January 29, 2015, 07:38:03 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 - Sith Zombie

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II news
« on: September 02, 2013, 05:16:17 AM »
For me the specs sounds possible because the price gap between the 6D and 70D is not very big. But is it really possible that Canon introduce a product that is more popular and is reducing the sales of the 70D?

Possibly, the 70D pretty much matches the 7D and replaces the 60D. Anybody looking for a 60D upgrade or a 7D type camera is covered by the 70D, the 7D mkii will appeal to 7D up-graders and those looking for the best crop camera. I don't think the 7Dmkii will take too many sales from the 70D, think of it like the difference between the 6D and 5Dmkiii.

As for the specs... sounds reasonable but a lot of people will be pissed if it uses the same sensor. I'm not knocking the 70D's sensor, it looks to be the best canon crop sensor for awhile and it's good to see them improving the banding but I think people will be expecting/wanting better ISO performance from the 7Dmkii

Canon General / Re: Should I get into this industry?
« on: August 18, 2013, 09:04:47 AM »
Hi, sorry you lost your job.
First off, I would say that if you really want to make a living off photography, now is the best time because you don't have the 9-5 to sap your time and energy. I know a few people who have been in your situation and they ended up being better off, so try to turn a negative in to a positive.

Secondly, Unfortunately the style of photography you do will probably not make you much money, unless perhaps you live in a 'touristy' area and can sell images of the area or portraits of tourists next to landmarks etc and even then you might not make much.

The way I see the industry now is that with film, photographers could make a lot of money because nobody knew how cameras worked or how to develop film etc, so a photographer would have a skills that people were willing to pay for.
Now with digital, the skill set was diminished. People can figure out how the camera works more easily because they can see the results instantly, they no longer need people to process film or print images as they can view on computer screens etc.
Also because digital has made photography more accessible, the market has become over saturated, further lowering the perceived value of photography.

You can still make some good money from stock sites but you have to have a huge catalogue and be constantly adding to it. You also can't just put up loads of landscapes and expect money, you have to do you kinda things blog sites etc will be looking for. So for example a cooking site might be looking for things like heaps of spices or some fresh vegetables to go with an article.

If your good with people, I would suggest wedding photography as people are always going to be getting married for the foreseeable future.

Money can be made with product photography but a lot of small business/ebay/websites do their own nowadays because cameras are so cheap and get them instant results. Sure most are really bad at it but then they'll pay someone a few bucks to spruce them up in photoshop, or again, do it themselves because the tech is cheap and accessible.

but like others have said, if you are good at what you do and work HARD, you can still make it. Just consider that making money from photography is more about being a businessman than it is being a photographer. If you think you can do that, then go for it.

If I were you however, I would start my own design company because that is your real skill, take some business courses or research on the internet.

Anyway, best of luck.

Landscape / Re: Pricing of landscape photos?
« on: August 18, 2013, 08:01:11 AM »
Thanks for the input dr croubie.  I use a local company http://www.posterjack.ca for all my printing and they seem to do a real good job.  They offer a 20x30 print on glossy photo paper for $19.99.  So by that logic asking for something in the $40 to $60 range would be fair.

I should really look into getting a decent quality photo printer for quality test prints, but for now i suppose this is a viable option.
I think pearl or lustre would suit your image though, while glossy would kill it.

+1 I have a large format epson too and I find lustre to work well with a lot of images, especially when people have seen the image on a computer screen. Matt images can sometime seem a bit dull if your used to looking at images from a screen all day, whilst glossy can be too far the other way.
I'm not knocking the other papers at all, as different images work better with different paper types [one of my fav prints is on matt paper] but just stating lustre/semi gloss is probably going to be the safest bet for you.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art Reviewed
« on: August 15, 2013, 06:16:26 AM »
This lens is causing me a dilemma. The gearhead in me wants it badly, and is amazed at its price, but the realist in me can't imagine choosing to use it on a 7D in preference to a Sigma 35mm on a 5D MkII. I desire every new Sigma lens that comes out - they're such lovely things. I wonder if my bank manager would pay for therapy to rid me of this problem.

Same here! I so want to get this lens for f1.8 on crop but being honest with myself, the focal length doesn't interest me much. I would really want wider as I already have a few 'walk around' zooms...... suppose I could sell them tho ;]

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: BMD 4K, EOS C100 or 5D3
« on: August 12, 2013, 09:01:03 AM »
The BMPC 4K looks insane for the price: full frame, 4K. It's definitely the choice for future proofing!
I do photography for work and video for pleasure and the BMPC would be great for the stuff I do [short films] but I think you would really have to know the menus well for it to perform in your line of work. The c100 with it's physical controls might suit you better. The choice basically comes down to something that's ok in terms of features but will serve you well in your line of work, or something that's more exciting and better spec'd but may prove to be 'quirky' in use.
Maybe try out the BM but i'v got a feeling that your heart lies with the Canon.

Also, I wouldn't worry too much about accessories, as no matter what camera you get, chances are you'll end up buying some sort of rig/adapters/accessories.

Technical Support / Re: Not Windows
« on: July 31, 2013, 06:13:38 AM »
an SSD might give your existing Macs a boost (unless you're already using them).

While I'm not a programmer, what I can say is the best decision I made computer wise was dumping apple around 2006 for my wintel machine. Win7pro is polished, fast, and just works.

I used to think that switching from Win to Apple was almost a one-way road, but you are not alone.
My 2007 iMac with Snow Leopard opens the EOS M RAW files only with Canon DPP (Preview and iPhoto are obsolete).  :(  And it's slower than when I'm opening the 12.8 Mpx RAWs from my 5Dc (12bit raw, BTW).
I always thought that my computer should last 7 years, so I'll try to resist.
Options I'm considering: adopting Mountain Lion (and iPhoto 11 and/or Elements) and replacing the HD with a SSD (but CPU and GPU would not change)...

I had Leopard for around 6 years and didn't want to upgrade. It was fine for my existing gear but then I got a new camera and aperture wouldn't recognise the RAW files so I updated to Snow Leopard so that aperture could update [Leopard support pretty much dropped]. After that I decided just to go the whole boss hog and update to Mountain Lion and I'm glad I did. Some of the new features are great and any stuff I don't like, like launch pad, I just don't use. You can also customise stuff to bring back the things you miss from Leopard too, for example I got rid of the springy scrolling on folder boxes and changed expose to how it behaved in Leopard. I'd suggest upgrading Ram to 8gig if you haven't already and with a new SSD then you should be fine.

Canon General / Re: Bad Photography Rant
« on: July 26, 2013, 07:36:52 PM »
Folks, I think this 1st video (in a series definitely WORTH watching), pretty much explains it all, when you need to know what it takes to be a professional photographer:

MWAC Attack-Episode 1: The Camera

Remember, if you wanna be a "Pro", make sure and use the "P" setting on your camera, as that THAT is the professional setting on your cameras.

Of course, most all of the quality folks here on the list knows this already.



ps. Do make sure and give this whole episode a watch, and the next ones are pretty 'informative' too.

... Speechless lol

Abstract / Re: How do you shoot this?
« on: June 21, 2013, 09:15:43 AM »
My vote is for through a mirror at an angle but in this digital age it's possible use various techniques to do something similar in photoshop.

Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 20, 2013, 04:56:43 AM »
I can confirm that a EF 16-50 f/4 prototype exist.

Cool!  :) any news on performance or a rough price?

I haven't had a issue with photoshop on any recent computer, the big thing is to have enough memory.

Dito. I used to run CS5 on a 2007 macbook: 2ghz dual core processor, 4gb ram [667mhz] and it ran great for normal photo editing, even ran ok with half a gig files with a tonne of layers, so I don't think you have to worry about building a monster PC. It ran a little slow with the liquify filter some times and you could forget about 3D but any hardware you buy now will be leaps and bounds above my old macbook, even lower end stuff.

I now have a 13" inch macbook pro: 2.5ghz i5 10gig ram [1600mh] I wouldn't call it a powerful computer but it just flies!
I was going to swap out the optical drive for an ssd but cs6 already opens up in under 3 seconds, do I need it to open any faster?

I would argue that we've reached a point now that you don't really need to worry to much about computer specs, unless your into gaming and HEAVY video/3d work.

Reviews / Re: what utter crap this is.... samyang 24mm TS
« on: June 04, 2013, 09:13:09 AM »
let us first se another test and exemplar first, Im not saying it not can be true that the difference are so big but it looks little bit od .here is lens tip http://www.lenstip.com/372.4-Lens_review-Samyang_T-S_24_mm_f_3.5_ED_AS_UMC_Image_resolution.html

its no blockbusters

Agreed, the digital picture review images look so bad but others look OK, not Amazing but pretty good.

Lighting / Re: Battery Mystery
« on: June 03, 2013, 05:37:50 AM »
Maybe check your battery cover end on the flash? I lost a cover to one of my flash units once so I made a cover from a few pieces of card and some strips of tin foil. Anyway, I didn't know which way the current was supposed to flow so I took a guess. The flash worked but when I checked the batteries they were really hot [burn your fingers hot], so I changed the  foil strips and go it right, the flash worked and the batteries remained cool. Perhaps something is making a connection somewhere and interfering with the correct flow of the current? Check inside the battery chamber and the cover.

Site Information / Re: Membership Approval Now Required
« on: May 10, 2013, 06:15:04 AM »
Fair enough, Everybody hates a spambot. I'll be able to link to my website in a few weeks once its done but don't mind answering a question or something. No maths though! I'm terrible at it  :(.

EOS Bodies / Re: Back to the Future Parts 1/2/3 Canon Strategy
« on: April 29, 2013, 05:31:38 AM »
What does this have to do with Back to the Future?

After reading this thread, I'm gonna "make like a tree and get out of here."

It's *leave*, you idiot! "Make like a tree, and leave." You sound like a damn fool when you say it wrong.  ;)

I figured that if it was a composite then the images were taken from the same area/shoot at least and not completely different locations. Looking at the original image, it appears that most of it was made by just moving areas of it around, the lighting was pretty much natural but just emphasised. I was surprised that the boat was shopped in tho.

Don't you guys think it's a bit crazy that we're at a time when it's hard to tell a real photograph from a shopped image??

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10