exact PPI and dimensions for desired print target.
5. Perform any additional noise reduction and detail recovery. This is normally a simple curves layer to lighten the darkest detailed areas.
6. Start softproofing ( printer and paper type and rendering intent I find rendering intent crucial on a per image basis), and check for out of gamut errors.
6b. If there are any significant OOG errors maybe narrow ranges of saturation to fit within the papers limitations. I never do this, I don't worry too much about OOG colours, the printers are better at extrapolating than I am, I have seen and done serious OOG tests and the printer almost always does a much better job than we do, but rendering intent is crucial.
7. Save a print copy 16-bit TIFF.
8. Print from Photoshop. Sometimes I'll do a test print on a small 4x6" sheet, I use 8.5x11 and print on half of it, then reverse the paper to print on the other half, my printer takes that as the smallest size. If the 4x6" test comes out looking good from a gamut, sharpness, and detail standpoint, I'll print on the full size paper, which is usually 16"x24" which is my smallest print.


P.S. All on OSX, but I see know reason for it to be any different on Windows.

71
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: 600-ex-rt upgrade?
« on: August 04, 2014, 04:19:51 PM »
Actually, they HAVE recently released an upgrade to the 600EX-RT's, I'm picking them up tomorrow:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1049889-REG/profoto_901092_b1_500_air_location.html

 ;D

(But I'm still keeping my speedlites).


I have been eying the B1 Airs for a little while, and subsequently came across a crazy good deal on a set of Einsteins and accessories that couldn't be missed. I like the Cyber Commander feature set much more than the Air commander, ETTL is still not reported as 100% on my 1DS MkIII's and the cost of everything Profoto is crazy, beautiful kit, but crazy prices. Even a battery is $250! You can get a Vagabond set for that and it will run your computer and charge your iPad and iPhone while powering a more powerful light. But as far as I can see they will get much more useful when they get the HSS enabled, though I suspect that will be a camera by camera walkout that will never include most models. Personally I'd find good HSS worth much more than ETTL in a portable studio light.

But there is a niche for every product in the off camera lighting arena, and I am not saying I won't get the Profoto's at some point, I just don't need ETTL from a fixed, but protable, light source enough to warrant them yet.

72
Lighting / Re: Studio lighting advice for a newbie
« on: August 04, 2014, 04:05:54 PM »
You cannot go wrong with a Paul C Buff light, either Einstein or Alien Bees, and a few modifiers, they hold their value exceptionally well and if you hate it you can get  80-90% of your money back on eBay.

As for modifiers, it depends on what kind of image you like, post some links and it isn't difficult to reverse engineer the lighting of them to point you in the right direction for your needs. But be aware, the shooting environment plays as large a part in the lighting as the lighting does, anybody offering you advice without knowing what kind of images you like and what your normal "studio space" will be is disingenuous, their advice will not help you.

73
Lighting / Re: Speedlite zoom setting in flash modifiers and camera ISO
« on: August 04, 2014, 03:57:49 PM »
1: You need to do your own test with your own gear. Set up the flash and modifier and point the camera directly at it, then take your shot, close down until you see the pattern of the flash in the mod and adjust your zoom to suit.
2: Only for narrow dof images in general. ISO 200 gives your flash, effectively, twice as much power, why not use it? With well exposed subjects iso can easily be used at 400 and 800 even in older cameras, just not for low key stuff. But I already demonstrated that for you http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20523.msg388422#msg388422

Hands on testing trumps all internet "opinions" don't forget at least half the posters on any subject don't have a clue what they are talking about.

74
Lenses / Re: Why are Cine Lenses so expensive?
« on: August 04, 2014, 03:44:43 PM »
which leads me to the next (obvious) question

Is there any advantage for Still Photographers to use cine lenses?

No, none.

For the moving image there are many good reasons to use a collection, or set, of manufacturer movie lenses, for stills shooters none of it applies.

75
Lenses / Re: How resistant are L lenses against the shocks/vibrations?
« on: August 04, 2014, 11:41:35 AM »
I just finished dropping my EF17-40mm and EF24-105mm, simultaneously, from a height of 1,50m and both are done for!  :o

My EF100-400mm on the other side landed (from the same height) on its mount and I am happy to report that it still works, BUT is stuck in the 135mm position!  :'(

The new Zeiss I recently bought bounced of the tree I threw it at and, apart from minor cosmetic damage, works without any problem. That's GERMAN quality for you!


Anyway, I am looking forward to hearing from the rest of you guys  ::)

No it isn't, it is the luck/back luck of the specifics of the impact. I have damaged L lenses comparatively easily and I have failed to impact my 50 f1.4, a lens with an internet reputation for being more fragile than a badly formed egg, hard enough to ever have to send it in to Canon despite spending over ten years in my bag and having been around the world several times.

The problem with heavier metal lenses is they have more potential energy and they dent, lenses with engineering plastic tend to be lighter and although they deform at the instant of impact they return to their original shape instantly. Many of the newer L lenses have a lot of engineering plastic in them.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 145