October 21, 2014, 11:44:34 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 - Cgdillan

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 20
31
You should take a look at HDR Efex 2.  I have not used Enfuse, but I did use Photomatix for awhile and I like the job HDR Efex does much better.

I actually tried it for a while and was happy enough with it to switch from LR/Enfuse. LR/Enfuse is perfect for large batch processing which is exactly what I do. I don't charge enough to be able to not to batch fusion and have it be worth my time. I do appreciate the recommendation though! Thank you.

32
something looks off with the greens
what camera profile are you using in LR
adobe standard or camera faithfull?
it looks like adobe standard which makes the greens too saturated imo
if you switch it to camera faithfull (before you process them obviously) the greens will be a bit more natural
sometimes i'll even specifically desaturate the green in the HSL tab a bit to take the edge off as they can dominate a shot to the point of distraction.
try also to use the vibrance slider instead of the saturation slider

I actually do usually desaturate  the green and even bring their luminance down. But I could do it further. The greens have been an issue for me. I didn't know anything about camera profiles at all I will look that up right away. I also do use vibrance rather than saturation unless i specifically need to bring everything up.

cool definately try it bottom tab configuration it will say adobe standard in the check box and select camera faithful instead

Thank you I will!

33
something looks off with the greens
what camera profile are you using in LR
adobe standard or camera faithfull?
it looks like adobe standard which makes the greens too saturated imo
if you switch it to camera faithfull (before you process them obviously) the greens will be a bit more natural
sometimes i'll even specifically desaturate the green in the HSL tab a bit to take the edge off as they can dominate a shot to the point of distraction.
try also to use the vibrance slider instead of the saturation slider

I actually do usually desaturate  the green and even bring their luminance down. But I could do it further. The greens have been an issue for me. I didn't know anything about camera profiles at all I will look that up right away. I also do use vibrance rather than saturation unless i specifically need to bring everything up.

34
My $0.02:

(1) horizon line is right in the middle of the picture. I'd like it with more sky.
(2) my favourite of the bunch. You see more of the house, the composition works (for me)
(3) I find this composition a bit awkward. Swimming pool is clipped on the right, and the house is right in the middle of the frame and the sloping horizontals make it look like the image is about to slide out of the left side of the frame. I'd like this more if the picture had been framed with the house on the left hand side (more of the pool, house to the left of the frame). Since that's not possible now, I'd like it cropped closer to the left of the house.
(4) I'd like this more if the staircase were to the right (the staircase directs the "flow" of the picture)

Composition is definitely something I need to work on. I have been finding myself taking photos from every possible angle and spending too much time taking too many shots. With your $0.02 as well as others, these things are coming to my attention. Thank you for your input.

35
Honestly I loved your shots, they're truly amazing and nice angles  ;D .. by my humble expertise in HDR, I'm assuming that you've used HDR photomatix, using photomatix could be a lot of fun but it bothers me the most with the glowing edges on the blending points, after all .. that's how it works .. try lowering " Strength "  so they gradually fade away.

Thank you! I actually used LR/Enfuse... I used to use photomatix and the haloing was far too strong for my taste and the resolution was compromised along with a bad noise that showed up all over the image. Since switching to LR/Enfuse I have noticed much cleaner images and far less haloing. Sometimes you just can't get away from a small bit of halo when it comes to fusing bracketed exposures together.

36
Not much to comment on- I generally like them, especially keeping in mind who these pictures are really intended for (buyers looking for a house.)

For me, the outdoor colors are too vivid and saturated. I like the indoor ones- but the exterior shots I just find a little overwhelming. Particularly the blues, but they don't feel "cool", like the white balance is off. I think there's just a lot of blue, and the overall saturation makes it feel overwhelming. I'd dial that back a bit. Otherwise, the composition looks interesting, helps to visualize the house, etc.

Aha I totally see what you mean... Thank you for the input.

37
Here are a few photos from house I just shot. I'm still learning and respect your opinions if you have constructive criticism to share. Here is the full post on my RE blog: http://www.smrealestatephotography.com/2403-calle-san-miguel-encinitas/










38
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Feedback for first real estate video
« on: April 24, 2013, 09:01:18 PM »
I would definitely practice your glidecam work. It's very wobbly back and forth. Maybe try to balance the glidecam more precisely and it will become easier to work with. Also you might want to consider a pan or slide on the static shots to keep it more interesting rather than halting the movement. Your exposure is nice and the colors look good. I like the sound track.

How to balance glide cam
How to PROPERLY balance Wieldy, Glidecam, Flycam, Laing, Wondlan, etc

39
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon release a Pocket BMCC competitor?
« on: April 11, 2013, 04:14:44 PM »
Great little camera, but S16mm just isn't for me.

This camera coupled with a Speed Booster would be awesome I think

40
EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon release a Pocket BMCC competitor?
« on: April 10, 2013, 12:11:20 AM »
Hahaha Canon releasing something other than 8-bit H.264 for less than $20,000 – not a chance.
Think about it – the EOS M is almost $1,000 – A small RAW camera with the Canon label on it would cost at least $3000, and it would still have line-skipping moire.

Haha. That's what I thought... Lol Well said.

41
EOS Bodies / Will Canon release a Pocket BMCC competitor?
« on: April 08, 2013, 11:17:23 PM »
I think it's a amazing that Black Magic released such a camera and I have been looking to upgrade to something that shoots raw for my real estate work. The sensor is s16, but I'm sure I could find an affordable lens to get wide enough. This really sounds perfect for my RE work. I would be happy to pay Canon more for a competitor maybe even with a slightly larger sensor. Body size is not an issue to me for the most part. It's just the specs I want. And SD Cards! Affordable media. Any thoughts on Canon?

42
5D MK III Sample Images / Del Mar, California, Sunset
« on: April 06, 2013, 03:24:25 PM »
Went out shooting with my girlfriend and her dad and these are a few of the shots I took. Just thought i'd share =-)

Here are the rest: http://www.stockhammedia.com/2013/04/06/del-mar-california-sunset-photography/








43
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« on: April 06, 2013, 03:16:19 PM »
Darn  :(

Imagine if we had shot this on a D800 instead of out dated gear from 2005  :'(

Love this shot!!!!!!

44
also, I dump the footage after the video is complete and the client is happy, so if i keep one 2TB hard drive on Thunderbolt or Esata then I should do pretty well with storage space shooting one house at a time.

45
The camera handles like crap, it's really heavy and even with the handles didn't feel great.  Rent one and check it out, but make sure you try to edit some of the footage, even 60 seconds of footage and you'll see really quick what a pain it is.  Believe me I was as pumped about this camera as anyone and mine actually came in last week but I passed on it.  Might get the MFT in the future but there are just too many issues with the EF.

And some of the posters are giving excellent feedback on the camera itself, but I'm looking at the camera AND what you'll be using it for (which is arguably more important).  You're not doing occasional studio shoots, you're doing real estate videos, which means you'll be shooting a lot and very frequently.  Battery life would also be a big issue in your case, since the internal battery lasts maybe an hour.  Also consider that you won't be shooting real estate videos in 2.5K RAW, it's just going to slow you down way too much, so try and take that spec out of the equation and look at it as just 1080p ProRes.

Fair points, all. I don't find raw as cumbersome as you seemed to. Perhaps my two-year-old machine is faster than the one you had available. The dynamic range of this camera still shows in the 10-bit 4:2:2 encoded files. Again, ProRes or DNxHD puts little extra burden on the workflow than the C100. Perhaps a bit more storage space, but with a benefit.

You point about the camera handling different than a proper video cam or a DSLR is also fair. It is clunky. A shoulder rig, slider, or tripod are a must. Whether Cgdillan uses these anyway is something he must consider.

Curious as to what issues the MFT version overcomes for you, given the issues you claim of the camera? None of those issues are changed in the MFT version. Is it just that the extra benefits of the MFT lenses (e.g., wider and/or faster) helps to further justify putting up with the costs you cite? I can understand that. Otherwise, you seemed very negative on the camera for certain reasons, only then to say that you might get one again in the future when none of those issues will be addressed.

In the end, I agree with you Axilrod. For a day-in, day-out workhorse (perhaps closer to run'n'gun), these issues might outweigh the image. A camera must be practical for its purpose. That's why my initial reaction to the OP was quite negative on the issue. Until I saw what I saw on my monitor. I'm just in love with the image this camera produces.

These are all great points to mention. I've been using my 5D3 for all my video work and for RE video i've been really feeling like I need more DR in my videos. I could care less about the 2.5K since the video will be probably viewed at 720p through vimeo. But the raw codec and extra DR I believe would greatly help my image, as well as my pride in my work. I was pretty turned off at first with all the "issues" the BMCC has, but I have totally fallen for the image it produces. I generally use Tripod, Glidecam, and Slider for stabilizations in my RE videos. I downloaded some test footage from the camera and FCP X actually took the .dng files in there native form wonderfully and the rendered extremely fast. I was very impressed. So I'm thinking towards the BMCC now over the C100 (I was thinking C100 over 5d3 for the extra dr and sharper image) as long as I can get in the house, shoot the proper exposure for each room, and get out. Usually takes about an hour to shoot a house up to 3,500 SF.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 20