November 28, 2014, 02:28:25 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 - jdramirez

Pages: 1 ... 42 43 [44] 45 46 ... 171
646
Photography Technique / Re: So I really stepped into it....
« on: May 06, 2014, 05:00:31 PM »
I thought I was being informative... helping a newb in the ways of depth of field and proper focus techniques using her gear... little did I know that I was belittling the sanctity of the world of photography.  If I only had known...

647
Photography Technique / Re: So I really stepped into it....
« on: May 06, 2014, 04:57:36 PM »
and finally...

The image is following the rule of thirds, focus is on the eye (though I think I missed and it is on the eye brow), using live view, using manual focus, using a tripod, using a wide open aperture... I didn't use a flash mostly because Shipwreck wasn't moving so 2nd shutter wouldn't have done didly... nor high speed sync... though i kinda want to do a silhouette... Maybe tomorrow... maybe tomorrow.

And here is the comment about being an embarrassment to all things photography.

Well, here's my response Joe. These action figure images are an embarrassment and if I were you wouldn't hold them up as an example of anything even remotely related to good photography. This page represents the local (sic) Camera Club and I think we can do better than this.

648
Photography Technique / Re: So I really stepped into it....
« on: May 06, 2014, 04:55:17 PM »
Here's the 2nd.

Same shot... but with a water bottle and directv remote in the background. As I'm shooting at a shallow depth of field, the bottle and remote become blobs of color and aren't as noticeable and distracting from the main subject. I'd prefer they not be there... but if given the opportunity, I don't really wanna see them even if they are there. As many of us know, depth of field is based on a few factors... distance from your subject, aperture, focal length, and crop v. full. Shooting wide and cropping will result in a greater depth of field than zooming to 250 or 300 (which are common ef-s zooms) and filling the frame. Though, as a quick counterpoint to shooting at the tele side with those lenses... they are variable aperture which gets smaller the further you zoom... which increases the depth of field and counteracts the focal length

649
Photography Technique / Re: So I really stepped into it....
« on: May 06, 2014, 04:54:11 PM »
I'm home.  I get to upload before I am coerced into yard work. 

Here's what I said about this image:

I like clean backgrounds... and while isn't always possible, if you can account for the foreground/background in the set up for your shot, it will make a difference.

650
Photography Technique / Re: So I really stepped into it....
« on: May 06, 2014, 11:29:03 AM »
Its just a fact of life, people may like the images the way they take them, and many like / want the entire depth to be in sharp focus.  They can also be sensitive to criticism, even though they asked for it.
 
Its ok, if they like them, isn't that what counts?

The original lady hasn't publicly said a peep.  And I don't care if she uses my suggestions or not.  But I wasn't attacking her, I was actually doing as asked... which is... how would I make the resulting images better.  And I didn't say she needs to get a 5d mkii, a 300 mm L f2.8, studio lighting, etc. 

I think people are way too sensitive.  I'm a softball coach and practically every other game someone is crying.  Hey... do it right and you won't get yelled at.  Well... instructed. 

651
I like Amazon, but this is silly.  I want to patent bike riding technique... no one can use a seat unless they buy a license.

652
Photography Technique / Re: So I really stepped into it....
« on: May 06, 2014, 10:30:20 AM »
I'll put up the photos that are an embarrassment to photography when I get home...

653
Photography Technique / Re: So I really stepped into it....
« on: May 06, 2014, 10:27:30 AM »
Facebook
Isn't one of the main concepts of Facebook to make people less anonymous so they don't attack each other ???
Is it?  I thought it was too see who from high school got fat.

654
Photography Technique / So I really stepped into it....
« on: May 06, 2014, 10:21:16 AM »
So I'm a member/participant on Facebook of my local photography club.  A woman who is a novice asks what can she do to improve here photos of her daughter who is a comparative weight lifter.  The woman said she has a Canon t3.

So I proceed to give an honest critique.  Focus looks off here, try using a tripod and live view focus, the guys in the background are distracting, try either slimmer depth of field or move so they aren't as visible, have something in the foreground that is characteristic of the sport and blue it out, maybe do a long exposure with second curtain flash so there is movement...

There was a portrait where the subject was on the left side of the image looking left and I said to frame it differently so the open space of the photo is in the direction she's looking....

And boy oh boy did I start something.

This is what I heard... I can't copy and paste on my phone, but the gist was be positive.  I was positive.  I was positive that I have good advice.

Then I heard... put some examples... So I did of a basketball shot where the ref was blurry in the foreground, and a softball shot where the catcher was blurry in the foreground... And the response I receive is that it was too distracting.  Ok sure... busy foreground aren't someone's cup of tea... but it is a widely used technique.

Then I put up some toy model to explain the concepts about depth of field, live view focus, etc. And the gist of that response is it was an embarrassment to photography. 

They aren't just throwing the baby out with the bath water, they are putting the baby in a blender so it goes down the sink easily.  Oh my.

So I came here to rant... because while I don't care about the group, just like here, seeing different images do inspire.


655
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Lexar Memory Card Sale at B&H Photo
« on: May 06, 2014, 10:05:25 AM »
I like my lexar, but if I'm spending big money on a compact flash card... SanDisk is my only consideration. 

656
Definitely a fraction of a millimetre, but that was through a microscope :)

I forgot about that... but my photo of mitochondria was to contrasty and didn't follow the rule of thirds.

657
PowerShot / Re: New PowerShot & EOS Cameras to Offer DOF Control?
« on: May 05, 2014, 01:03:21 PM »
Sounds to me like a mode in which the camera determines the subject near and far distance and sets aperture to ensure all subjects are in focus.

take for example a shot of a group of people.  face detection could be used to determine the distance to the subject closest to the camera and the suject farthest from the camera, then select the aperture that mathmatically satisfies the DOF with that lens.

Sounds like a cool feature for consumer level cameras or even for shooting video if it was dynamic enough to adapt to the changing environment in real time.

That's a cool feature and I think it would be perfect for a consumer level camera. 

658
PowerShot / Re: New PowerShot & EOS Cameras to Offer DOF Control?
« on: May 05, 2014, 11:59:57 AM »

Absolutely. Canon people may be slow but they are not idiots. If they bringing something on, they must have reasons.

I feel that Canon has enough misses to make a credible challenge to your idiot claim.  :p

659
The computers are down at work and I'm bored.

The reason I ask is because I bought an f1.2 lens and I was concerned that the dof would be unmanageable... then I played with a dof calculator and it turns it I've shot a thinner.

So at 18 inches, at f2.8, and 100mm on full frame is mine which equates to .11 inches.

While the 36 inches, at f1.2, and 85mm on full frame equates to .29 inches.  It will remind me of the Seinfeld episode with Elaine driving in the wide lanes... how luxurious.

660
PowerShot / Re: New PowerShot & EOS Cameras to Offer DOF Control?
« on: May 05, 2014, 11:42:25 AM »

the rumor is very vague..

+1

A lot of heat for something that we don't even have a clue of what it is.

There was a guy advertising for photography services a few years back on Craig's list.  His sample images looked like a mobile phone with some really bad bokeh filters applied.

I'm not saying everyone needs full frame and an f1.2 prime, but the assertion that comparable professional results can come from such techniques are so asinine.

Pages: 1 ... 42 43 [44] 45 46 ... 171