August 22, 2014, 05:54:00 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 - c.d.embrey

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 28
Photography Technique / Re: Photographer's Block
« on: August 21, 2014, 06:09:22 PM »

Back in 2004 my first child was born and like most parents we wanted to capture every moment of our daughter's life.

You bought a camera to document your children/family memories. A good reason, lots of people do that.

I have a few realtor friends who've asked me to photograph their new listings for them.   They've called me back for more work, so I must be doing okay there.

You say you don't want to be a Pro, but you do Pro work (even if you don't get paid).

And now, I'm not sure what else to do/try.   So far all of my pictures have been functional rather than creative.   That is the reason behind this question.   I want to break out of the functional mode of photography.  I want to jump start my brain ...

But that's not the original question. You asked about Photographer's block. "I just can't seem to get inspired to do anything lately."

Seems to me your real question is how do I move from functional to creative. And that's a very difficult question to answer.

Some people think that creativity can be taught. From my POV, talent/creativity is something you are born with. I think you can teach technique, but not real creativity. Maybe technique will satisfy your needs.

My next question
. What do you think your functional photography lacks. Is it Point-of-View/Composition, Lighting, Whatever ???

Photography Technique / Re: Photographer's Block
« on: August 21, 2014, 02:43:37 PM »

I don't know that's entirely fair... You can grow as a photographer and you can fit more on your plate as time goes...

Asking a person WHY they bought a camera is fair. There are lots of reasons people buy cameras. And some of the reasons have absolutely nothing to do with photography.

Why do think there is a real need to fit more on your plate to grow as a photographer ??? Is there a check-list that needs to be filled ;)

Photography Technique / Re: Photographer's Block
« on: August 21, 2014, 01:03:07 AM »
I've worked on macro, sports, portraiture, real estate, architecture, and wildlife but right now none of those seem appealing.

Maybe you picked the wrong hobby ??? From your long list of subjects, it sounds to me like you are looking to justify all the money you've spent on gear.

Many people take up photography because there is something that they are driven to shoot. Maybe it's Large Format B&W Landscape. Maybe it's cat and tuna sandwich shots for social networking ;) Ask yourself why you bought a camera ???

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 20, 2014, 04:06:25 PM »

Sony are great at churning out products and they are great at component level horsepower (i.e. sensors).  But I am not at all convinced that they understand the needs of photographers as well as Canon and Nikon.
- A

Sony seems to be run by the people you ran the former Walkman division  :o  I was impressed with my new NEX 5n, but I've been waiting since 2011 for the lenses I want/need. The lack of lenses has cost them a NEX 7 sale and an a6000 sale. No way will I buy into a Sony system.

For those not familiar with the Sony Walkman, it was the dominate portable music player. Then Apple brought the iPod to market, and Sony had no reply :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 20, 2014, 03:47:04 PM »

To me, that's one of its biggest disadvantages.  What I see in an EVF is virtually never what I get.  What I see in the OVF is what I get because I post-process the images to look the way the scene did ...

What I see in the EVF is an over-contrasty version of reality with brights blown, blacks crushed, and colors looking unnatural.

Do you use Custom Functions to adjust jpeg output. In this fast paced world many pros are bypassing Raw and using custom jpegs. The client can't see any IQ difference, but they like seeing the final photos immediately.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 20, 2014, 03:06:26 PM »

Alternative theory: Mirrorless will evolve into something that looks very different from today's cameras. All cameras today are based on the idea that the photographer holds it close to his face with the viewfinder to his eye. Even cameras without viewfinders are based on that model, which is why they are so clunky to use. They ask you to take a design that was meant to be held close to the face to keep steady and then hold it away from your face, making it hard to compose, hold it steady and operate the controls.

Ergonomically, a smart phone is actually better to use than a camera without a viewfinder. It's small, light, fits naturally in one hand and is a lot easier to balance. Plus, you can hold it in one hand and use a finger to touch the focus point without shaking it.

I'm thinking that an innovative camera designer ought to be look at how people hold and use their smart phones and start designing cameras to take advantage of the smart phone model. Of course, I'm guessing that for the near future, that would pretty much preclude the idea of large sensors and large or long lenses.

As I've said in the past, for many Professional Photographers, a smart-phone will become their main camera. iPhone 7 maybe, iPhone 8 almost for sure.

Right now I can shoot table-top with M4/3. If Nikon would pull their head out of their  :o  and make a Pro Nikon 1. I could be shooting table-top with a 1" sensor within 18-24 months.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 20, 2014, 02:33:48 PM »

Saw this picture today in a story at The Phoblographer:

And I think it's a stimulating photo to windup this discussion.  Do you believe this is the future, or do you believe this is mirrorless trying to be / to do too much? 

- A

This is the future of FULL FRAME.
Sooner or later Canon will build something very close to this (so will Nikon).

To me, this is a good example of be careful of what you wish for ???

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 19, 2014, 02:33:54 PM »
Mirrorless has one huge advantage, the WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) EVF. No need to chimp, because you've seen the results before you pushed the button :) Even with something as old as my Sony NEX 5n, it's trivial to get the shot in difficult lighting :) I often have the 5n set-up to shoot B&W jpegs. I use a #21 Orange filter, just like I'd do when shooting film. I set the exposure by eye using the screen, try that with an optical DSLR viewfinder :)  :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 18, 2014, 05:41:25 PM »

I'm intrigued why more fixed-mount lenses with a simple, high quality zoom aren't offered more often.  Right now, the best bet for fixed-mount lens with a small, high quality zoom are some "cheaper" APS-C Leicas or the high-end point and shoots like the Sony RX100 series or the G1X II.  Fuji has the X10, X20 bodies that do this as well, I think...

Panasonic makes the FZ1000 with a 1" sensor, a fixed (=FF) f/2.8-f/40 25–400 mm lens and weighs 1.83 lbs (that's effing huge!).

Sony makes the RX10 with a 1" sensor, a fixed (=FF) f/2.8  24-200 mm lens that weighs 1.79 lbs (also effing huge).

More than a little too large to fit the description small/light.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon mirrorless: Status?
« on: August 18, 2014, 02:58:44 PM »
Different cultures think in different ways. Americans are into BIGGER is BETTER. Asians seem to like Hello Kitty.

I like small cameras with prime lenses because they are inconspicuous. Many Very Serious Photo Enthusiasts like Full Frame Pro Bodies with 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses because they scream "Hey look at me!!!"

I like prime lenses between 14mmFF/28mmFF and 85mmFF/135mmFF. I don't have any need for 35mmFF to 60mmFF, they don't fit my shooting style. YMMV. What does suite my shooting style is close-focusing. An 85mm f/1.8 on a xxD (= 135mm FF) doesn't focus close enough for me. I'm much better served by an Olympus 75mm f/1.8 on a M4/3 camera (= 150mmFF).

As the world changes, different tools go into/out-of style. Will Canon pick the right tool or the wrong tool ???

There are several kinds of photography Retail photography is Portraits and Weddings. Photojournalists shoot for newspapers. Editorial photographers shoot for high-end magazines. Advertising photographers shoot photos used for ads. Some photographers shoot both Editorial and Advertising.

There a huge difference in pay between the low-end and the top-end.

Canon General / Re: Gear Realities
« on: August 16, 2014, 01:30:11 AM »

that i like... but if it was taken today, people would say that it doesn't follow the rule of thirds.

Some of the best/most famous photos violated the rule-of-thirds, and every other rule you can think of. Some were even out-of-focus.

Canon General / Re: Gear Realities
« on: August 15, 2014, 06:01:43 PM »

As my favourite sport is canoeing.... and having 4 pre-1950 canoes, I don't understand the question :)
The picture is of the 1910 Dean sailing canoe, taken earlier this week.....

I was thinking about real sports, where there are winners and losers :)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fun Arias rant on APS-C vs. FF
« on: August 14, 2014, 02:00:54 PM »

I don't know. Some of these arguments here feel like people defending what they bought, rather than any objective discussion.  This feels like one of those.

People base their response on their self esteem. If you own a (pick one) camera, you have to defend that brand/format. If you don't do this you (and other people) may think that you bought the wrong camera!  :o And being wrong about your camera choice lowers your self esteem, and your perceived standing in your community.  :(

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 28