October 21, 2014, 11:37:07 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 - LetTheRightLensIn

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 262
Sports / Re: Post your best Football shot (American Style)
« on: October 20, 2014, 07:33:13 PM »
A few online:

Sports / Re: Post your best Football shot (American Style)
« on: October 20, 2014, 06:53:28 PM »

very nice set!
i would crop this one a bit to get rid of some of the sideline junk

United States / Re: Is this the norm or outrageous?
« on: October 19, 2014, 07:10:47 PM »
reasonable unless they are doing a total trash job and using poor materials (there are very different types of glass and backing and matting, some backing is not acid free and is really bad and some is museum quality acid free and so on and so forth and on).

framing is horrendosuly expensive, more horrible than you can imagine, truly top quality for 30" range can be practically your entire sum for just a single print, it's hideous

your prices mentioned are actually on the lower side, if anything

what types of glass and materials do they mention?

Don't try to rely on fast fps for headers, the fps are not nearly fast enough, you'll just get ball way before or way after the header. It's not easy to time it yourself, but you should do noticeably better than spray and total pray fps reliance.

But don't be afraid to spray all sorts of bursts as you never know when a arm will fly up and block out a shot badly or whatnot so the more close to key frames of genera action melees you can get the better.

Try to not let the zoom lure you into the ease of shooting too loose, try to keep things framed as super tightly as you can manage. You may wish to keep the other eye open at times to help tracking and keep track of wider goings on on the field, although may be more necessary for American football.

I imagine you are well familiar with the game and that should help. If you have ever played soccer at a decently high level that should really help your shooting the game even much moreso, especially if you were the sort of player who had a great head for the game and always saw where the ball would go next and how things were building.

Oh and set the cams to max frame rate, AI servo. Shoot the 5D2 RAW only to maintain buffer (or maybe you can do jpg only if you don't care about the ultimate in image quality). Not sure what the 60D buffer is, that camera was a bit crippled AFAIK compared to even 50D in some ways, it might need to be shot jpgs only, not sure.

Don't be afraid to fire off hundreds of shots during the game, shooting is free (other than shutter wear, but whatever), so fire away without thought whenever you feel like it.

Deadlines for newspapers are sometimes rough though, you may want to cull as much as you can during half and even during lull points in action, it all depends.

Don't use IS/OS (not unless conditions are utterly dire, like super high ISO and still getting only 1/320th wide open, in which case you are in trouble regardless).

Try to never let the shutter below 1/640th if possible and even going below 1/800th is not so great. If you can do 1/2000th and up that is much better. Tend to favor fear of slow shutter more than fear of higher ISO noise.

It is possible that they might limit you to certain areas to shoot from. Often they let you shoot from the endline from the outer penalty box to the corner and then up the sideline from the corner partway up, sometimes all the way, although usually not from right in the benches area if you are on that side. Sometimes it is free reign (although almost always immediately behind the penalty box or at least the goal is not allowed).

The inner outer endline often works very well. So does from about where you suggested. Sometimes I track up and down the sidelines. If one and only one spot could be used I guess I'd go for the inner part of the outer end line. But I like to also always do at least a bit from around where you mentioned and some tracking up and down when allowed.

I almost might use the longer lens on the FF. I bet the 5D2 has better AF than the 60D. I thought the 5D2 (center point with hidden assists) tracked better than my 50D did. Then just use the 60D for the few times 150mm is still too long on FF. And with 500mm lens reach you should be able to frame reasonably well and manage to get away without the 60D reach. You could swap and do some with each, get some advantage of the 5D2 IQ for all the shots than can be framed as desired and for the better AF and then some shooting with the 60D so you get some of the distant shots with best reach.

It is a POS!  Who cares about a 5K display if it is only sRGB

"5120‑by‑2880 resolution with support for millions of colors"

Millions?  What about BILLIONS... like 1.07 Billion give or take to be exact.

This is the problem I see with most 4K or 4K plus displays, lack of color depth. 

The ASUS PB287Q may only be a 4K monitor but it handles 60x more colors.

All you hear people harp on is Dynamic Range... Dynamic Range... And then you throw away a BILLION colors?

I am sure it is a "nice" display, and it is a "big" foot print.  But I like colors... Lots of colors.

And even if you do get one of the few 1 Billion+ display monitors that are out there, so still need a card that can handle that as well.

Yeah, this is the bigger issue for me. If I am going to spend a lot of money on a new high resolution screen, I want it to be one of the high grade graphics design/photography displays like the NEC PAW line or Eizo ColorEdge. I won't spend a lot of money on a new screen until I can get at least 4k with at least 97% or more AdobeRGB coverage. I also don't think I could live without the really flat even rendering across the entire area of the screen or the clean, crisp colors from a hardware LUT.

You don't need Eizo or NEC for that these days. The Dell Premiere Color UP2414Q UHD screen has 99% AdobeRGB (plus a lot beyond AdobeRGB as well), high bit internal programmable LUT, screen uniformity compensation and it even uses variable direct current driving of the LED backlights instead of PWM. The 24" UHD display from NEC is not a PA series but EA so there is no way to internally calibrate its sRGB calibration mode and something else too was worse and it costs a lot more and it even uses PWM for brightness (although at least it uses a very high frequency). It's odd they didn't make it a PA series but only EA for their UHD display.

It is a POS!  Who cares about a 5K display if it is only sRGB

What is the colour space of the Internet and almost every computer screen? sRGB.

A lot of photo people have wide gamut, although many don't. Most of the better IPS LCD screens are wide gamut.

It's weird that Apple OS is like the only OS that is totally color-managed and yet they are the only company that doesn't make wide gamut displays!

Overall the 5k vs 1080p will make the most overall difference for sure, but don't knock wide gamut. It can make a difference for stuff like fall foliage, golden evening lighting on almost anything, sunsets (sunrises if you are awake), bright color clothing and cars, flowers, brilliantly plumaged birds and those are some pretty top notch subject types to shoot. Plus stuff like emeralds and certain minerals and tropical waters.

Even a simple red rose will clip something horrible on sRGB. (even wide gamut isn't quite enough) In fact the whole stuff you read about digital sensors blowing reds or Canon sensors being notorious for blowing reds- that's all myth. It is sRGB that blows the reds. The Canon sensors capture reds way beyond was sRGB can handle (as do the sensors for other brands). Another myth is that AdobeRGB only gives you extra greens compared to sRGB. It actually gives you a lot more light and bright reds/oranges as well, although most current wide gamut monitors give you even more reds/oranges/purples than AdobeRGB can handle. But yeah sRGB clips reds horribly.

I have never cared for the all-in-one imac design.  I prefer my peripherals to remain separate and easily switchable in case something breaks or there is an upgrade.


5120x2880 pixels: http://www.apple.com/imac-with-retina/

not bad.

But I'd go for the 5k Dell, it will have wide gamut (programmable sRGB emulation mode too of course), programmable high bit internal LUT, programmable screen uniformity compensation, if it follow the path of the UP2414Q it won't use PWM and will use fancier direct current control of the LEDs for brightness dimming.

Software & Accessories / Re: Hello Windows 10
« on: October 17, 2014, 05:51:42 PM »
To be fair installing Classic Shell means that you can negate most of the worst things about Windows 8*. It's still not perfect, and why you have to install add-ons that basic to make things work... I think the people at Redmond just assumed that everybody loves looking at a screen through a sheen of greasy fingerprints...

yeah, it was truly absurd. Holding you arm out all day long to a 24" or even 32" screen, high quality photo screening and just smearing it up, or more likely a low quality garbage screen since I don't know that they make consumer level touch screens with good quality.

not to mention that a mouse is simply better for a lot of stuff anyway

Software & Accessories / Re: Hello Windows 10
« on: October 17, 2014, 05:50:14 PM »
Yup. I've heard (word of mouth only) that win10 would be "the last windows ever", which basically means subscription service vs 1-off payment (as if it won't change ever ever for the next 100 years).

At home I'm on Linux, which I can only define as " interesting" ;-)

Sounds like it's more time than ever to bring back AmigaOS.

EOS Bodies / Re: \
« on: October 17, 2014, 03:39:53 PM »
It will be interesting to see what sort of video comes out of the new Canon RX100 clone. If it is not soft and waxy then it means DIGIC can do video well so long as marketing doesn't have the quality crippled or decides to use amateurish settings. If it is soft and waxy then it won't tell us much.

I mean it's (going back to Canon DSLR video now) not that bad and it looks better than most consumer camcorders used to deliver, but now, unless you shoot a 5D3 with ML RAW the details are a bit mushy feeling and the 'grain' not so natural. Using ML RAW it's quite a nice 1080p though.

Of the Canon DSLRs the 1DX is the only one that puts a bet better detail into things without using a hack.

EOS Bodies / Re: \
« on: October 17, 2014, 03:38:08 PM »
When you are paying thousands of dollars for a modern premium camera that has video as one of its selling points, it had damned well better be achieving an effective resolution in the 1000 line range, because there is no reason why it should not other than the manufacturer using obsolete technology in the thing.

Magic Lantern RAW shows that they get pretty good res and a natural look off the sensor for video. Something goes wrong later on. Clean HDMI out to Ninja not looking crisp shows that it is not the video codec that ruins it.

1. DIGIC is very poor at image processing and produces a soft waxy look (not that they did not use DIGIC for Cxx line but a much older Canon DV chip from their camcorder line instead, so perhaps this is the reason?)

2. DIGIC is OK but marketing has them program it with very amateurish settings, low details, tons of DNR even at ISO100 especially in areas of shadow or low contrast

3. DIGIC is OK and they program it well, but marketing has them apply some Gaussian blur filter right before sending the result to the compression codec or to clean HDMI out

(there may be a trace of softness due to the read out method from the sensor, but it's nothing compared to later losses of detail and blobbing of noise)

Rumours had it that it was a DELL manufactured monitor inside.

Neither Apple nor Dell manufacture display panels. They both use panels made by LG. Get your facts straight.

I'm happy to stay with my monitor for quite a while, only had it for 2 years. It was a lot cheaper than any Apple branded gear, and in no aspect worse.

Funny, the Dell UltraSharp 27" Ultra HD 5K Monitor which has the same screen size, resolution, and almost certainly uses the same display panel as the new iMac, costs $2499.99, or $0.99 (99 cents) more than the iMac. The iMac "display" comes with an entire top-of-the-line, fully spec'ed computer behind it. The Dell doesn't. Get your facts straight.

The Dell will probably start out with large sales then PLUS as mentioned the APple will probably use PWM dimming and probably even low frequency then. It almost certainly won't have wide gamut. Or internal LUT. Or screen uniformity controls.

That said, 5k is exciting all the same and I'd say the difference is certainly more overall noticeable for 4k/5k vs 1080p than for sRGB vs. wide gamut. And it's great to see more and more of this good hi-res stuff out there.

A few weeks ago, I bought a Dell UP2414Q 24" 4K display. I had a 27" for a few years but found it actually too large. I'm mid-40s and don't wear glasses (yet) but my eyes every week it seems are headed that way. I digress. I bought the Dell 24" to match my retina macbook pro. It's a perfect match. And 4K on the 24 is basically like 5K on 27. I'm graphic designer as occupation and photographer as hobby. Colour and contrast on the Dell 24 are great. And it's matte finish. No glossy reflections.

All your apps must be really hard to work with though? There are scroll bars and text in the Adobe suite which currently can't be scaled (AFAIK) and they are already too small even on a regular display. At that pixel density they'd be a nightmare!

And some apps scale a lot better.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 262