August 27, 2014, 05:25:09 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 - dave

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9
16
Portrait / Re: Joshua
« on: September 16, 2013, 07:45:40 AM »
This one shows real character and grabs your attention.

17
Portrait / Re: Self Portrait
« on: September 16, 2013, 07:43:24 AM »
Fantastic work!

18
Black & White / Re: A Light Read
« on: September 15, 2013, 09:07:41 AM »
Well, colour me stuffed!

My interpretation was different originally but with that story it is pretty impressive. Shows how different my usual reading places are to some people's.

19
Black & White / Re: A Light Read
« on: September 15, 2013, 06:02:04 AM »
Hi,

I like the panorama you posted, however for me this image is too staged. Reading is an immersive pastime. I am not sure how staging like like this does it justice.

It has the sense of a photo in which you were so focused on tehnique you forgot about making it interesting. I do really like the way it is lit, especially the book, although I would have liked such a portrait to show the person's face just a little more.

That is just my thoughts, with the best of intentions,

Dave

20
For video work I don't see the point in AF discussions. Your preference should be for a focal length range, which works well in bars.

As a zoom I would recommend the 16-35mm f2.8 so that you are wide enough and still have some possibility to change focal lengths, but your 17-40mm should fill this role in a similar form, so there's no need to purchase anything in a hurry. Using your 24-105mm you will have plenty of flexibility towards longer focal lengths.

I wonder: How much would you be willing to swap lenses to get the better color rendering of say a 50mm f1.2?

+1

A shorter focal length has the extra benefit of being easier to manage focus with. You could try renting a Zeiss 35mm 1.4 or 21mm f/2.8. In my experience manual focus with Zeiss lenses is a more user friendly experience.

The 16-35mm is also a good choice as suggested above.

If you are going to use a longer focal length and people are going to be involved in the footage then practice, practice, practice in the meantime.

21
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: If you plan to upgrade your camera, read
« on: September 12, 2013, 09:43:34 PM »
Signed in just to comment about the iPads :)

Watched a lady with her brand new iPad with the built in case taking a picture of a birthday cake.  She was holding primarily by the case, case released, iPad fell in cake.

I'm glad people photograph with iPad's.  It's very entertaining to watch!

Did you pull a smartphone out and take a photo of the Cakepad? That sounds pretty funny.

22
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Never let it be said...
« on: September 12, 2013, 09:39:58 PM »
They are not oversharpened. They are just instagrammed. Haven't you seen the new pointillist/sandpit blended filter combo. ;D

23
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: If you plan to upgrade your camera, read
« on: September 12, 2013, 07:47:02 PM »
About iPads (didn't want a massive nest of quotes).

I tend to agree with Don. My fiancee is an illustrator and she loves her iPad. She can share work in progress photos instantly and then get back to work straight away. She is pretty handy with the editing apps and they are cheap as chips so it works so well for her. Furthermore because her photos basically live on a retina screen that gives her an extra boost of confidence inspiring awesomeness.

...as for when she pulls it out to take pictures in public - oh the shame!

24
Lenses / Re: A Big Lens Announcement in September? [CR1]
« on: August 28, 2013, 08:27:42 PM »
The 200-400 f/4 L IS already sold are too good and need to be recalled for crippling.

25
Canon General / Re: Just For Fun!
« on: July 23, 2013, 01:30:30 AM »
68b. Just kidding, not going there.

69. Look at these photographs taken by x photographer for y big deal event or public purpose. I could have done better. What a crappy photographer. Why would they hire that guy and pay him at all.

70. People whose posts present some version of the following: "I am so sick of people turning up to weddings and taking photographs and thinking that they are professional just because they have a DSLR".

26
Abstract / Re: Bursting Balloons
« on: April 26, 2013, 08:37:57 AM »
Whack some colored gels on the flashes.

If you try yellow food coloring with one red and one green flash you will get a lot of variation in the image, for example.

27
Street & City / Re: a 'Surreal' moment....did I do it justice??
« on: April 17, 2013, 07:05:40 AM »
Yes.

28
Technical Support / Re: Photographing paintings for a Catalogue help please
« on: February 20, 2013, 07:28:24 AM »
Check out the book "light, science and magic" by fil hunter, Steven biver and Paul fuqua.

It has a really good section on "copy lighting".

I do this type of work at home regularly and you generally use two identical light sources. One on each side of the work at about 45 degrees. Using a longer focal length (the 70-200 is perfect) is useful because the family of angles that will cause direct (nasty) reflections is pretty small giving you plenty of room to move your lights. Basically you draw two imaginary lines from the front of you camera, one each to the left and right edge of your subject and bounce these off the wall at the same angle. The light should be positioned outside these imaginary lines. That's why 45 degrees is usually are good starting point.

Oh, diffused lights are generally more useful.

29
EOS Bodies / Re: Cost of Canon 5D mk III
« on: February 04, 2013, 09:36:52 PM »
How many dslrs does Canon have in the lineup as of today?  With the 5D3 coming in at the 2nd from the top, how is that midrange? Oh you mean when compared to MF's costing 5-8x as much? Please look up apples to oranges and try again please.

Flagship is 1DX...5D3 currently costs about ~half of the MSRP... but if it makes you feel good. Please make a bumper sticker :)

P.S. One of the bodies I own is a 5D3 and love it. But I am just calling attention to this lording over those who can't afford the 5D3 at MSRP.

The OP has a point. It is priced officially higher because it can be had for much lower from time to time. Why is this an issue?

The OP didn't actually focus on the MSRP - instead suggesting it should be $2500 tops.

30
EOS Bodies / Re: Cost of Canon 5D mk III
« on: February 04, 2013, 09:27:47 PM »
Nobody cares whether or not you buy the 5DIII.
Why are you whining on this forum instead of buying the Nikon that you say is a better camera for less money?

+1000 Harsh, hardly. Tired of hearing all the whinning about the cost of equipment... If you can't afford one are you going to die?!?! I want a Ferrari for 20K...boooo hohoohhhhooo.

5D3 is hardly a Ferrari...and owning a 5D3 does not make anyone superior... it is a midrange camera at best. Lets not use it as a status symbol...because it is not. When you own a few Hassys or the multiple supertele's or even the lowly 1DX let us throw that proverbial stone. :)

Let's give the guy a break...he is just venting. Show him when and where the deals exist...cuz they do.

I don't really follow the status symbol thing. Each sensible person balances needs and cost and each sensible company tries to read the market. If you buy a camera because of what other people will think...I dunno, it makes no sense. and I don't think that is what chilled xpress was alluding to, simply that just because you want something doesn't mean the manufacturer has a responsbility to price it for you. I want a trip to the moon on a spaceship with a giant pretzel and lapdance thrown in... for $100. What, no dice? Shame on you, nasty, elitist Richard Branson.

However, my issue is that first post the OP complains about the price of the 5D3 then goes on to cite the competition doing better. He/she has the option to buy the competition cameras but chooses not to, instead apparently opting for the 6D.

Given that the OP clearly would prefer a Canon (presumably because he/she believes it would better suit his/her needs - otherwise, why?), that must mean they value the Canon's quality and feature set more. Why slag canon off for charging for what you believe is a better camera? As others have pointed out the 5D3 has been widely available for less than $3000USD. That's not much more than the Nikon.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9