August 23, 2014, 11:57:44 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 - V8Beast

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 62
Sports / Re: Your favourite motorsports events
« on: Today at 12:06:49 AM »
Someone please go to Spa this weekend so I can drool over pics of F1 cars running flat-out through Eau Rouge ;D

Medium format file bit depths are generally much bigger than 135 format RAW files so they are much better at subtle tonality, they can literally accurately record thousands more tones of grey, also they don't have AA filters so detailed gradation is rendered much more accurately.

Indeed it could well be the AA filter that people are seeing on the crop cameras that is killing some of the subtle tonality of the image. Generally crop cameras have more severe AA filters than 135 format cameras and as their bit depth is the same it is the only substantive difference.

V8, you should borrow a D810 to see how you like the tonality of that, it should be the closest to the medium format in 135 format, though still not as good.

I knew someone smarter than me could provide a real technical reason as to why medium format looks so much better for this type of stuff ;D Glad to know exactly why now.

I certainly don't shoot enough product images like this to warrant investing in a D810, but would like to try one out some day. I just hope it doesn't have an oily sensor :o

Technical Support / Re: Question regarding sensor size and image quality
« on: August 22, 2014, 11:53:06 PM »
One more thing. As no surprise, lighting plays a tremendous role in the perceived depth and tonality of an image. In other words, a crop sensor with proper lighting technique can produce an image with a better "3D" quality than a full-frame sensor with mediocre lighting technique.

Both these images were shot with my 5D3, 24-105 lens, and the same lighting equipment. The only difference is that in the second image (the close-up), the physical limitations of the location preventing positioning the light sources where I wanted to. This compromised the lighting angle, and resulted in a much flatter, duller, two-dimensional image. The gradations, particularly in the mid-tones, aren't nearly as smooth. Therefore, the flat image had nothing to do with sensor size and everything to do with mediocre lighting technique. Just don't tell that to my client ;D


Technical Support / Re: Question regarding sensor size and image quality
« on: August 22, 2014, 11:43:32 PM »
Disclaimer: I don't know if there are any technical points of reference that either prove or disprove my observations :) At any rate, for me personally, what I perceive as superior tonal range is the biggest advantage of full-frame vs. crop sensors. Maybe the tonal range is genuinely superior with FF, or maybe it isn't, but for what I shoot sure it looks better to me :)

For example, these product shots I took recently are all some slightly different shade of gray with some black and silver mixed in. IMHO, these are the types of shots where full-frame sensors provide far more depth and tonality than a crop sensor.

When shooting similar types of boring, gray products, to my eyes medium format trumps a FF 35mm sensor in the tonality department by a huge margin as well.

Your results may vary ;D


Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810 users are seeing spots
« on: August 20, 2014, 01:25:49 PM »
Seems like this issue affects all units in the initial production runs.  Good job by Nikon to quickly acknowledge the issue and offer a fix.

Guess they learned something from the D600 oil/dust spot fiasco. 

Who cares about some silly spots? It in no way affects your ability to stroke yourself after intentionally underexposing an image of your cat by five stops, and playing around with the sliders in Lightroom.

I see psolberg has already joined the party. Surely, dilbert can't be far behind ;D

In my tiny corner of the photography world (automotive editorial), staff guys earn between $30-$45K. Beyond that, in the freelance/contract world, it's almost impossible to pin down an exact figure. On one end of the spectrum, there are people that work for nothing or next to nothing. They might only make a couple hundred dollars per year! They usually have full-time jobs in other professions, and shoot for fun. Some are itching to join a staff, but haven't had the opportunity to do so.

On the other end of the editorial spectrum, there are guys who would never join a staff because they make way more money on a contracted basis. Many got started working on a staff, but quit upon realizing the greater earning potential doing contracted work. Annual earning range between $50K-$100K. Most fall right in the middle. That said, most full-time freelance photographers that specialize in editorial work also dabble in some product and advertising photography as well.

The guys that clear $100K usually have a fair amount of public relations photography gigs, and do some editorial work on the side. By PR work, I referencing photographers that shoot images for OE manufacturers (GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, BMW, etc) that will be distributed to media outlets.

The top dogs in the business are commercial photographers that don't even bother with editorial work. These are they guys shooting brochures, ad campaigns, and billboards. In the U.S., you can count these guys on one or two hands :) Everyone aspires to be as good as them someday. They can charge hundreds of thousands of dollars per shoot, but they also have full-time staff members, hoards of assistants, and 18-wheelers full of equipment that rack up the expenses. Even so, they earn hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

The unofficial hierarchy of earnings/prestige is:

1) Commercial photography
2) PR photography
3) Editorial photography

Of course, that's just my opinion ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D MK I Still Relevant?
« on: July 24, 2014, 07:35:46 PM »
I've touched my 5D only once since replacing it with the 5D3. Thank goodness for that. While the 5D still offers great IQ, it's hard to re-acclimate to using after being spoiled by the MK3. I can't believe I used to rely on that junk screen ;D That said, IQ wise I very much prefer the 5D over the 7D. 

Sports / Re: Formula One from Silverstone
« on: July 09, 2014, 01:01:24 PM »
And V8 Beast, that’s the deal of the decade, if you wanna do the same for the Abu Dhabi GP let me know ;)

If I get rich some day I might have to take you up on that offer. Flights from Austin to Abu Dhabi are $2,000 - $2,500 right now. Ouch!

Sports / Re: Formula One from Silverstone
« on: July 07, 2014, 11:48:25 PM »
Great shots. As thrilling as the Alonso vs. Vettel battle was on TV, I can only imagine how exciting it was in person. What an incredible atmosphere for an F1 race. I hope to attend an F1 race in Silverstone someday.

I have a proposal for any Brits out there. I'll let you stay at my house in Austin for the USGP and shuttle you back and forth to the track if you do the same for me in England for the 2015 British GP ;D

Sports / Re: Cars cars cars (and some bikes)
« on: July 07, 2014, 11:44:18 PM »

Thanks!  Would you believe I took the on my kitchen table?  ;D  The Merc is a CMC 1/18 scale diecast model shot in a tent on black acrylic.

I guess that's kinda like a studio. Shows what I know! LOL ;D

Sports / Re: Cars cars cars (and some bikes)
« on: June 18, 2014, 02:57:04 PM »
Amazing shots, Tom. I love the wide-angle pan blur, color balance, and overall processing.

Roo: Great shot of the Merc! Is this a studio shot, or a clever bit of post processing?

Great shots, and once again Montreal put up a great show. What a massive turnaround for Red Bull. The Nico vs. Lewis saga gets more interesting each race. As for Ferrari, at least they still make fast road cars :o

Sports / Re: F1 Photography Advice
« on: May 26, 2014, 02:23:29 PM »
First time posting here, got a few from last year at Silverstone as the 2014 circus hasn't quite got round to the UK yet...

All from general spectator areas with a 5Diii shooting through the fence with 400mm f5.6 (sometimes with old sigma 1.4x) at the GP or following young driver test...

Sunday, enjoy the race :)

Great shots! Last year's cars look so much better!

Sports / Re: F1 Photography Advice
« on: May 04, 2014, 08:54:21 PM »
The wombat is back! Terrific shots, mate! On a side note, I hope these new cars sound better in person than they do on TV!

And yes, for capturing pan blurs of cars going around a track, the 5D3's AF is utterly amazing. Just to amuse myself, I played around with the auto 61-point selection instead of zone AF on the autocross yesterday. To my surprise, it worked just as well if not better than in zone AF mode. What a machine. Whenever the 5D4 comes out, unless it offers some substantial improvements, I think I might skip the next generation of the 5D series and stick with my Mark 3.

Sports / Re: Your favourite motorsports events
« on: March 17, 2014, 12:32:04 AM »
19 seasons with only 1 championship win with Merc engines isn’t a good statistic for a team like McLaren Graham, they do look strong at the moment but it's only race 1 of the season...........ohh yeah, and McLaren are winning the constructors championship at the moment  ;D

I understand the whole nostalgia element, but I think having drivers like Senna and Prost during the Honda-powered McLaren era may have had something to do with why Honda engines seemed so dominant :) As it stands, Honda will be a year behind the curve when they re-enter F1 in 2015. With such dramatic rule changes since the last time Honda was in F1, I wouldn't want to be their guinea pigs! Nevertheless, I'd very much like to see McLaren and Ferrari start winning races again. I don't know about Ferrari, but McLaren doesn't seem that far off.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 62