December 19, 2014, 04:16:48 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 - Sporgon

Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 139
Landscape / Re: Waterscapes
« on: March 17, 2014, 06:36:44 PM »
Antarctica is an amazing place, needs a Phase One to do it justice I think, but the thing that surprised me was the actual lack of colour, it's pretty well shades of Blue & White, which is why it converts reasonably well to B&W.

The B&W is beautiful, but I prefer the color version. Well done Edward.

For me it's definitely the black n White ! That pictures got a power to it that does Antartica justice - for me at any rate ! :D

Landscape / Re: Waterscapes
« on: March 17, 2014, 06:20:08 PM »
Colour version of an earlier back & white picture of a sea fret coming down on Flamborough Head, England

The other pros I know use their assistants for location scouting, site/studio prep, organizing resources, grunt  work and retouching.  Most of them process their photos themselves or at least supervise the changes in LR/PS, etc. in post.  And they would certainly feel silly having their assistants compose their shots for them.

You've missed out the most important function: loading film backs !  ;D
I've browsed through most of the thread and I'm surprised so many are taken aback by this guy having his assistant (s) set the camera up on a landscape picture. Producing this type of picture is very different from sports or press photographers, those guys never used an assistant in the field. But producing a landscape; what's it about ? The location, the light, the view. Who was the guy who instigated being in that place at that time ? I'm sure the photographer will have set up his exposure how he wants it and framed the picture. Then who actually releases the shutter doesn't matter. By and large I would expect the photographer to do his own editing; in another thread recently someone stated that post process work is editing, not photography, but this couldn't be further from the truth.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: March 17, 2014, 09:47:22 AM »
Shot with a Hasselblad H4D-40.  That is the shot before editing.  The final shot was given some mood, and the bits of orange tape were cloned out:
If your response is that the scene could have just as easily been shot with a Canon 5D3, while true, that misses the point.
What is the point? I don't really see anything in that shot which couldn't have been captured with a full frame or even APS-C sensor? Is the "look" the point?

Yea I'm a little confused by this comment too. There's clearly a fair bit of perspective distortion going on: look at the relative sizes of the sheriff in front on the two women (one with teddy) at the back. Normally the larger the format the less exaggeration there is, so this was quite a wide lens for MF, looking up. I don't see why you couldn't have produced the identical image using the afore mentioned 5D and a wide shift lens such as the 24 or 17 mil.

I managed to catch this one (I think it's the Sopwith Pup).


Nice shot of the Pup. I presume you must have shot this in Oz because D4170 is an Australian replica. This one uses a radial engine instead of the original 80 hp rotary - as nearly all the replicas do, so although it's nice to see them flying you don't get to hear the original sound, which basically sounds is if the engine is dying and about to cut out even when running normally !

By to days standards, in Britain at least, the original Pup would qualify as a microlight, so you wouldn't need a full PPL to fly one !

Photography Technique / Re: What could I do better?
« on: March 16, 2014, 08:38:48 PM »
If you're going to look at images from that particular lens at 50 - 100% I would recommend using f11 when at 200-300mm, and even then it's only critically sharp in the very centre.

Landscape / Re: Waterscapes
« on: March 16, 2014, 12:58:57 PM »
Another shot from when the sea fret was coming down fast on Flamborough Head, England.

Landscape / Re: Please share your snow/ Ice Photos with us in CR.
« on: March 16, 2014, 12:27:51 PM »
Fluffy the cat on patrol...

That cat clearly considers you responsible for the snow Don, and having seen it wearing the Christmas reindeer antlers I'm not surprised  ;)

(That picture was one of the funniest I've ever seen)  ;D

No full auto or "creative" auto mode on the higher end DSLRs, P (Professional) is good enough for anyone who wants Auto mode.

But P mode doesn't set all camera functions back to 'basic user'. Green box does and this is very useful when handing the camera to someone else (non photographer) to grab a picture, without having to explain BBF etc etc.  Doesn't happen often but I say keeping on.

Lenses / Re: Visit Guilin, Mountain Range, in China - Lens selection
« on: March 16, 2014, 05:37:05 AM »
By coincidence I'll be there the following week on vacation, organised as a mystery tour by Chinese friends after official visits to Hong Kong and Shanghai.  I had intended to take the 5DIII plus Tamron 150-600 for nature and 24-105 for general.

 I have been trying to persuade my wife to take the 70D with the 15-85 as it could provide a back-up body and I could omit the 24-105 and we would have two cameras ready all the time.  However, she wants something small for her handbag.  She needs something without any buttons, mode dials etc that can be pressed by mistake and set off the self- timer etc. Anything foolproof to recommend (apart from iPhones etc)?

If I was looking for something genuinely pocketable, where possible I would stick to something compatible with my system. So in this case the EOS M.

Sports / Re: Horses / Horseriding etc
« on: March 15, 2014, 04:13:48 PM »
Shot at a local hunting meet.

The pretty lady's horse clearly said "If you wanna jump the fence so bad get on and do it by yourself"

The second shot is the same rider, but the right way up.

Landscape / Re: Waterscapes
« on: March 15, 2014, 02:00:13 PM »
Mmmmm, no Surfers or Oil Rigs but not much water either.

That's a great picture Edward; the B&W and the way you have processed it has given a feel of real energy in the picture.

Street & City / Re: Voyeurism
« on: March 15, 2014, 01:48:58 PM »
Primes are fine, but I wouldn't want to shoot a wedding without a 50 mm focal length.

Hi Sporgon,
I love to hear why? I am currently looking for adding 50 or 85mm and like to hear your arguments.

Space, distance and perspective are my reasons for this. 85mm gives a pleasant perspective but you need to be able to get far enough away. You also need more light one way or another to keep more depth of field. 35mm will result in an undesired perspective when used close; to reduce depth of field you're going to be very close = undesired perspective. In these situations the 50mm (on FF) gives you a pleasant, neutral perspective even when close, and you have good control over depth of field. That's why I say I wouldn't like to shoot a wedding without access to the 50mm focal length.

I don't know what you shoot or your style but I see you have the 135 so if deciding between a 50 and 85 prime, I'd go for the 50. You hear people say it's a 'boring' focal length because it doesn't give an exaggerated perspective either side of neutral, but I have found that relying on extreme perspective to make a picture good is a mistake.

Street & City / Re: Voyeurism
« on: March 15, 2014, 10:08:31 AM »
Primes are fine, but I wouldn't want to shoot a wedding without a 50 mm focal length.

Street & City / Re: Voyeurism
« on: March 15, 2014, 05:44:37 AM »
If you're going to get a second body and you're serious then get the same as you have now. This means that you can have different lenses on different bodies: the most common in weddings 24-70 + 70-200 for instance.

Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 139