« on: January 09, 2014, 04:36:59 AM »
Great! Now all I need is 7000 dollars.
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.
Alan, thanks for posting these results!Btw (hint, hint :-) ... unless shooting jpeg only use full iso stops, iso 320 is really iso 400 underexposed, iso 640 is iso 800 underexposed, you gain nothing by this but only lose dynamic range.
Do you have data to support that assertion? You didn't respond previously…
Btw (hint, hint), Bill Claff's data suggest that you're wrong, and that using ISO 160-320-640 gives less noise (as AlanF indicates) and also more DR than the 1/3-stop higher full stop increments of ISO 200-400-800.
As I stated in the other thread, it seems that from a noise as well as a DR standpoint, you're better off using multiples of ISO 160 than ISO 100 (unless you're using a 1D X, which has smooth noise and DR curves, unlike the jagged ones of other recent Canon sensors).
Neuro, this item definitely deserves some research - I'll try to shoot some high DR test shots this weekend at the various ISOs (on my 5DIII) and then run them through a battery of tests with the tools I have.
"Re: Black & White
« Reply #231 on: January 06, 2014, 12:28:44 PM »
Quote from: Tonywintn on January 01, 2014, 08:36:31 AM
My brother's Harley
Why did you opt for HDR?
I like how the HDR highlights the chrome and also all of the detail it shows in the tires. I also like how it made the shadows look.
Chappaquiddick Fog by jwilbern, on Flickr
The ping-pong champion in NYC East Village
www.peopleofakind.com is a street photography project.
It is collection of interesting faces, clothes, looks and styles.
It is about the way people present themselves to the world.
Each approach is DISTINCTIVE,
each message is unique,
each person is ONE of a kind.
A couple of shots from a festival in december. Both of them shot with 5D III and canon 50mm 1.4 (the only lens I had with me)
My brother's Harley
...make sure you do a shoot int he first few days of the baby. At that time you can pose them in anyway and they will sleep through it and not move.
After about 2 weeks they start to stretch out, so don't miss that 'newborn curl'.
EOS 1D X, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM @ 47mm, 1/250 s, f/6.3, ISO 400
I think Rogers's definition of a plastic vs. a metal mount differs from how most people think about those terms. For most of us, we're talking about the bayonet parts - the 'teeth' that lock into the mount on the camera.
The EF-S 18-55 on the left has a 'plastic mount', the EF 17-40L on the right has a 'metal mount'. Very few of us disassemble lenses, so we have no idea what's behind that mount surface. Roger is talking about how the screws that that attach that visible surface piece to the lens are connected - do those screws go into metal screw-holes that are attached to the frame of the lens, or are the screw-holes plastic?
'Plastic' can be quite strong, so for a 'light' lens (most lenses under 100mm, with the exception of the 'magic cannonball' 85L), I agree with Roger that I wouldn't expect any issues, and 'professional' could apply. However, for the bayonet 'teeth' of the mount, plastic wears down more easily than metal (vs. the screw-holes, which aren't subjected to routine 'wear'). That means a lens with a plastic mount (as I'd say is the common definition pictured above, not Rogers's use of the term), would be able to tolerate fewer mount/unmount cycles than a lens with metal bayonet teeth. Since a professional lens would be expected to last years and most 'pros' own several lenses and change them frequently, it makes sense to associate a metal mount (as pictured above, regardless of how it's screwed in) with 'professional' build.
I find the 17-55mm f2.8 IS to be an excellent performer. (...) For the money I can't think of a better lens than the 17-55mm f2.8 IS for an APS-C walkabout lens; if it's not enough I'd upgrade to FF.
I received and email today from "Outdoor Photographer" soliciting a free class covering family portraits. I have not taken the online class yet, but I intend too and I wanted to share the link to the class with the CR community. I'm sure most of you are accomplished well beyond what this class will teach, but it's free.
Here is what I can copy out of the email:
Enhance family portraits and bring out the best in your subjects with expert instruction! Join author and professional photographer Kirk Tuck in his new FREE online class Professional Family Portraits, and discover the essential skills for successful family photo sessions.
Plus, sign up for Professional Family Portraits and you’ll also learn quick, effective strategies for transforming any room into an uncluttered studio—even a garage!
This interactive online class offers all the benefits of an in-person seminar from the convenience of your home. Every lesson is packed with invaluable information that will take your skills to the next level—no time wasted! Kirk will critique your photos and answer any questions you have, and with class access forever, you can learn at your own pace and revisit techniques before your next shoot.
From fast-moving toddlers to mature adults, you’ll learn advanced strategies of family portraiture with Kirk’s favorite techniques for lighting, posing and composition. Discover fail-proof ways to take adorable shots of even the most impatient little ones, and master shutter speed for crisp, blur-free shots.Use foam core, umbrellas and bounce flash to create ideal lighting in any setting, and explore broad and short lighting for warm, engaging portraits.
Commercial photographer Kirk Tuck has photographed many extraordinary people, from President Bill Clinton to Academy Award winner Renée Zellweger. He’s also authored several books including Photographic Lighting Equipment: A Comprehensive Guide for Digital Photographers, Minimalist Lighting: Professional Techniques for Location Photography, and Commercial Photography Handbook: Business Techniques for Professional Digital Photographers.
Join Kirk as he moves outdoors and guides you selecting a location and directing poses for a large group. Then, discover step-by-step post-processing strategies to remove blemishes, soften wrinkles and adjust color cast to ensure your portraits have professional polish.
Sign up for Professional Family Portraits for free, and take natural, high-quality photos that preserve precious moments in time.
Also, I'm not advertising for this site - just pass along information for a free class for the interested.
I was trying to be respectful of the person, whilst showing my disrespect for the example. Obviously I succeeded, sorry.
As for the "rule" well like all rules it is meant to be broken, but only for a reason and only effectively when done deliberately.
The viewers eye will always try to connect tangential edges and/or keys to form satisfactory, to the brain, patterns. The eyes are almost always key on portraits so in group portraits the brain tries to connect the dots, if they are on the same level the brain stops at that line and struggles to get past it.
Whilst this comprehensive and very formal approach is not, generally, a "look" we often shoot for now, the core lighting and posing tips found in this series of pages is a bible that has more common sense and experience than anybody here can claim to have, I am not ashamed to say I refer to it prior to a shoot with an unfamiliar grouping, look at chapter 8. For a more modern slant and interpretation look at number 4 here.
Zeltsman does state you can put peoples faces on the same height if they are separated by another body, my experience is that the body has to be very distracting to brake the brain connection of a strong line. Certainly if it is the two anchoring figures, oldest or outside pairs, it doesn't work, kids inside a grouping can work.
Only trying to help, sorry if ti was too antagonistic.