January 27, 2015, 09:50:10 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 - RLPhoto

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 239
31
Post Processing / Re: DNG vs. original RAW in the long term
« on: December 22, 2014, 08:41:49 PM »
What are the advantages and disadvantages?

I've converted everything to dng lately as I don't intend to switch away from LR/ACR, it's just too good - and multiple other apps start supporting dng.

Advantages of dng:
* metadata information inside the file, no xmp sidecar
* faster rendering vs. cr2 (if you "embed fast load data")
* you can update the jpeg preview to the post-processing state
* saves 20% disk space right away (if you drop the full res thumbnail that's in the cr2)
* lossy & downsized options while retaining dr and lossless wb adjustment

Disadvantages:
* some post-processing software doesn't support it, namely dpp & dxo
* xmp sidecar of cr2 gets written faster than the whole dng when updating metadata

However, the option to convert cr2 to raw won't go away, if you're not sure you can do it anytime in the future, even with the free Adobe DNG converter.

They are always adding stuff to the DNG converters so converting them now could restrict what future developments would be possible later one. IE: Lens correction tech.

I don't understand that - you can just update an older dng version to the new one.

Unless you're using lossy dng, the "converter" just *wraps* the raw data from the cr2 into a new dng container and adds a new thumbnail and fast load data (if you request it). Absolutely no file information is lost on cr2->dng, you could even write an app to convert it back.

I checked my older 7D files that I sampled in .DNG two years ago(experimenting at the time) and they were lossy compressed. Your right, and I tested a new file w/o lossy compression and I cannot see a difference between the .cr2 and the .DNG.

But I can't help but cringe knowing that the file is smaller somehow and that the converter has to move data around from the original sensor data in the .Cr2. Then again, if we're talking long term, .DNG wasn't really accepted fully by the top camera manufacturers and has no better chance of lasting 20+ years than a .NEF or .CR2. Its still not a ISO standard yet and if I had to choose between the two Multi-national billion dollar companies like Adobe or Canon, I'd chose Canon way before Adobe. The way Adobe has been using their software as leverage to me means that the yet adopted ISO standard .DNG is not free and clear from their control. If anything, its giving more control to adobe because to get the best performance, adobe software will be the best, thus sell more product, and if you have all your catalog in .dng, have fun trying to move to another software workflow. In a way, it could turn into an AdobeRaw format per say.

Another note that some photo competitions require the original raw and a converted .dng could be brought into question. Even though not very likely to occur but another reason to stray away from .dng
http://photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00WQjJ

Long term means trust, and Nikon/Canon has been around alot longer than Adobe.(which still makes the best .dng converter around)

32
Post Processing / Re: DNG vs. original RAW in the long term
« on: December 22, 2014, 02:10:07 PM »
They are always adding stuff to the DNG converters so converting them now could restrict what future developments would be possible later one. IE: Lens correction tech.

I'll be keeping my .cr2s.

33
EOS Bodies / Re: Poll: Most wanted new features for 5D Mark IV
« on: December 21, 2014, 06:51:35 PM »
Built in RT transmitter is not on the list.

34
Software & Accessories / Re: i folded and bought CC :(
« on: December 18, 2014, 01:21:07 PM »
and at least Adobe has offered their package at a reasonable price (finally !).

not if you do video work too

Once upon a time you used to be able to even do something like upgrade InDesign once every three gens and Premiere Pro package (including PS) once every three gens and then add in a stand alone PS upgrade along the way if needed. Or forget the InDesign and just upgrade PP every once in a while and PS extra as needed.

And with the rental model, you can pay them for years, thousands of dollars and then if you quit you have nothing, nada, to show for all that money spent. You don't get to keep anything even if you did it for years and spent thousands.
+1 Finally! I believe you should have written that statement in bold!
+2 I will not adopt CC out of principal. Thankfully,  I'm not in publishing or video because the tools I own can last me for another 4 years easily. Those other professions are pretty much at adobe's mercy and the price hikes will come.

35
Canon General / Re: Canon USA Addresses the Gray Market
« on: December 17, 2014, 04:14:23 AM »
The real issue is this. After a year, I got my 5D3 for 2499$ and at the time I could literally stab the sensor with a screwdriver,  send it in for a new sensor and when I got it back, it would still be cheaper than B&h photo. It's now going on three years since release and the price I paid then is now becoming the normal price for the 5D3. CPS will fix the camera but just don't expect a warranty repair.

So no canon, just sell me a product and don't be artificially making boundaries to push up prices. It will end up with my wallet taking the path of least resistance.

36
Lenses / Re: What would you choose to compliment a 50mm prime?
« on: December 17, 2014, 04:05:34 AM »
16-35mm, 50mm, 70-200mm f/4 combo made the perfect travel setup for me. You don't need exact coverage in between the 50mm and you get a a lot more width with the UW.

37
Lighting / Re: Speedlites - How many are enough?
« on: December 15, 2014, 01:20:54 PM »
Hyper sync - long duration flash over the entire curtain movement
True high sync speeds - standard sync method but @ above 1/250th. (Which is still the best and most efficient but expensive.)
HSS - pulsed flash over the duration of the curtain movement.

I think you misread my comment, all of these methods are ways of syncing at High speeds, hence HSS but the most true form is the traditional method and the others are a workaround.



There is nothing 'true' or 'high sync speed' when syncing above 1/250th or 1/180th or even 1/60th.  HSS is syncing multiple bursts over a curtain movement - where the sync is with the slit being exposed is perfectly timed with the speedlites.  Syncing with a Leaf shutter doesn't involve multiple bursts.

Syncing with a 'slow' strobe or speedlight where your shutter speed is faster than the lights t.1 time is just that, dealing with slow lights.  The issue is that you're not going to get even exposure over the frame, let alone between shots.

Now, with all that said, with the faster studio lights, like Einsteins in the fast mode, or the Bron Move2 packs that'll do a 1/10,000 flash duration, you can 'sync' at 1/125th or even slower, and 'freeze' your subject with light.  Then, all syncing at a faster speed does is allow you to kill the ambient light.

Which for most of my purposes is exactly what I'm setting out to do, such as with a portrait in full daylight, or balancing a portrait subject in open shade against full daylight, or a portrait in full daylight that will benefit from being shot wide-open. With my Einsteins fired with ODS adjusted Odins I get consistent, even exposures at shutter speeds all the way to 1/8000, though usually don't need to go past 1/2000. The Godox Witstro is also clean, even and consistent.

Freezing action with flash is another technique skill-set altogether; both are entirely valid and useful.

Whether it's correctly called HyperSync, High Speed Sync or HSS or Crazy-Fast-Speedy-Sync is immaterial to me. When you understand the characteristics or shortcomings of your chosen method, it simply becomes another tool to expand your creative scope, limited only by your imagination.

-pw

+1
Freezing action is the most crucial and beneficial aspect of any of the "HyperSync, High Speed Sync or HSS" or whatever goofy acronym a company wants to utilize as a promotional tool. Yet no DSLR company has successfully addressed this to date with a camera that syncs at minimum of a 1/1000th of a second with any existing portable flash systems that actually has good light spread, powerful output (above 200w/s), and 1/2000+ t1 durations. And it seems like no other company has figured out a triggering system that works around that correctly and consistently to date. When a DSLR cam company produces a body capable of producing what I mentioned above, the holy grail of camera/ flash system compatibility will have been achieved for EVERYONE. One can only hope, though I'm not holding my breath... :-)
Broncolor Scoro Packs + x100/Phase1 LS lenses. It's just really really really expensive.

You keep posting that, the Scoro 3200 has a full power t1 time of 1/285 sec, the 1600 has a t1 time at full power of 1/535, indeed its lowest power setting, that won't overpower anything but the dimmest ambient, is only 1/10,000 sec and that doesn't make it any better than an Einstein at 1/13,000 sec at lowest power. The problem of fast high powered flash is as much flash discharge time as anything else.

The only way to achieve true high shutter speed sync and flash power is to use electronic shutters and multiple flash heads used at low power.
I don't think you read what I was responding to. You should really read before you post.

He mentioned a camera syncing @ 1/1000th and the flash putting out a 1/2000th duration at or above 200 w/s. Which is quite easily done with a scoro pack.

Not 'quite easily', in Optimal Mode the Scoro S will do 150Ws at 1/2,150 sec, but as Lawliet points out Speed and Min modes also do have colour control via ECTC, this can give you an extra stop, or 300Ws. However, a single PCB Einstein will do over 300Ws at less than 1/2,000 sec in Sport mode for 1/30 the price of just the Broncolor Pack, get two and you have temp consistency too.

There is no need to spend mega bucks to achieve that, but it is very very difficult to get much better flash performance than that for any money. Flash duration is the bigger problem here, very fast shutter sync would be comparatively easy for manufacturers to implement, heck Nikon did it very nicely for Strobists in the D70, you can true sync that via the PC socket at any speed, but, the illumination it gets is still limited by the flash duration times.

So, you could achieve "a camera syncing @ 1/1000th and the flash putting out a 1/2000th duration at or above 200 w/s" with a D70 and an Einstein, which would cost you less than the rental of a Broncolor kit for a shoot.

Leaf shutters are not the answer, they still have shutter petal travel times and at high speeds simply act as a second aperture, light gets through but it is vastly reduced, it is not the true shutter speed, and it determines your subject/flash illuminated dof.
Again he mentioned a DSLR and regardless of what you call a leaf shutter,  it syncs just fine at those speeds. Just like the x100s.

And thanks for pointing out why the Einstein because it just made my previous point better. But again, a scoro pack can and will do those speeds just fine with above 200w/s in duration priority.

38
Lighting / Re: Speedlites - How many are enough?
« on: December 14, 2014, 01:53:26 PM »
Hyper sync - long duration flash over the entire curtain movement
True high sync speeds - standard sync method but @ above 1/250th. (Which is still the best and most efficient but expensive.)
HSS - pulsed flash over the duration of the curtain movement.

I think you misread my comment, all of these methods are ways of syncing at High speeds, hence HSS but the most true form is the traditional method and the others are a workaround.



There is nothing 'true' or 'high sync speed' when syncing above 1/250th or 1/180th or even 1/60th.  HSS is syncing multiple bursts over a curtain movement - where the sync is with the slit being exposed is perfectly timed with the speedlites.  Syncing with a Leaf shutter doesn't involve multiple bursts.

Syncing with a 'slow' strobe or speedlight where your shutter speed is faster than the lights t.1 time is just that, dealing with slow lights.  The issue is that you're not going to get even exposure over the frame, let alone between shots.

Now, with all that said, with the faster studio lights, like Einsteins in the fast mode, or the Bron Move2 packs that'll do a 1/10,000 flash duration, you can 'sync' at 1/125th or even slower, and 'freeze' your subject with light.  Then, all syncing at a faster speed does is allow you to kill the ambient light.

Which for most of my purposes is exactly what I'm setting out to do, such as with a portrait in full daylight, or balancing a portrait subject in open shade against full daylight, or a portrait in full daylight that will benefit from being shot wide-open. With my Einsteins fired with ODS adjusted Odins I get consistent, even exposures at shutter speeds all the way to 1/8000, though usually don't need to go past 1/2000. The Godox Witstro is also clean, even and consistent.

Freezing action with flash is another technique skill-set altogether; both are entirely valid and useful.

Whether it's correctly called HyperSync, High Speed Sync or HSS or Crazy-Fast-Speedy-Sync is immaterial to me. When you understand the characteristics or shortcomings of your chosen method, it simply becomes another tool to expand your creative scope, limited only by your imagination.

-pw

+1
Freezing action is the most crucial and beneficial aspect of any of the "HyperSync, High Speed Sync or HSS" or whatever goofy acronym a company wants to utilize as a promotional tool. Yet no DSLR company has successfully addressed this to date with a camera that syncs at minimum of a 1/1000th of a second with any existing portable flash systems that actually has good light spread, powerful output (above 200w/s), and 1/2000+ t1 durations. And it seems like no other company has figured out a triggering system that works around that correctly and consistently to date. When a DSLR cam company produces a body capable of producing what I mentioned above, the holy grail of camera/ flash system compatibility will have been achieved for EVERYONE. One can only hope, though I'm not holding my breath... :-)
Broncolor Scoro Packs + x100/Phase1 LS lenses. It's just really really really expensive.

You keep posting that, the Scoro 3200 has a full power t1 time of 1/285 sec, the 1600 has a t1 time at full power of 1/535, indeed its lowest power setting, that won't overpower anything but the dimmest ambient, is only 1/10,000 sec and that doesn't make it any better than an Einstein at 1/13,000 sec at lowest power. The problem of fast high powered flash is as much flash discharge time as anything else.

The only way to achieve true high shutter speed sync and flash power is to use electronic shutters and multiple flash heads used at low power.
I don't think you read what I was responding to. You should really read before you post.

He mentioned a camera syncing @ 1/1000th and the flash putting out a 1/2000th duration at or above 200 w/s. Which is quite easily done with a scoro pack.

39
Technical Support / Re: Happy ending...
« on: December 14, 2014, 08:00:18 AM »
Cool. I thought you were a mac user? Maybe a mix up with someone else...

40
Lighting / Re: Speedlites - How many are enough?
« on: December 14, 2014, 07:57:40 AM »
Hyper sync - long duration flash over the entire curtain movement
True high sync speeds - standard sync method but @ above 1/250th. (Which is still the best and most efficient but expensive.)
HSS - pulsed flash over the duration of the curtain movement.

I think you misread my comment, all of these methods are ways of syncing at High speeds, hence HSS but the most true form is the traditional method and the others are a workaround.



There is nothing 'true' or 'high sync speed' when syncing above 1/250th or 1/180th or even 1/60th.  HSS is syncing multiple bursts over a curtain movement - where the sync is with the slit being exposed is perfectly timed with the speedlites.  Syncing with a Leaf shutter doesn't involve multiple bursts.

Syncing with a 'slow' strobe or speedlight where your shutter speed is faster than the lights t.1 time is just that, dealing with slow lights.  The issue is that you're not going to get even exposure over the frame, let alone between shots.

Now, with all that said, with the faster studio lights, like Einsteins in the fast mode, or the Bron Move2 packs that'll do a 1/10,000 flash duration, you can 'sync' at 1/125th or even slower, and 'freeze' your subject with light.  Then, all syncing at a faster speed does is allow you to kill the ambient light.

Which for most of my purposes is exactly what I'm setting out to do, such as with a portrait in full daylight, or balancing a portrait subject in open shade against full daylight, or a portrait in full daylight that will benefit from being shot wide-open. With my Einsteins fired with ODS adjusted Odins I get consistent, even exposures at shutter speeds all the way to 1/8000, though usually don't need to go past 1/2000. The Godox Witstro is also clean, even and consistent.

Freezing action with flash is another technique skill-set altogether; both are entirely valid and useful.

Whether it's correctly called HyperSync, High Speed Sync or HSS or Crazy-Fast-Speedy-Sync is immaterial to me. When you understand the characteristics or shortcomings of your chosen method, it simply becomes another tool to expand your creative scope, limited only by your imagination.

-pw

+1
Freezing action is the most crucial and beneficial aspect of any of the "HyperSync, High Speed Sync or HSS" or whatever goofy acronym a company wants to utilize as a promotional tool. Yet no DSLR company has successfully addressed this to date with a camera that syncs at minimum of a 1/1000th of a second with any existing portable flash systems that actually has good light spread, powerful output (above 200w/s), and 1/2000+ t1 durations. And it seems like no other company has figured out a triggering system that works around that correctly and consistently to date. When a DSLR cam company produces a body capable of producing what I mentioned above, the holy grail of camera/ flash system compatibility will have been achieved for EVERYONE. One can only hope, though I'm not holding my breath... :-)
Broncolor Scoro Packs + x100/Phase1 LS lenses. It's just really really really expensive.

41
Photography Technique / Re: What can old-school photogs do better (or not)?
« on: December 13, 2014, 06:47:01 PM »
Composition.

Nope - definitely not an "old school" attribute/skill.

Although I'm in my fifties, I only started serious photography in 2006, yet - and it's not a big deal (good composition is not difficult) - my compositional sensibilities are as well-rounded as anybody's.

A skill not absolutely hindered by my digital-only photographic experience.
Nope. Composition is one of the oldest school attributes of all time, not even including photography but back to painting. So no, if you'd like to argue that, painters would ultimately be better in composition. Not saying that digital has made composition worse but it's been watered down by the amount of frames lending to more loose snapshots.

42
Photography Technique / Re: What can old-school photogs do better (or not)?
« on: December 13, 2014, 08:17:50 AM »
Composition.

If we really think about it, no one has ever had a full lifetime career from shooting digital. It just hasn't been around long enough but there are plenty of people who lived and died never ever knowing what a .jpg was or a .cr2 file could be, and produced impeccable work for a lifetime.

Film even when I was a teen, cost some monies and I was much less of a snap shooter then.

43
Lighting / Re: Best way of setting up the lighting
« on: December 12, 2014, 11:59:31 AM »
That's like saying which is the best way of setting up the best pie. There is a lot of great pies and they're all different. The best way to narrow down is to find a style you like and build on that.

44
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Co-worker dumps $5k on Nikon
« on: December 08, 2014, 01:42:44 PM »
Dilbert now why would you go posting something like that on a Canon forum. ::) ::) ::)

45
If you think the second image is an improvement then we are talking about different things.
+1 That second image is quite horrid.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 239