December 21, 2014, 01:28:34 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 - cayenne

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 82
391
I make a decent income from my micro-stock sales. You really need to find niche markets because almost everything under the sun has been shot.

Also prepare for rejection... Alot of it.

LOL, I am ready for rejection.....and I don't expect to get rich off this.
But mostly jumping for fun,and would be thrilled if someone actually wanted to buy something I shot.

I was looking on istockphoto...and it appears that the video area, is one area that isn't as saturated as the stills....thinking of trying for some of those too.

C

392

Have you actually used a Windows Phone 8 device? They are certainly not a joke, and after owning several generations of iPhone, I much prefer the Metro experience. The app gap is shrinking fast, and most of the apps I want are already available, and those that aren't are either coming, or I can write myself. I'd also point out that as the Android vs. iPhone battle has raged, iPhone has been losing, while Android and Windows have been gaining. Windows market share is about doubling every year, particularly with the Nokia Lumia phones. Again, I think people who skip past a Lumia just because its Nokia or just because its Windows are short changing themselves.

No point in having that argument really, not going to win anything.
I find the 'apps gap' irrelevant in about 5 mins I'd downloaded (free) every app I'm likely to need on my phone. (Nokia 925 win8)

I think what Nokia are doing is facinating, apart from IQ what I want to see improving substantially though is focus and shutter lag.

Shutter lag on an electronic shutter has always been an oddity to me. Is it simply because most smartphone cameras (and, for that matter, P&S cameras) insist on making a cutsie and unbelievably annoying little fake shutter click when people press the button? I figure, assuming the lens is focused, taking a picture should be near instantaneous...

If I recall correctly, at least in the US...the sound was MANDATED by law, to foil upskirt photographers that were taking pics of chicks walking around in skirts without them knowing.

Apparently enough of a ruckus was raised and it was mandated that cameras on phones make a sound when they were activated.

C

393
I just read some of the reviews on the Lumia 1020. I have to say, from a photography standpoint, I am REALLY impressed. It finally brings the true PureView 808's 41mp sensor, the 6-element Zeiss lens from the 925, and full Xenon flash to a phone pretty much built for photography. Their pro photo software looks rather nice, giving you complete control over all the standard aspects of exposure (i.e. want to do a long exposure and blur people walking by...you can). I love the fact that it has the extended battery "grip" accessory, too.

http://www.nokia.com/global/products/phone/lumia1020


So, does this mark the true end of the point and shoot, and the beginning of full blown photography phones with all the features we *photographers* have come to expect from an actual camera? To date, phone cameras have been geared more towards the instagrammer crowd...the Lumia 1020 seems to be positioned more for pro photographers who want something simpler, but still just as capable, for a handy every-moment alternative to a DSLR.

Is it only me who thinks this?

I don't think there is much of anyone (camera or other phones) that will have much to fear from competiton from this phone, as long as it is running Windows.

 ;D ;D

Cayenne

Have you actually used a Windows Phone 8 device? They are certainly not a joke, and after owning several generations of iPhone, I much prefer the Metro experience. The app gap is shrinking fast, and most of the apps I want are already available, and those that aren't are either coming, or I can write myself. I'd also point out that as the Android vs. iPhone battle has raged, iPhone has been losing, while Android and Windows have been gaining. Windows market share is about doubling every year, particularly with the Nokia Lumia phones. Again, I think people who skip past a Lumia just because its Nokia or just because its Windows are short changing themselves.

So far, I've not been able to stomach ANY version of Metro, no matter the platform it is on...I think M$ is really shooting itself in the foot with this, and it is showing with Win8 sales.

But to each his own...I prefer to play with Linux and OSX these days, and only run windows (win7) on VMs for apps that absolutely won't run on anything else.

But whatever pleases a person.

I have been curious, however, who the guy was that was buying the Windows phones....nice to meet you!

:)

394
I just read some of the reviews on the Lumia 1020. I have to say, from a photography standpoint, I am REALLY impressed. It finally brings the true PureView 808's 41mp sensor, the 6-element Zeiss lens from the 925, and full Xenon flash to a phone pretty much built for photography. Their pro photo software looks rather nice, giving you complete control over all the standard aspects of exposure (i.e. want to do a long exposure and blur people walking by...you can). I love the fact that it has the extended battery "grip" accessory, too.

http://www.nokia.com/global/products/phone/lumia1020


So, does this mark the true end of the point and shoot, and the beginning of full blown photography phones with all the features we *photographers* have come to expect from an actual camera? To date, phone cameras have been geared more towards the instagrammer crowd...the Lumia 1020 seems to be positioned more for pro photographers who want something simpler, but still just as capable, for a handy every-moment alternative to a DSLR.

Is it only me who thinks this?

I don't think there is much of anyone (camera or other phones) that will have much to fear from competiton from this phone, as long as it is running Windows.

 ;D ;D

Cayenne

395
I was on Getty for 2 years (minimum contract) keep the images generic, keep brands out of them, ideally keep people out of them (unless you've got a model release) do you have a specific photographic interest, see if that plugs any gaps in their portfolio. 

My commision was about 20% of the sale, one image (a close up of a sparkler) sold quite well and helped me out at Christmas etc and the others did sell (one was of a local bridge, a notorious suicide spot, so my image was picked up by a few magazines etc after a double suicide by two young girls, don't quite know how I feel about that, I felt a bit grubby, need to be more mercenary I think, or keep my photography for me)

Don't expect to get rich.  Or even moderately better off within a reasonable time scale.

My getty experience paid for a couple of lenses.  Wouldn't repeat it.

Thank you for the reply!!!

Were the shots of the suicide point...editorial ones vs the normal stock images?

I'm not planning to get $$$, but just seemed an interesting and possibly fun way to just get started selling images...

Thank you,

C

396
Lighting / Re: Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT - I'm impressed!
« on: July 15, 2013, 11:57:08 AM »
I have two of them, but when I set Master on camera and Slave off camera, I cannot get the Master to also flash, only the Slave.  On a 5D Mark III.

Hmm...check your settings...

I have 2x of them, and depending on how I set the master on camera, I can have it flash same times as the slave, or just set the slave to fire.

There is a setting on the flash where you can tell master to fire or not fire and just control the slave....

cayenne

397
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:
« on: July 15, 2013, 10:09:25 AM »
Some HDRs I took in Bethlehem, PA!
More goodies at dlheidemann.com! Thanks everyone  :D










Very nice!!

Industrial stuff really seems to 'shine' with HDR....

C

398
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: High noise at low ISO
« on: July 12, 2013, 04:40:21 PM »
Yes, I was using in camera metering.

I'm just now learning about the histogram.  I'd gotten the expose to the right advice on my stills, but there I was shooting at high ISO, and was underexposed.

I didn't think to find how to see the histogram for video.  I'll give that a shot.

Trouble is, I have a whole cooking video shot and edited, that I don't know how to finish grading without it looking like crap.
:(

Everything is slightly underexposed...so, I have to raise exposure.

Yes, the blown out I referred to...the scopes were peaked out up top.

Any suggestions for salvaging my current shoot? It is going to YouTube for HD....otherwise I guess I'll just have to live with this one being noisy.

But man...I have yet to get a decent looking video out of the 5D3 so far...best one done was the first one that used the standard setting.

OH well, I'll keep trying...thanks for the ETTR advice and the histogram on the video, I'll try that next!!!

cayenne

A trick that MIGHT help with the noise, especially if it is color noise, if you haven't tried it already: In Resolve, add chroma blur. To do this, you must create a layer node by first creating a new serial node (from Node 1 in the attached image, adding Serial Node 2). Then add a layer node (the Add Layer Node adds node 4 and the Layer Mixer). This creates a diamond-shaped set of four nodes, with the one on the left being the last node you had, which splits into to nodes, then comes back together in the layer mixer node.

Right click on the layer mixer node to set its composite mode to "Add". This brightens the image, but isn't actually what we're trying to do. Go back to the top node  (node 2) and set its saturation to zero. Now go to the bottom node (node 4) and set its luma to zero (do this going to the Primaries tool and setting the Gain's Y channel as low as possible: 0.01, I think).  Now you have a separate luma node (node 2) and a chroma node (node 4), which are added together by the layer mixer. Go to the chroma node and use the blur tool to add a blur to the chroma channel. This effectively blurs the colored noise and leaves only the luma noise. Therefore, depending on what kind of noise you have, it can be very effective.

If the Neutral or Standard picture styles worked, why go to Cinestyle? I have an on-again, off-again relationship with Cinestyle myself. I sometime love it until I hate it and then use Neutral for a while, only to be lured back to Cinestyle... until I hate it again. In the end, the 8 bits of data just aren't enough.

Thank you!!
I'll give this a try!!

Well, I just don't want to shoot out of camera for video...and the things I've seen that were done with the 5D3, especially real movies, just POP, and from what i've read, it was done with these flat cinestyle profiles, and I'd read where Resolve (a tool I'd love to learn) would be what they use to get these great, sharp vibrant (or bleak depending on the grade you are going for) images....

I want to be able to do that.

Thanks for the advice...sure, I get frustrated at times, but I'm learning.

I sure hope ML can get the RAW out of the 5D3 soon, and I think with that, I can have much more luck with Resolve to do the color then edit....

C

399
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: High noise at low ISO
« on: July 11, 2013, 10:09:31 PM »
Cayene - when you say, "blown out", do you mean that the whites are clipped? Specifically, have you lost detail in the highlights? In Resolve's scopes, this would show up as a straight horizontal line at the top of the Waveform monitor or straight vertical lines at the right of the histogram.

How did you expose in camera? Were you relying on the 5D's exposure meter to hit the center (or 1 stop below, when underexposing)? I have found that Cinestyle really needs to be exposed by ignoring the meter, looking at the histogram and overexposing (commonly called "expose to the right" or "ETTR" for short),  but being careful so that nothing important is clipped (i.e., no vertical line showing up on the right side of the histogram). This is really easy when there is no highlight in the scene that SHOULD be blown out. If there is something in the scene that should be blown out, such as shooting directly at a light source or a reflection of a light source, then that should show up as clipped. Once I got used to using the histogram, I could figure out what was clipping and what wasn't. Basically, the histogram gives you more info than the light meter and you expose what you want.

When using ETTR, the image will look like crap prior to color correction. But, after you bring down the shadows (and perhaps the mids) and add contrast, it should look very good, assuming no important highlights were actually blown out or clipped. In essence, you are pushing the noise to black by doing this.

By underexposing and then lifting the exposure in post, you are adding digital gain, which will increase the noise, not decrease it. You want to go the other way: overexpose and then decrease the exposure in post. This reduces noise. As I said above, the catch here is to not overexpose so much that you lose the highlight detail.

Yes, I was using in camera metering.

I'm just now learning about the histogram.  I'd gotten the expose to the right advice on my stills, but there I was shooting at high ISO, and was underexposed.

I didn't think to find how to see the histogram for video.  I'll give that a shot.

Trouble is, I have a whole cooking video shot and edited, that I don't know how to finish grading without it looking like crap.
:(

Everything is slightly underexposed...so, I have to raise exposure.

Yes, the blown out I referred to...the scopes were peaked out up top.

Any suggestions for salvaging my current shoot? It is going to YouTube for HD....otherwise I guess I'll just have to live with this one being noisy.

But man...I have yet to get a decent looking video out of the 5D3 so far...best one done was the first one that used the standard setting.

OH well, I'll keep trying...thanks for the ETTR advice and the histogram on the video, I'll try that next!!!

cayenne

400
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: High noise at low ISO
« on: July 10, 2013, 11:39:17 AM »
The Mark III has a lot of noise in the shadows (high read noise) at low ISOs. 500 ISO is a digital push, brining the blacks up. Cinestyle further raises the blacks.

This looks underexposed. Did you meter correctly? Not in-camera but through an incident meter. The internal meter is not accurate for cinestyle. Looks nicely lit and composed, but the underexposure will get you. HTP further exacerbates this issue, and it's there to some extent on all Mark III video, even raw.

I think I have the same problem.
ugh.
I had been playing with Marvels Cinestyle..and early test seemed to show if I slightly underexposed I had lots more room to try to use Resolve to bring up exposure, and get good color saturation, etc.

I'd gone through my whole video on Davinci Resolve (edits done on FCPX), and it looked great.
I brought it back to FCPX...and most of it looks good, except anywhere with dark/black is highly noisy, I mean really bad.
:(

I can't seem to find a happy medium. When I exposed in camera for proper exposure, it always seems things get blown out, so, I tried underexposing by about 1 stop on everything...but now full of noise.

I didn't think the 5D3 had noise problems till you got in high ISO? Or is that just with stills?
I shot everything in multiples of ISO 160, trying to keep  it below 800 -640 as a last ditch high value...most of it was 480 and below.

*sigh*

this is getting frustrating, I desperately want to try to shoot with a cinestyle and learn color correction and color grading, and get great images like I've seen others get out of the 5D3, but I've not hardly gotten anything near what the baked in Canon Styles seem to result in....I just don't know what I'm missing.

I have all my lights matching color temp, I have decent lighting, good WB...and yet, my images look like they came out of an early edition iphone or something.

:(

cayenne

401
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? 

  8)

402
Hi all,

I have footage I took with my 5D3. I used the Marvels Cine style. I slightly underexposed and footage looks flat and great.

I transcoded from ALL-I to Prores...due to a workflow I found that worked from FCPX -> Resolve doing this method...it won't work other wise I've found.

I went through it all, using Davinci Resolve 9 Lite, I mostly boosted highlights, lowered mids and did some slight WB to some shots that needed it. I sharpened a bit and saturated to make things look nice...and they look great it seems in Resolve.

I exported XML and imported that into FCPX...and while the colors and exposure look great...in dark areas (like my shirt I wear in the video) there is a hideous amount of noise.

I'm new to color grading...what steps would you guess that I'm doing that are adding all this noise?

Thanks in advance,

cayenne

403
HI all,

A couple weeks ago, I saw an interesting class on Creative Live...about making money with micro stock, like with iStockPhoto.

I was curious if anyone on the list here sold photos through this, or other stock image sites...if so, what are you general thoughts?

If you would, could you give advice to someone who would just be starting..how to make you first images acceptable for the initial application to become a contributor to the site?

What site do you like the best and why? Is there a money difference between them? Do you just do stock photos or have you done video too?

Just looking both for comments on the game, and any advice you would be willing to part with to a noob that is thinking it might be fun to try.

I'm sure that the big money was done a few years ago early on, but I'd just be thrilled to sell a couple photos, and if it turned out to be a little beer money, well it would justify all the tax write offs I do with my company on the photo equipment so far....etc.

Thanks in advance,

cayenne

404
I have been looking into possibly trying to become a contributor on istockphoto, and their site says they accept this particular app fully:

http://www.applicationgap.com/

I've yet to every actually purchase any type of content or app from Apple or Android stores...but I might go for this one.  Unfortunately you have to buy it twice if you want it on both platforms, but I figure $20 for the two of them, might be worth it for me....

cayenne

405
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:
« on: July 02, 2013, 02:04:25 PM »
So many great pictures!

A humble offering taken in Chicago.

Single Image.  (Lightroom -> Photoshop for perspective correction -> Nik HDR Efex for Tone Mapping -> Lightroom for HSL)

I used NIK for mine too.

I really like the concept of this image..with the clouds and all...and please take this advice as coming from a noob myself, but I might suggest you go back and do a little adjustment, to make the halo-ing around the building a bit less noticable....unless that is what you were going for.

Again, I like the image overall...but the haloing just catches my eye a bit much and think you might benefit from cutting that back a little?

Hoping this is take only as constructive criticism!!
:)

cayenne

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 82