October 23, 2014, 01:34:25 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 - Krob78

Pages: 1 ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... 89
706
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:56:00 PM »
Let's get back to the fundamental principle here.

A great shot from a A1400 from a never attempted perspective very close to an animal very difficult to do so, would destroy anything ever done by any super-tele + $$$$$ 1D combo. That's the principle. It's Irrelevant how its done, but that's what makes a better picture. The photographer.

And it would destroy a close shot with a 5D3+some short lens too? Even if it was some stunning dark evening crazy glow lighting and the large sensor of the 5D3 captured more light and gave it some radical low DOF pop???
Although, the gear they used to take Neuro's head shot, wouldn't be convenient to get the image of the Grebe... But it would matter... It would matter because if you tried it, you'd not get the image... but it's great technology and very expensive "gear"...

707
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:53:47 PM »
Ask not, what you can do for your camera.  Ask, what can your camera do for you?  :D  I think some president said that!
Or perhaps it was; Ask not, what your camera can do for you.  Ask, What can you do with your camera!  Hmm..

708
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:52:02 PM »
Ask not, what you can do for your camera.  Ask, what can your camera do for you?  :D  I think some president said that!

709
EOS Bodies / Re: Bye Canon?
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:50:06 PM »
The whole MF vs. 35mm format argument in this thread, went on too long.  I did not read it all, but however much I read...was more than enough...too much.  Why?  Because both sides got redundant.  Camera format first and foremost, is just a personal choice of the photographer.  People are different.  Yet fanboys in forums are very much alike...talk about children flailing their arms around!

I challenge each of you, from now on, to make your point with fewer words, and stop being redundant.  It looks very silly.  If you put as much effort into your photography as you do in typing about your opinions about hardware, you might not care so much about typing the same things over and over.   

Hmm. I never made my responses overly lengthy, just the ones who don't know what their talking about.
Quote
I challenge each of you, from now on, to make your point with fewer words, and stop being redundant.
Well just because it is an argument or heated discussion, the nature of such is going to be redundancy from either or both sides, no?  Making one's point over and over again, employing different words or strategies to try to entice the other to come over from the dark side or at least to get to a point where there is a clear winner, even if it's only in one's own mind?  That being said, a myriad of examples presented in different  forms can somewhat quell the redundancy, yet only on the surface...

710
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:43:42 PM »
Let's get back to the fundamental principle here.

A great shot from a A1400 from a never attempted perspective very close to an animal very difficult to do so, would destroy anything ever done by any super-tele + $$$$$ 1D combo. That's the principle. It's Irrelevant how its done, but that's what makes a better picture. The photographer.

Well, your going to have to prove that one. You need to go get that shot, then prove to me that the only thing that matters to a magazine editor is the simple fact that it's unique. Words aren't enough anymore. Your going so hard against the grain here, so far beyond the point where you could have cleanly exited this debate without all the bumps and bruises, that you now need hard, irrefutable PROOF, actual physical evidence (i.e. your A1400 photo reproduced in a prestigious magazine...oh, say, "Living Bird" of the Cornell Lab of Ornithology).

You can say whatever you want. Doesn't make it true. I don't think you quite understand what it is your debating...and are just debating for the sake of taking the contrarian position? I mean, I can't think of any reason your still continuing. You lost the debate a long time ago.

I'm not saying the photographer is not a critical factor in getting a good photo. On the contrary, that has been core to my point ever since the debate started. You are still, conveniently, ignoring my point. That even when the photographer is as skilled as humanly possible, if you put a better tool in their hands, they will have the capacity to make better photos. The PHOTOGRAPHER is still CRITICAL to that equation...and a skilled photographer, the human mind aspect here, would KNOW about all of the factors I listed in my previous answer. That skilled PHOTOGRAPHER would KNOW that an aesthetically appealing perspective and clean low-noise output isn't going to happen with a wider angle lens, while treading water, with a microscopic sensor, from a few feet away!

No one is going to care that YOU, the great and powerful "photographer", risked your camera, intruded upon the territory of a bird (in rather rude and unethical fashion), and got yourself soaked...in order to get a photo of a Grebe that was "unique". That doesn't matter. No one cares. You aren't going to be getting any props, and in a circle if other bird and wildlife photographers, or even in any group of naturalists, they would probably be quite miffed at your lack of respect for the bird and it's environment. You'd probably get stoned to death for encroaching upon the bird's bubble of comfort and making it fly away in the first place!

Again...you should really quit while your...well, there is no "ahead" anymore, RL. You don't know what your talking about anymore, and I think that is paramount to anyone still reading this thread. Quite before you dig the hole so deep you can't see the rim. It's the less embarrassing, and still honorable, thing to do.
Quote
bird and wildlife photographers, or even in any group of naturalists, they would probably be quite miffed at your lack of respect for the bird and it's environment
Well, there is that!  Funny I was just thinking that right before you posted it!  It is a relevant point, if not pivotal with regard to the bird side of the argument... Sigh...

711
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:35:17 PM »
Willets, Western variety, at Cherry Creek State Park:






(See more full size images at my site)
I see your still having issues getting nice images with that 7D Jon!   ;)  Seriously, very nice!  Thanks for posting!

Ah, this was a better day. My lens is still soft...dropped it again after getting it back, so its softish (i.e. I can't resolve feather barbs anymore, regardless of the distance to the bird...where as before the drop I could.) Scaled down, and carefully processed with LR, Nik, and Topaz, I can extract every ounce of quality possible from them though. I just can't get razor sharp shots, which bugs me every time I go out.

Plus...I got these after spending about 30 minutes acting like a bush. ;) Continuing from the debate with RLPhoto...I was wearing camo, had LensCoat RealTree HD on my tripod, Jobu Pro 2 gimbal, and a LensCoat RealTree raincoat on my lens. The birds moved down shore, both directions, when I scooted up. Took a while before they were satisfied that I was just some kind of odd-looking dead bush, and were willing to get close. About another hour after that, they were comfortable enough to allow me to inch closer and closer. Most of these shots are near MFD...so, about five to eight feet out, maybe ten at the most.

Still...If I had a BETTER TOOL, I wouldn't have had to wait at all...I could have set up shop at a distance the birds were more comfortable with, and started getting good shots right off the bat! Wow, imagine that! :D  ::)
Well, it would have been more convenient wouldn't it! LOL!   Just jesting of course with regard to the images, throwing back to someone's ridiculous remark that 7D is a crappy camera, still irks me!  Every time I see good or great 7D images I have to smile!   ;D

712
Animal Kingdom / Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:31:16 PM »
I found the sky boring and added clouds to make it more interesting.

Do you think this is cheating? I really want to know.

Am very confused. I have made changes but not altered nature. Have I done something wrong?

Thx



oooops - my apologies to sanj, but I was bored this evening.

Maybe passing something like this off as how it really was might be deemed a little 'unethical' !

I hope I haven't given offence by manipulating your image. I have deleted it.

( PS. I think it was Ansel Adams that said '50% of photography is done in the darkroom"
Quote
( PS. I think it was Ansel Adams that said '50% of photography is done in the darkroom"
Shhh, He was thinking it, he didn't really say it!

713
Animal Kingdom / Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:29:46 PM »
I found the sky boring and added clouds to make it more interesting.

Do you think this is cheating? I really want to know.

Am very confused. I have made changes but not altered nature. Have I done something wrong?

Thx



oooops - my apologies to sanj, but I was bored this evening.

Maybe passing something like this off as how it really was might be deemed a little 'unethical' !

I hope I haven't given offence by manipulating your image. I have deleted it.
I think the ambient light is hitting them from the wrong direction... Do you have any skies which would portray the sunset even further to the right?  Wait a minute, did you manipulate this image??  LoL!  Nice!

714
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:27:12 PM »
well It was not  about the motive, its a bridge against the sun, nothing fancy  . It more  about  that I can dig out information from one raw file from sun into shadows with out banding and noise in the shadows. You need two different exposure to do the same with a Canon, I can do it hand held, you must use a tripod. This file are now saved 4 times as a JPG =not optimal.

Ahh and all hope that this thread wouldn't be hijacked by the dynamic range discussion is gone. Please try not to ruin this thread like you have ruined many others...

If you have hdr pictures to post, this is the place to post them. Take the dr discussion elsewhere.
Agreed, just post'em.  We'll let you know how we like'm... They're great to look at!  For what it's worth, Crayola Crayons have a better DR than Walmart brand... but my grand daughter hasn't let that get in the way of her creating art... Bring on some more HDR images!

715
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:23:39 PM »
Quote
...from the exact same spot on shore. No question in my mind that I could have gotten a better perspective

Well if it had been from the exact same spot, it would have had the exact same perspective!  :)


Quote
So now let's see the one taken with a Canon PowerShot A1400 at 90'-100'!  Nice image!

Just to throw a spanner in the works, there has been a rather well mannered thread about this kind of thing http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=12154.0

I can see both sides of this argument, only a fool couldn't, or an argumentative troll who wouldn't. Some photographers can achieve amazing results with comparatively modest equipment, eg, most of these images were shot with a 5D MkII and a 50mm f1.8 http://tamarlevine.com/. On the flip side some photographers wiill always find images they can't shoot due to equipment limitations even when they are using the best currently available, eg, http://www.andyrouse.co.uk/index.php?pageno=6&link=blog&category=7 now those images, however skilled you are, could never ever be shot with a point and shoot, an SX50, or a 4x5 field camera.
I like your spanner!  And I agree!  As I mentioned earlier, both sides win!  It is more convenient and gear matters!  Good for us!

716
Animal Kingdom / Re: Wrong Photography Ethics?
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:20:35 PM »
This is a pretty stupid topic. It's all opinions vs opinions. It's never going to go anywhere. To the OP I like your photo either way, heck put the trees back and add a thunderstorm enter it into a contest and win. Heck if the contest doesn't state you can't edit photos then go for it! Everyone else has access to the same tools as you do. People can take photos of cheetahs if they want to. What's the big deal? No one wants a boring photo, if that's what the OP saw but nature changed before he could get the photo then recreate to how it was in the minds eye. If I bought that PHOTO from the OP I wouldn't care about the edit because looking at it everyday would better my mood. Is the film negative the photo and everything after is a print or copy of the photo? This debate will be even worse 100 years from now, when photography will probably have evolved yet again. How about Instagram are those photos or digital art? Just enjoy life and take photos or whatever you want to call them! Print them share them sell them. Enjoy what you and others create and stop wasting time criticizing!
Quote
This is a pretty stupid topic.
Quote
Enjoy what you and others create and stop wasting time criticizing!
That was a bit critical, no?  :)  Seems like, "I like his image" would have been more apropos!

717
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:13:52 PM »


Red-Winged Blackbird, taken with my 7d/600mm f6.3 - 1/800 iso 160

I didn't crop the image at all just re-sized.
Nice image Magical, good exposure and nice and sharp!

718
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:12:56 PM »


I believe these are Golden-Eyes, but unsure. Used my wife's shoulder as my monopod. Taken with 5d2 w/600mm.

Yes, female Common Goldeneye. Nice little brood she's got there...six strong?
Actually, she may be considered a Bi-pod, no?  Seems to work pretty well for you!  Nice image!

719
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:11:46 PM »
Willets, Western variety, at Cherry Creek State Park:






(See more full size images at my site)
I see your still having issues getting nice images with that 7D Jon!   ;)  Seriously, very nice!  Thanks for posting!

720
HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:
« on: May 09, 2013, 05:07:04 PM »
possible, but you can make/develope  two copies from the same raw file/exposure , one after highlights and one after the shadows and blend them, handhold and no worry about the subject moving or not.
Have to be a blistering fast shutter speed, I believe I've seen it done but the tripod is most certainly the option to go with!

Pages: 1 ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... 89