GKPE: Serious Photography Thread

[weka2000]

IMO, and call me a luddite for this, but if you've got to faff about putting things back in that you didn't capture in the first place, you shot it wrong originally. Ergo, get better and do it again.

Not sure you want my opinion on the shots from the place you guys went to the other night.


I was intrested in your views not of the photo but the result re blended exposures result. Personally im not a HDR fan but blended exposures I have always used.
I guess some people use dodge and burn.

[dgcorner]

Thanks for the feedback.

Will look up the software... might be able to charge it to the business...

[manipula]

I was intrested in your views not of the photo but the result re blended exposures result. Personally im not a HDR fan but blended exposures I have always used.
I guess some people use dodge and burn.

Personally I prefer the top one of the two, don't know if that's the blended or not...

[weka2000]

Personally I prefer the top one of the two, don't know if that's the blended or not...

Darker 1 is HDR-ed

[S-S]

Ok 4 images different exposures. NO PP at all both done in photomatrix. I like the result from the blended exposures.

the non hdr one is too flat, theres no differentiation/graduation between the front arches and the distant ones. also you have blown the sky too much. and, the scene feels a bit wonky.

but the hdr one looks underexposed and is still flat, even though you've enhanced the colours in the grey concrete with the blending procedure (or added colour that wasnt really there) and what are those odd blue lines in the left of the sky (which is oversaturated)? (and its still wonky)

sorry, liked your earlier ones better...

[S-S]

Now, I'd like to post a couple of pics which I posted a while back but didn't get any real critique... be harsh, be honest -- I want to learn...

at first glance i like them, but when i look closer i feel like the pink one is composed better around the stamens, with the pink lines leading you in to the subject (the purple one is tilting down/right a bit and the angle hides those lines) but the left of the pink is distracting with that large pale petal intruding in and that little blob above it

and both are not completely sharp/still which macro like that really needs to be in order to retain its impact

imo

[weka2000]

Neither photo had any PP done to it, thats straight out of photomatrix.
The point of the exercise was to show the difference between a HDR and Blended exposure image and the way photomatrix processed each.

[S-S]

40D + 24-105, in the rain (sea actual colour)
opinions/comments

[theflyingkiwi]

40D + 24-105, in the rain (sea actual colour)
opinions/comments

wow what a gray, dab, boring photo.

[weka2000]

SS what are we looking at here? What is it you want us to see?
Sorry its just a snapshot.

[Nzshrimper]

sorry i thought this was the serious photography thread...... i can not find anything positive about the shot at all.... but it did get a wow out of mark.. ;)

however if you post it in the landscape section i am sure lots of people will like it..

[S-S]

wow what a gray, dab, boring photo.

thats the point of it, in a way

SS what are we looking at here? What is it you want us to see?
Sorry its just a snapshot.

the light... but maybe it doesnt translate well if you dont know what that scene shoud look like under normal lighting

however thanks for the feedback, was interested to see how others viewed it. feel free to continue to comment...

[weka2000]

thats the point of it, in a way



the light... but maybe it doesnt translate well if you dont know what that scene shoud look like under normal lighting

however thanks for the feedback, was interested to see how others viewed it. feel free to continue to comment...
1 of the hardest things in landsacpe photography is trying to convey what the eyes see and the "emotions" we feel.
The veiwer cannot feel the wind in your hair, smell the salt air or "feel" the tension. Thats why so many photos fall over.
Many of my waterfall photos suffer the same fate.

[theflyingkiwi]

thats the point of it, in a way



the light... but maybe it doesnt translate well if you dont know what that scene shoud look like under normal lighting

however thanks for the feedback, was interested to see how others viewed it. feel free to continue to comment...

I must admit that it's an interesting idea, a boring photo.

I don't believe the photo works. no focus point for the eye to start looking at. there isn't anything interesting for the eye to follow to, no nice colours. In fact it's got nothing that makes a photo interesting. so if you wanted to create a boring photo well done.

[S-S]

yeh... like i said i was interested to see if it conveyed anything
it was raining on me at the time so i didnt hang about, not being weather sealed
it was the orangeness of the scene that caught my eye, usually looks nothing like that - oh and all the islands and headlands are gone

[weka2000]

SS wonder if a tele pano shot would have been the better way to convay
Bring the islands closer as the forground is bland.

[S-S]

yeh but i wanted to get the muddy water in too, and i think (might be alone here :rolleyes:) the curve of the waves bottom right balances the curve of the rainstorm top left
but its not meant to be a pretty or powerful shot, its meant to look like what was going on there that day

[Nzshrimper]

yeh but i wanted to get the muddy water in too, and i think (might be alone here :rolleyes:) the curve of the waves bottom right balances the curve of the rainstorm top left
but its not meant to be a pretty or powerful shot, its meant to look like what was going on there that day

so as tony said a snapshot.

and a bland one at that...

[joeseph]

yeh but i wanted to get the muddy water in too, and i think (might be alone here) the curve of the waves bottom right balances the curve of the rainstorm top left

actually the waves set up the "rule of thirds' thing in the shot. Still looks like there's something missing though.

[Moppie]

We have a thread filled with great photos, and the boring, attention seeking snap shot gets how many posts dedicated to it?

NEXT PLEASE.

[Nzshrimper]

We have a thread filled with great photos, and the boring, attention seeking snap shot gets how many posts dedicated to it?

NEXT PLEASE.

roflmao..... stop it i have tears

[Nzshrimper]

ok i posted this in the main thread a couple of days ago but lets have some real c & c on it...

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u185/nzshrimper/bubbles.jpg

[weka2000]

Sorry Chris but cant fault it. I would put it a folder for the vol3 POTN book.

Was it "posed"or caught in the moment?

I spent hrs blowing bubbles as a kid.

[joeseph]

ok i posted this in the main thread a couple of days ago but lets have some real c & c on it...

righto:
nice lighting, technically good picture, good subject.
sadly I'm not a big fan of portraits without all of the subject's head in frame.

[Moppie]

ok i posted this in the main thread a couple of days ago but lets have some real c & c on it...



Nice, I don't think there is a lot to do differently.
Maybe a little more DOF, it does appear a little soft (but that maybe from resizing), and maybe some more light on the left hand side, and a hair light to really make it pop.

But, I am assuming it is just single on camera flash? In which case very good.

[Nzshrimper]

Sorry Chris but cant fault it. I would put it a folder for the vol3 POTN book.

Was it "posed"or caught in the moment?

a caught in the moment with a touch of planning.. - i was after a shot and had set the flash up and had the camera ready - but i was just letting him get on with it..

the original shot has a nasty white background (kitchen cupboard door) so it disappeared with the help of photoshop.

[weka2000]

sadly I'm not a big fan of portraits without all of the subject's head in frame.

Why does the head need to be in the frame? The elbows arnt.

Now chris has answered may have been to deal with the PP.

[Nzshrimper]

Nice, I don't think there is a lot to do differently.
Maybe a little more DOF, it does appear a little soft (but that maybe from resizing), and maybe some more light on the left hand side, and a hair light to really make it pop.

But, I am assuming it is just single on camera flash? In which case very good.

single off camera flash.. i agree with dof - could have had a touch more....

sharpness is a resizing issue. his left eye was the focus point and is sharp in the original .

[weka2000]

Ok Moppie put up. Show us what you got :lol:

[Nzshrimper]

righto:
nice lighting, technically good picture, good subject.
sadly I'm not a big fan of portraits without all of the subject's head in frame.

thats fair...

[Moppie]

Ok Moppie put up. Show us what you got :lol:

How about 2 quite different images:

From the South Island

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/Moppie/fernraindrop.jpg


And from the A1

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/Moppie/converted-5667.jpg



Feel free to comment on both, or just one.

[joeseph]

Why does the head need to be in the frame? The elbows arnt.
no rules say it has to - just commenting that I have a preference...

[weka2000]

Moppie Motorsport 1 crap way OOF and in some dire need of contrast. a 16:9 crop could help as there is way to much back ground.
Now I do like the fern. The only issue I have is what appears to be folage over the in focus leaf. The greens are green not like up here.

How did the chairs come out?

[Moppie]

Moppie Motorsport 1 crap way OOFand in some dire need of contrast.

How did the chairs come out?

Your completely right.

The background however is meant to be there.

Better:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/Moppie/A1GP-morecontrast.jpgAnd do you really want to see photos of chairs?

[Nzshrimper]

Andrew - i like the concept of the ms shot... however i think its needs jonny's car to be in focus to work.. you also have a lot of sensor snot... and that dust up there is nasty as it is pumice rock...

[Belmondo]

I'm amazed that so many people who are gifted at photography seem to feel that critiquing others' photos is a competition within itself. That is, it appears to become challenge to see who can make the most snide comment possible while cloaking it in 'humor.' (Okay, humour for you guys.)

I look back and see a number of good photos and a few great ones. Sadly, I see an even larger number of snarky comments. Maybe we need to spend a little time critiquing the critiques. At what point does this cease to be fun and become personal?

There are far better ways to work the passive aggression out of your systems. Try racquetball.

[RandyMN]

I'm amazed that so many people who are gifted at photography seem to feel that critiquing others' photos is a competition within itself. That is, it appears to become challenge to see who can make the most snide comment possible while cloaking it in 'humor.' (Okay, humour for you guys.)

I look back and see a number of good photos and a few great ones. Sadly, I see an even larger number of snarky comments. Maybe we need to spend a little time critiquing the critiques. At what point does this cease to be fun and become personal?

There are far better ways to work the passive aggression out of your systems. Try racquetball.

Geesh, can't we all just get along? ;)

[Nzshrimper]

Geesh, can't we all just get along? ;)

it would appear not....

anyway whats racquetball ? ---- (is it something like squash) (serious question as i don't know)

[Belmondo]

it would appear not....

anyway whats racquetball ? ---- (is it something like squash) (serious question as i don't know) Very similar.

[Nzshrimper]

I think here in NZ we tend to be a nation of straight to the point no thrills and no BS. A spade is a spade and thats that.

We also have this thing called 'tall poppies syndrome' here to - which together can be perceived as nasty. We also have a very dry and dark sense of humour (you have to have seen who we have neighbours :rolleyes: ) .

[Nzshrimper]

Very similar.

i see - that may cause a few extra heart attacks down here if we had to play that..... and where would we plug in our pc's ;)

[Belmondo]

I think here in NZ we tend to be a nation of straight to the point no thrills and no BS. A spade is a spade and thats that.

We also have this thing called 'tall poppies syndrome' here to - which together can be perceived as nasty. We also have a very dry and dark sense of humour (you have to have seen who we have neighbours :rolleyes: ) .

I doubt you'll get a majority of Kiwis to agree that being 'edgy' to the point of rudeness is a matter of national pride. Common decency is just that, regardless of the flag that flies over the government buildings.

[weka2000]

Moppie, cant be fixed. I have heaps like it. Looks like a very different track to puke

Im curious to see how the chairs came out "product" photography

[theflyingkiwi]

I'm amazed that so many people who are gifted at photography seem to feel that critiquing others' photos is a competition within itself. That is, it appears to become challenge to see who can make the most snide comment possible while cloaking it in 'humor.' (Okay, humour for you guys.)

I look back and see a number of good photos and a few great ones. Sadly, I see an even larger number of snarky comments. Maybe we need to spend a little time critiquing the critiques. At what point does this cease to be fun and become personal?

There are far better ways to work the passive aggression out of your systems. Try racquetball.

I would like to think that I call a spade a spade. esp when photographers can do so much more and yet they post a photo that is, in my option. below average.

Hey I am open to anyone questioning my critiquing.

but alas that wont happen.

[weka2000]

This tread was setup by me to be a serious critique of photos and discuss photography in a serious manner. NOT a personality attack thread as we already have 1.

Leave personal issues at door. If you post a photo here expect it to be shot down in a ball of flames and people to be direct and blunt. If you cant handle that dont post photos here.

Dont attack the photographer it dosnt help the photo.

Dont know about the rest of you but lets get on with the photography.

[Belmondo]

I would like to think that I call a spade a spade. esp when photographers can do so much more and yet they post a photo that is, in my option. below average.

Hey I am open to anyone questioning my critiquing.

but alas that wont happen.Spades should always be called spades. What we don't want is:

1. Man, that's an ugly spade
2. That's the worst spade I've ever seen
3. Typical, boring spade
4. ARGHHHHHH!!! Not another spade!!!
5. Your spade sucks
6. Your spades suck
7. You should give up spades and try clubs
8. I thought this was going to be a serious photo thread. Why are we looking at snapshots of spades?

Etc., etc. etc.

[Moppie]

Andrew - i like the concept of the ms shot... .

So good concept

Moppie, cant be fixed. I have heaps like it. Looks like a very different track to puke

Im curious to see how the chairs came out "product" photography

But poorly executed.

I had hoped the OOF Black Beauty would reduce it's presence in the photo, making it more about the track, and less about the car.
Get an atmosphere shot.


And you really want to see photos of chairs?
I'll post some this evening then.

[theflyingkiwi]

Spades should always be called spades. What we don't want is:

1. Man, that's an ugly spade
2. That's the worst spade I've ever seen
3. Typical, boring spade
4. ARGHHHHHH!!! Not another spade!!!
5. Your spade sucks
6. Your spades suck
7. You should give up spades and try clubs
8. I thought this was going to be a serious photo thread. Why are we looking at snapshots of spades?

Etc., etc. etc.

that is true. any type of those comments just don't work and it doesn't help anyone become a better photographer. pointing out the problems within the photograph however shouldn't be considered anything but ones own personal comments regarding what is wrong with the photograph.

anyway the point of this thread is to enable us to be come a better photographer.

[Belmondo]

Carrying my comments a step further, I want to add the following: critiquing should be helpful. It's okay to tell someone you don't care for the image, and it's absolutely within bounds, even beneficial, to tell them why. However, it serves no purpose to be gratuitously blunt. The person learns nothing about how to improve their work, but learns a lot about you.

Being a Kiwi does not impart a license to be cruel. I know that much. Don't try to dismiss bad manners by saying 'Kiwis are direct.' That might be true, but there is a very clear line between direct and obnoxious, and some of you are trying to blur it.

[weka2000]

Motor sport photography is a challange. I have so many good shots that just suck cause of OOF.

Part of learning I guess.

Moppie yes post a chair. Im curious as to the lighting

[Nzshrimper]

So good concept



But poorly executed.

I had hoped the OOF Black Beauty would reduce it's presence in the photo, making it more about the track, and less about the car.
Get an atmosphere shot.

.

yes it is a great concept.. lots of cars going in different direction - the road sweeps draw the eye around the picture.. i just feel it lacks a bit of focus. hence getting Reid's car in focus may have helped here....

I think the track has strong enough presences to deal with the car being sharp..

and not poorly executed as you said that you wanted the car oof - so your execution achieved it's goal.... its just the goal maybe slightly wrong.

maybe more blur on the car would have had the same effect - so a drop in shutter speed could have also helped...

[Nzshrimper]

so in short...

the car is not blurred enough to make look deliberate and not sharp enough to carry off its desired effect.

[S-S]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2395/2418912103_eb7dfcbfd6_o.jpg
40D + 50mm f/1.8

[iKirst]

Oh! SS, the incredibly tight aperture / DOF works really well on your blue bottles

[S-S]

thanks! lol i noticed after i posted it that i ought to have dusted them a little before taking the photo :rolleyes:

[iKirst]

See, now I didn't notice the dust, until you mentioned it.
A photographer (or the subject if it's human) is it's own worst critic ;)

[weka2000]

Reads Toms critique guide before posting as I dont want my a$$ a mod magnet :lol:

Ok SS I dont like the shot becuse its hard to work out what the objects are due to DOF and shooting up angle. There is no context in which these belong.

Maybe 1 in isoltation could provide a better result

[Belmondo]

Reads Toms critique guide before posting as I dont want my a$$ a mod magnet :lol:

Ok SS I dont like the shot becuse its hard to work out what the objects are due to DOF and shooting up angle. There is no context in which these belong.

Maybe 1 in isoltation could provide a better result

Critique Score: B+;)

[weka2000]

Critique Score: B+;)

LOL and I can sit with no pain :lol:

[weka2000]

Thoughts. Woops couple of dust spots

[Moppie]

Wheres the apocalypse?

I like it, but can't focus on it as there is no point of interest.
Maybe a little more saturation and colour tweaking would give the center more impact, and provide a point of interest to settle on?

[akiwi]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2395/2418912103_eb7dfcbfd6_o.jpg
40D + 50mm f/1.8
I really like that SS,
The composition is great, I can clearly see what it is, and the dust is tack sharp ;)
I like the overall blueness.
What would be also cool would be to put a green bottle in there & focus on that.

LOL and I can sit with no pain :lol:

LOL

Thoughts. Woops couple of dust spots
Pretty impressive sky, but as said is nissing something.

Zhat would be great to use in a photo composition as a background with a sexy woman dressed as a devil or something in it.

[weka2000]

I found when I reduced the size and re looked gave it more drama.
Akiwi great minds think alike "womans fury" :lol:

[S-S]

I really like that SS,
The composition is great, I can clearly see what it is, and the dust is tack sharp ;)
I like the overall blueness.
What would be also cool would be to put a green bottle in there & focus on that.

thanks pete
lol a GREEN bottle in my BLUE bottle shelf :shock:
maybe you could paint one green lol in PS ;)

[Nzshrimper]

-----------------

ok here is another one to look at - let know your thoughts.

*picture deleted because i cant be bothered with this...*

however thank you tony for input it was appreciated

[weka2000]

I like this thread :lol:

Chris the first thing I noticed was the OOF nose. Its a photo that needs to be studied. The more you look at it the more life like the man becomes.
Sorry not much good with words. I looked deep into the expression. Makes youwonder what he couldbe thinking or was thinking. Has that feel to it of a sudden death

[akiwi]

thanks pete
lol a GREEN bottle in my BLUE bottle shelf :shock:
maybe you could paint one green lol in PS ;)
A quick hack... but this is what I meant.

[weka2000]

A quick hack... but this is what I meant.

Contrast :lol:

[S-S]

A quick hack... but this is what I meant.

lol peter - cant believe you actually did it
yeah i get what you mean, i was just being smart about my blue glass collection
your hack looks good ;)

[S-S]

had to do an assignment yesterday so i thought i'd share the results here; the brief was to shoot a building or structure & create a 'sense of place'

i have to select 6 pics to submit and 2 rejects to fulfil the brief... c&c welcome

one sample posted, the rest HERE (http://www.flickr.com/photos/availablelightphotographyltd/sets/72157604586479227/) (ignore the last 10 shots in that set, they were taken ages ago & not part of the assignment)

[Kawaka]

SS,
I like the pictures u have done and u should be able to easily get the 6 required.
I may be way of the mark on how a "sense of place" is defined but i feel that the pictures need a human element, for instance the picture above could have a fishing rod leaning against the rail. The building would still be the focal point of the picture.

[S-S]

i hadnt thought of that but there were no such props nearby
the building used to be a water treatment facility and is now a theatre complex

[joeseph]

had to do an assignment yesterday so i thought i'd share the results here; the brief was to shoot a building or structure & create a 'sense of place'

i have to select 6 pics to submit and 2 rejects to fulfil the brief... c&c welcome

I quite like that one - I'd want to fiddle with the perspective & cropping slightly though, the angled planks at the bottom are a wee bit distracting.
Also quite like 2420874012 - interesting lighting in background Vs dark bit in front.

[akiwi]

lol peter - cant believe you actually did it
yeah i get what you mean, i was just being smart about my blue glass collection
your hack looks good ;)
Was bored, and it only took 3 or 4 minutes. Select bottle , new layer, hue/brightness, Erase edge a bit. Finnished!

had to do an assignment yesterday so i thought i'd share the results here; the brief was to shoot a building or structure & create a 'sense of place'

i have to select 6 pics to submit and 2 rejects to fulfil the brief... c&c welcome

one sample posted, the rest HERE (http://www.flickr.com/photos/availablelightphotographyltd/sets/72157604586479227/) (ignore the last 10 shots in that set, they were taken ages ago & not part of the assignment)
Those are pretty cool. Nice looking building by the way.

[S-S]

I quite like that one - I'd want to fiddle with the perspective & cropping slightly though, the angled planks at the bottom are a wee bit distracting.
Also quite like 2420874012 - interesting lighting in background Vs dark bit in front.

:oops: i dont know which one that is LOL, those arent the original filenumbers

[S-S]

pretty cool idea... http://theplug.net/28/strangerphotos.htm

[Sancho]

had to do an assignment yesterday so i thought i'd share the results here; the brief was to shoot a building or structure & create a 'sense of place'

i have to select 6 pics to submit and 2 rejects to fulfil the brief... c&c welcome

one sample posted, the rest HERE (http://www.flickr.com/photos/availablelightphotographyltd/sets/72157604586479227/) (ignore the last 10 shots in that set, they were taken ages ago & not part of the assignment)

That pic screams HDR LOL

You doing a course SS? if so.. more info?

[S-S]

AHA - NO HDR whatsoever, completely one exposure
the light looks two-tone because a cloud was passing over the end of the jetty when i was taking the shot, so the building is still in sun but the jetty is in shade, hence the blue
if you dont believe me i'll post a screenshot of the raw file in lightroom

yeh just grabbing a diploma for the folder

[Sancho]

AHA - NO HDR whatsoever, completely one exposure
the light looks two-tone because a cloud was passing over the end of the jetty when i was taking the shot, so the building is still in sun but the jetty is in shade, hence the blue
if you dont believe me i'll post a screenshot of the raw file in lightroom

yeh just grabbing a diploma for the folder

Oh, wasnt saying it WAS HDR, was saying it is screaming out to BE HDR :)

so wanna flick me some more details on the diploma, who is it through? Have toyed with the idea myself.

[S-S]

NZIBS
dont know how good its going to be yet, i've shot 2 assignments (of 8 ), submitted 1, and have yet to receive my 1st paper back

if you want to do some really good short courses check out www.betterphoto.com (online and payment in USD but they seem pretty good)

[joeseph]

:oops: i dont know which one that is LOL, those arent the original filenumbers
:-) http://www.flickr.com/photos/availablelightphotographyltd/2420874012/in/set-72157604586479227/

[S-S]

ah, thx

[Moppie]

Well Tony wanted to see chairs, so here are the best photos I have ever taken:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/Moppie/blackchair.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/Moppie/redchair.jpg

[weka2000]

Moppie they came out well. Looks like another rectangle softbox was needed to the right.

[Moppie]

Moppie they came out well. Looks like another rectangle softbox was needed to the right.

Yip, I need two really big boxes, and some stronger back ground lights.
I had to remove quite a lot of BG from all of them, and had a real hard time getting smaller softbox to not show up as a hot spot.

Dad polished them all before we started, which made things worse to.
At point there was a bright reflection showing on all the chairs, but it wasn't from any of the lights.
Took a while to narrow it down to the window in the door in the back corner, which was then covered with the bamboo screen.
There was also light reflecting back of the back ground onto the seats, so had to shoot with the chairs as far away as we could.
Really needed another 10 feet of studio to work in.

But, we got results similar to what Dad has gotten in the past from Pro's using medium format film etc.

[low orbit]

Hullo everyone :)

Here's one from Chris's 30D - 17-85 IS USM lens, 1/400@17mm f6.3 ISO400

I quite like it, although I'm having a hell of a job getting pin sharp images - I've got one or two but I think they happen more readily (in moving objects) at quitye high shutter speeds.

C+C, be brutal, I can take it.

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc83/low_orbt/Jhoofingit.jpg

Cheers, Shane.

??? photobucket has somehow screwed up the colour balance and put a hugely green cast on it (!)

[weka2000]

Love the motion but find the house in the back ground distracting.

[manipula]

Personally it's the lack of seeing the face, the colours (mainly) and the fact it looks a tad soft all over (have you re-USM'd for web sized version of the image?) that knocks it down a peg or so. Not bad, but not great. :)

[low orbit]

Love the motion but find the house in the back ground distracting.

Cheers Tony - I'm assuming you mean the white annoying one on the right?

Personally it's the lack of seeing the face, the colours (mainly) and the fact it looks a tad soft all over (have you re-USM'd for web sized version of the image?) that knocks it down a peg or so. Not bad, but not great. :)

Yep, it was soft to begin with. Ironically the few that I have taken of the boys that have been tack sharp the composition has been dead boring. (It's hit and miss with the focus on moving objects - I call user error - not used to what the 30 can and can't do).

Thanks for your feedback guys, much appreciated.

Cheers, Shane.

[akiwi]

Well Tony wanted to see chairs, so here are the best photos I have ever taken:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/Moppie/blackchair.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/Moppie/redchair.jpg
Those are very good. I like the lighting on them. In the second one you need to crop out or clone out the carpet at the bottom.

Hullo everyone :)

Here's one from Chris's 30D - 17-85 IS USM lens, 1/400@17mm f6.3 ISO400

I quite like it, although I'm having a hell of a job getting pin sharp images - I've got one or two but I think they happen more readily (in moving objects) at quitye high shutter speeds.

C+C, be brutal, I can take it.



Cheers, Shane.

??? photobucket has somehow screwed up the colour balance and put a hugely green cast on it (!)
It is not bad, but perhaps a slower shutter speed and pan with him to blur the background more would help isolate the subject.

[low orbit]

^ my thoughts exactly, but I haven't had a lot of success at (good) focus below about 1/400 (!) (except for some crazy fluke shots) that and he was running in a tight close arc at the time. But yes, mass seperation from the background would be great in that shot.

Cheers, Shane.

(btw that was a pan - hence the soft bg - just a high shutter speed makes it static)

[iKirst]

Ok - I haven't converted anymore just yet. The shoot isn't fnished.

But ok for an architectural mag?
(It's show casing the cladding - whilst showing who for ;) )

http://www.ikirst.com/gallery/albums/webpost/01_G.jpg

[Mark Vuleta]

Hi Kirst, is it showcasing the cladding for the manufacturer of the cladding system or cladding systems in general?

If it was for the manufacturer, perhaps a better example of its installation could be found, this particular installation is less than perfect. It could be tidied up in PP if required though.

Could also benefit from a little be more emphasis on the cladding, the sky & MacD's sign tend to dominate.

[iKirst]

Hi Kirst, is it showcasing the cladding for the manufacturer of the cladding system or cladding systems in general?

If it was for the manufacturer, perhaps a better example of its installation could be found, this particular installation is less than perfect. It could be tidied up in PP if required though.

Could also benefit from a little be more emphasis on the cladding, the sky & MacD's sign tend to dominate.

Fair comments.. but! ;)

It's an Austral Cladding - so I am showcasing the actual 300x600 clay tile wall cladding.
It's the third building in NZ to have the system used.
The first is our Selection Center. This was the 2nd, and Maccas Greenlane has just been completed.

The ABstract (spelt with capitol A & B - I haven't been doing typo's ;)) mag they are for is going to 30,000+ architectural firms (NZ and Auz)

The brief was for dramatic angles (creative - obscure), showing the cladding, and introducing the company logo of the building, with a slant away from the norm.

That is just one of 200 shots, I haven't converted the rest, because they don't want me to edit anything (*cringe*). They are going to do their own PP in Auz prior to print ;)

[Mark Vuleta]

Now I get the picture!!

I wouldn't have picked that it was a clay tile. Its going to be very difficult to get something perfect with such a heavy product! Which, I suppose is an attraction to the product. With the brief you have got, good job!

[Mediation]

HI.

I have been invited to the Auckland Museum on Monday evening to photograph an event. Ill be with another photographer who is a professional and wins awards. I have to stick with him and he is going to teach me things.

But I need to have some tips on how to compose photographs of people. What do I photograph at an event. I dont know what its about. Can I just photograph the way I want to? or do I have to think more traditional...

Indoors. Not sure of what light I have. I dont have a flash, so ill be using high ISO and pretty much trying to nail the exposure (how do you expose inside the museum at night time?)... Can someone please tell me some tips on how to compose people and stuff for an event. I only have a 50mm. Thanks :)

[manipula]

Event photography in most cases means simple, bankable shots, not artistic expression. So, read that as being (generally) fairly boring, flash lit shots. The CEO of the company will want to see himself handing over the cheque or giving his speach etc.

You're gonna have issues with just a 50mm IMO. Borrow your dad's Nikons with flashes etc?

[weka2000]

HI.

I have been invited to the Auckland Museum on Monday evening to photograph an event. Ill be with another photographer who is a professional and wins awards. I have to stick with him and he is going to teach me things.

But I need to have some tips on how to compose photographs of people. What do I photograph at an event. I dont know what its about. Can I just photograph the way I want to? or do I have to think more traditional...

Indoors. Not sure of what light I have. I dont have a flash. Can someone please tell me some tips on how to compose people and stuff for an event. I only have a 50mm. Thanks :)

Matt watch the ISO on the 1Ds try to keep under 800 or make sure you have something to reduce the noice. If your not getting paid follow your own beat. My pay to do some testing tonight, lets hope the area is lit for you tommorow night.
On a personal note well done on the camera and we watch to see what you can produce with just 1 lens.
Oh post photo tonight of something you have taken with your new gear.

[Mark Vuleta]

Matt, talk to the guy & ask him what he is after.

If you're going as a 2nd/back-up photog, it may be better off without a flash as you melt into the crowd/background easier. Take the fastest lens you have, do what the other photog asks, wouldn't worry about composition too much, there is very little you can do as far as "artistic" composition at events such as this, it is probably more of an journalist record of the event??

Either way, just relax & have fun but make sure you talk to the other guy to identify your role.

[Mediation]

Event photography in most cases means simple, bankable shots, not artistic expression. So, read that as being (generally) fairly boring, flash lit shots. The CEO of the company will want to see himself handing over the cheque or giving his speach etc.

You're gonna have issues with just a 50mm IMO. Borrow your dad's Nikons with flashes etc?

Nah I want to use my own gear. I am too afraid of using dads gear, because if it breaks he cant do business.

Well the polish photographer (other guy) asked the boss if she can provide some good lighting for the event. So I suppose that means there will be some light. Im going to try and be cunning and re-position people to face light. This will be good practice to understand light. But I hope its not going to be a damn disaster.

Matt watch the ISO on the 1Ds try to keep under 800 or make sure you have something to reduce the noice. If your not getting paid follow your own beat. My pay to do some testing tonight, lets hope the area is lit for you tommorow night.
On a personal note well done on the camera and we watch to see what you can produce with just 1 lens.
Oh post photo tonight of something you have taken with your new gear.

Ill try keep under ISO800, my camera has got noise reduction on. Im not getting paid for it. My friend, her mum is the boss. And she looked at my flickr and wanted me to become her second photographer for the event.

Thanks. I'm getting use to it now. If I want to take a wide angle shot now I just walk about 100metres from the thing I want to photograph. In other words I find my self walking away from objects now, instead of just standing there :p

Matt, talk to the guy & ask him what he is after.

If you're going as a 2nd/back-up photog, it may be better off without a flash as you melt into the crowd/background easier. Take the fastest lens you have, do what the other photog asks, wouldn't worry about composition too much, there is very little you can do as far as "artistic" composition at events such as this, it is probably more of an journalist record of the event??

Either way, just relax & have fun but make sure you talk to the other guy to identify your role.

Yeah I have been told a little bit about what my role is. She told me to just stay with the professional guy and watch what he does. And then I can go off and do my own thing. But she said that I need to stick with him in order to get a feel for it. He is basically going to take care of me.

But yeah, I need to know what my role is there. Perhaps ill be his assistant. Yeah ill have fun. Im going to try and do some bokeh's and arty shots. lol

[weka2000]

I hope its not going to be a damn disaster.
Never be affraid of making mistakes as it is normally the thing we learn most from.

[S-S]

hey matt sounds like a good experience
remember to shoot action & reaction: get the main stuff thats going on but also get ppl's responses to it

[Mark Vuleta]

Custom white balance on site may also be your friend here too Matt, depending upon the lighting.

[weka2000]

We have a general chat thread ....people dont bite in there :rolleyes:
EDIT ...oh wait its photography related :) .....carry on

I want to see photos matt and your thoughts re 1Ds

[weka2000]

Thanks. I'm getting use to it now. If I want to take a wide angle shot now I just walk about 100metres from the thing I want to photograph. In other words I find my self walking away from objects now, instead of just standing there :p
The old foot zoom :lol:

[low orbit]

You mean these critters ...

my absolute favourite from yesterday. No pp except mild sharpening and resizing. (and of course the watermark)

Couldn't trust pbucket till I test some more shots through them ...

C+C as usual.

Cheers, Shane.

[Mediation]

Custom white balance on site may also be your friend here too Matt, depending upon the lighting.

Ive never used custom white balance :eek: ill have a read of my manual. Im always on AWB.

hey matt sounds like a good experience
remember to shoot action & reaction: get the main stuff thats going on but also get ppl's responses to it

Ill remember that. O.k so main stuff and whats going on. Thanks :)

[Mark Vuleta]

Ive never used custom white balance :eek: ill have a read of my manual. Im always on AWB.


Not always an easy option but if your handing a card over to your off-sider for use, getting as close to correct in camera would be helpful (thoughts of someone else opening your files and seeing green tinged people egggggg;))

[Mediation]

Not always an easy option but if your handing a card over to your off-sider for use, getting as close to correct in camera would be helpful (thoughts of someone else opening your files and seeing green tinged people egggggg;))

ah ha, i read my manual and it said that I can use Tungsten or fluorescent white balance. And it said that I could get a red, orange or green tinge. So do I just look at what light bulbs there using and choose the right setting?

We have a general chat thread ....people dont bite in there :rolleyes:
EDIT ...oh wait its photography related :) .....carry on

I want to see photos matt and your thoughts re 1Ds

Yeah im loading some pics that I took today. Ill post some up and write a little bit about the camera.

One thing that I have noticed is that it has got amazing dynamic range.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2412/2426779189_2fc1d4c4ae_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3245/2427609890_8e4a3b0702_b.jpg

[Mark Vuleta]

ah ha, i read my manual and it said that I can use Tungsten or fluorescent white balance. And it said that I could get a red, orange or green tinge. So do I just look at what light bulbs there using and choose the right setting?


Take a shot of a white piece of paper (fill the frame) under the prevalent lighting conditions. Go to the custom wb setting and use this shot as your reference shot. Its quite simple.

Don't forget to check your histogram as well.

[Mediation]

Take a shot of a white piece of paper (fill the frame) under the prevalent lighting conditions. Go to the custom wb setting and use this shot as your reference shot. Its quite simple.

Don't forget to check your histogram as well.

Oh yes the custom white balance button. **flips over to page 45** :) thanks. Ill bring a white piece of card. If I don't ill just use a wall or something.

[Nzshrimper]

Take a shot of a white piece of paper (fill the frame) under the prevalent lighting conditions. Go to the custom wb setting and use this shot as your reference shot. Its quite simple.

Don't forget to check your histogram as well.

dont use white... use a grey card....

if you point the camera at something that is supposed to be a known color, the camera can compare what it actually sees to what it knows it is supposed to be seeing, and determine what it needs to do to compensate. Since any shift of color is most noticeable when starting with a neutral hue, that's what is traditionally used for this task. If we could define and accurately manufacture a standard shade of any other color though, we could all agree to use "red balance" or perhaps "blue balance," but for a variety of reasons the world has standardized on "white balance."

In practice though, white itself isn't generally your best bet since any color sufficiently overexposed will yield pure white. It isn't really the brightness we are interested in measuring anyway but rather the color. For this reason, many photographers make use of a standard gray card instead. When you think about it, it makes perfect sense. It has a nice, medium tone and a neutral hue, and photographers frequently have one anyway for metering. If you point a camera at a gray card and shoot fully on auto exposure, you will get a medium toned result. We know how bright the picture will be, so the only thing in question is what color it will be. Since the gray card actually has a neutral hue, any variation from neutral that the camera records must have come from the color of the light shining on it. To do this, it is important that the frame be completely filled with the color we are measuring to prevent reflections from other objects influencing it.

[S-S]

ah ha, i read my manual and it said that I can use Tungsten or fluorescent white balance. And it said that I could get a red, orange or green tinge. So do I just look at what light bulbs there using and choose the right setting?


if you shoot raw, you can worry about that later - just pick the thing on the dial that makes the scene look as natural as possible and take care of the rest later - or leave it on auto if you feel like it

fluoro lighting can be pink or greenish, tungsten is usually yellow/orange - but there could be a combo of both kinds at the venue which gets messy

raw is your friend ;)

[Mark Vuleta]

dont use white... use a grey card....

Your thinking of exposure, not white balance.

[Mediation]

dont use white... use a grey card....

really? in the manual it says this:

"With custom white balance, you photograph a white object that will serve as the standard for the white balance.

And I need to select the image and import it into white balance data for the setting.

[weka2000]

dont use white... use a grey card....

Nice 18% grey card (or palm of your hand) white card will cause it to under expose ....yes?


woops exposure /WB and thats why we have RAW :)

[Mark Vuleta]

Nice 18% grey card (or palmof your hand) white card will cause it to under expose ....yes?


Two different things, exposure vs white balance.
I wouldn't worry about it unless I wasn't processing the images, if I was handing a card over, I probably would.

[weka2000]

Woops failed photography 101 :cry:

[Nzshrimper]

Nice 18% grey card (or palmof your hand) white card will cause it to under expose ....yes?


woops exposure /WB and thats why we have RAW :)


exposure and white balance are 2 different things....

[Mediation]

if you shoot raw, you can worry about that later - just pick the thing on the dial that makes the scene look as natural as possible and take care of the rest later - or leave it on auto if you feel like it

fluoro lighting can be pink or greenish, tungsten is usually yellow/orange - but there could be a combo of both kinds at the venue which gets messy

raw is your friend ;)

Yeah I can see myself being unsure of all this white balance stuff and flipping to auto. Ill just see what the other guy does. He will teach me when where there anyway. :)

[S-S]

hand over your 1Ds

[weka2000]

exposure and white balance are 2 different things....

All I know is I have these slider thingys for exposure and a eyedropper for WB :lol:

[Nzshrimper]

if you shoot raw, you can worry about that later - just pick the thing on the dial that makes the scene look as natural as possible and take care of the rest later - or leave it on auto if you feel like it

fluoro lighting can be pink or greenish, tungsten is usually yellow/orange - but there could be a combo of both kinds at the venue which gets messy

raw is your friend ;)

Your thinking of exposure, not white balance.

really? in the manual it says this:

"With custom white balance, you photograph a white object that will serve as the standard for the white balance.

And I need to select the image and import it into white balance data for the setting.

Nice 18% grey card (or palm of your hand) white card will cause it to under expose ....yes?


woops exposure /WB and thats why we have RAW :)

Two different things, exposure vs white balance.
I wouldn't worry about it unless I wasn't processing the images, if I was handing a card over, I probably would.

Woops failed photography 101 :cry:

looks like you all did... ;)

[Nzshrimper]

Yeah I can see myself being unsure of all this white balance stuff and flipping to auto. Ill just see what the other guy does. He will teach me when where there anyway. :)


Matt - shoot the grey card in your first shot - then shoot the rest in AWB - the first shot will give you a reference to set your white balance to in pp work..

ie make the card the right colour then set the wb in pp the same on the rest of the shots.

you can set your own wb in camera but for tomorrow i would just go with the the easiest set up first then experiment after...

[Mark Vuleta]

dont use white... use a grey card....

if you point the camera at something that is supposed to be a known color, the camera can compare what it actually sees to what it knows it is supposed to be seeing, and determine what it needs to do to compensate. (This is why you use white) Since any shift of color is most noticeable when starting with a neutral hue, that's what is traditionally used for this task. If we could define and accurately manufacture a standard shade of any other color though, we could all agree to use "red balance" or perhaps "blue balance," but for a variety of reasons the world has standardized on "white balance."

In practice though, white itself isn't generally your best bet since any color sufficiently overexposed (this is the operative word, exposure, not colour). will yield pure white. It isn't really the brightness we are interested in measuring anyway but rather the color. For this reason, many photographers make use of a standard gray card instead. When you think about it, it makes perfect sense. It has a nice, medium tone and a neutral hue, and photographers frequently have one anyway for metering. If you point a camera at a gray card and shoot fully on auto exposure, you will get a medium toned result. We know how bright the picture will be, so the only thing in question is what color it will be. Since the gray card actually has a neutral hue, any variation from neutral that the camera records must have come from the color of the light shining on it. To do this, it is important that the frame be completely filled with the color we are measuring to prevent reflections from other objects influencing it.


Using a grey card as a white balance will shift the entire colour cast towards the darker range.

[Sancho]

I simply shoot raw and adjust by eye in post later, surely that is the best way or am i missing something?

OK, my first image in here, be nice everyone :)

http://stuff.visualtwist.com/photos/photo_of_day/ninja-see-no.jpg

[Mediation]

Question: If I had a lens hood. Would it stop this from happening?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2125/2427644468_976ba3a469_b.jpg

[Nzshrimper]

Using a grey card as a white balance will shift the entire colour cast towards the darker range.

ok then everyone i know in the photography world has been doing this wrong for the last 100 years...

even every camera book i have read has always suggested using grey as it is neutral.

a few links...

http://www.digitalartsphotography.com/instructions.htm

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/white-balance.htm

[Mark Vuleta]

dont use white... use a grey card....



Just thinking about this a bit more, using a grey card, exposing to the centre of the histogram would be right, using a white card, exposing to the right would also be correct.

Its something that is not detailed very well in the Canon manuals, they indicate a white card but should specify that it should be exposed to the right. All very confusing at this time of the night:rolleyes:

[Mark Vuleta]

ok then everyone i know in the photography world has been doing this wrong for the last 100 years...

even every camera book i have read has always suggested using grey as it is neutral.

a few links...

http://www.digitalartsphotography.com/instructions.htm

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/white-balance.htm

Good links, can't say its been an issue for 100 years or so though:rolleyes:

There are also links on here which offer equal amounts of opinions on this subject.

Where you expose the card on the histogram seems to be the key

Take a shot of a white piece of paper (fill the frame) under the prevalent lighting conditions. Go to the custom wb setting and use this shot as your reference shot. Its quite simple.

Don't forget to check your histogram as well.

[low orbit]

I simply shoot raw and adjust by eye in post later, surely that is the best way or am i missing something?

OK, my first image in here, be nice everyone :)



I like that as much as I did the first time around - although not nessecarily a photograph I like it a lot as a striking image.

Cheers, Shane.

[weka2000]

Bookmarked. Time I did a refresher course. :lol:
Hard to retain things as you get older :rolleyes:

[Moppie]

Some of these questions should really be better asked in the wider forums, as there is a wider base of knowledge, and you are are likely to get better answers.


Shooting RAW is only your friend if you have a w/b reference point, and you have time to batch process it to all your images, or you are only keeping a very small number and can process each separately.

For an event, you are likely to want to keep or submit quite a few photos, and is important that they all have the same white balance and exposure.
The exposure part is easy, as you know it will be inside, under constant lighting, you can shoot manual. Set one exposure and leave it.
Just remember to use an aperture that will provide enough DOF for shooting people.
F1.8 might be good for artistic shots of someones eye, but is no good for events where you need to see the whole person, or group of people.

Regarding W/B, This is hard to get right if there are mixed lighting sources. Chances are they will all be Halogen though.
You don't have to use a grey card, or a white card, simply use something that is neutral in tone. Anything grey will do.
Setting the w/b will not effect the exposure in any real important way, unless you are dealing with the extremes, when it can effect the exposure on individual channels (e.g a heavy **** to red in from a photo taken with a very blue w/b can blow the red channel).

The brightness of what ever you set the w/b off will not effect the w/b either.
It could be white, or dark grey and you will still get the same white balance.
You can try this with a test card that has black, white, and grey sections.

If you don't use a grey or white card before hand, you can find a neutral tone in your photo editing software by taking its colour selection tool and moving it over different colours in the photo. When you find one where all 3 RGB values are the same, or with in 5 points of each other, you will have found a neutral tone from which you can set the w/b.


Matt, more importantly, if you are there to support another photog, forget all the advice you get given here, listen to the photo and do what they tell you.

Also, if you need a flash let me know, you can borrow my 550EX if I don't need it.

[weka2000]

Matt possibly use your hand to shade often helps.

Sancho......... your going to give my purist heart a turn :lol:

Having looked at it again the only thing is the gap differneces throws it a bit off balance. Could the center girl be moved to the right a bit in PP?

[Nzshrimper]

just done a little experiment in photoshop and lightroom results as follows...

using grey and white cards i adjusted the white balance to each extreme.... funny no matter where i set the slider in light room the white was always white....

1. Control (White and Grey)

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u185/nzshrimper/whitevgreyat0.jpg

2. -100 temp

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u185/nzshrimper/whitevgreyat-100.jpg

3. +100 temp

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u185/nzshrimper/whitevgreyat100.jpg


now i know which one i would rather use to set my white balance.

white is

r0
b0
g0

(no colour)

grey is

r200
b200
g200

(netrual - or in the middle)

black is

r400
b400
g400

(or just black - devoid of light)

as colour is just the wavelength of light reflected back then black is really a non colour too....

[Moppie]

Cheers, Shane.


That is a very cool photo.

[S-S]

I simply shoot raw and adjust by eye in post later, surely that is the best way or am i missing something?

OK, my first image in here, be nice everyone :)

http://stuff.visualtwist.com/photos/photo_of_day/ninja-see-no.jpg

ah i like the finished product better than the other one... i see you flipped it, good call

i find her on the right's thumbs distracting tho, they look like pixie ears. can you remove them without it lookin weird?

[weka2000]

Dam our group has so much photography talent. Now to find someone to market our work so we can focus on photos :lol:

Sancho I know what your saying. So is it HDR?

SS didnt even see the right 1 with the thumbs. Dam need to get my eyes checked.

[Sancho]

Matt possibly use your hand to shade often helps.

Sancho......... your going to give my purist heart a turn :lol:

Having looked at it again the only thing is the gap differneces throws it a bit off balance. Could the center girl be moved to the right a bit in PP?

Could do, and did consider it, but liked the weeds between them it gave a more 'natural' feel to it, in my opinion .. less 'staged' looking if you will.

ah i like the finished product better than the other one... i see you flipped it, good call

i find her on the right's thumbs distracting tho, they look like pixie ears. can you remove them without it lookin weird?

LOL, hadn't noticed them being weird till you pointed it out.... will think about that one.

Dam our group has so much photography talent. Now to find someone to market our work so we can focus on photos :lol:

Sancho I know what your saying. So is it HDR?

There is a tone mapped layer, desaturated grass and sky layers, dodge and burn layers on the model, and a few other small tweaks her and there.

Belinda just wishes she had done her hair first :rolleyes:

[Moppie]

Strangely, they look like thumbs to me.

[Nzshrimper]

mark i think every woman should be like this - say nothing , hear nothing , see nothing...

life would be so much easier..

cool shot thou... however i found the ladybird on the third blade of grass from the bottom left corner very distracting... ;)

[Moppie]

The correct phrase is "See no evil, Hear no evil, Speak no evil" or words to that effect.
So the photo needs to be reversed, unless it is to be read in Arabic.

[Mark Vuleta]

just done a little experiment in photoshop and lightroom results as follows...

using grey and white cards i adjusted the white balance to each extreme.... funny no matter where i set the slider in light room the white was always white....


white is

r0
b0
g0


(no colour)

grey is

r200
b200
g200

(netrual - or in the middle)

black is

r400
b400
g400

(or just black - devoid of light)

as colour is just the wavelength of light reflected back then black is really a non colour too....


Never played with Lightroom!

Chris, do a CWB with white card exposed 2 stops to the right, then take a shot of your room (or what ever) under the same light as this CWB, then do another CWB with your grey card but exposed in the center. Take another (similar shot) under the same lighting conditions and compare them.
White 0,0,0: grey 127,127,127: black 255,255,255:


EDIT: Chris, I am making assumptions here, I presume that for your "control" shot, you took a shot of a white card on top of your grey card??

If this is right, you have not done an equal test, looking at the proportions of the "control" shot, much more area of grey than white, the average value of this CWB would be well out. Do the same test but filling the entire frame with a white card and then again with a grey card. If you can be bothered do the same again with the white card over exposed by a couple of stops & the grey card exposed in the centre.

[iKirst]

I simply shoot raw and adjust by eye in post later, surely that is the best way or am i missing something?

OK, my first image in here, be nice everyone :)

http://stuff.visualtwist.com/photos/photo_of_day/ninja-see-no.jpg
Absolutely love it!
And the PP work :D

[Mediation]

I want to see photos matt and your thoughts re 1Ds

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3248/2424986114_c56bc32e7e_b.jpg

My thoughts on the 1ds. First of all, the body. It is solid and feels like a strong tool. I love the feeling of magnesium alloy, the rubber grip and the weight. I now hold my shots a bit longer now when I photograph. Because its so heavy, its not light and plastic like. Therefore camera shake is never there anymore. The big thumb dial on the back of the camera is awesome.

Its so easy to change the aperture now. With my 300D I had to press a button and then run my finger along the main dial. Just the simple things make a huge difference I guess. The viewfinder is something that I have really enjoyed. Being able to see the photograph accurately in full frame is something special. It has made my shot count a lot less and more precise. I only take 50shots now. Where as with my 300D I use to take 80-150 shots in one set.

I dont know why. But it seems like I can trust this camera. I know what the picture will look like. It is so accurate and precise. The focusing screen and focus points are amazing as well. I can work out exactly where and what I want to be in focus. Just allows me to have more options.

Now the image quality. The way I feel about it is that I can see what I want to photograph and it will show the vision of it very accurately. I dont have to heavily edit anymore. I dont have to smart sharpen anymore. The dynamic range is lovely. The images just come out clean. The thing that is strange is the LCD is terrible. It shows the pictures and information in a dull, small, blue tinted screen.

But when you load the pictures onto the computer they just burst out with amazing detail. I am not use to a accurate photograph. The 300D was good. But this is great. Ive never actually realized. But I can see why photojournalists love using 1d series camera's. They are so accurate, powerful and trust worthy.

I just love how the images look with the 1ds. They are large and have a quality to them that picks up the smallest of details. I can actually read letters now in my urban photographs. Instead of getting a blob.

In terms of its size and being in the public eye. It does draw attention. People look straight at the thing I have around my neck. And what im holding. But they respect me, just like when I had the 300D. There is no difference really. It is a tool. And they know why I have the camera and what im doing. So its fine.

I dont know what else I can say about the camera. It has a special quality to it. And has done 40k clicks, owned by a studio photographer. I only have the 50mm. But I really do like Prime. They are so fast, accurate and gets me more active. What I really want to do now is a portrait session. So ill try and get Stella and hopefully Sanja to be my models. I have another girl that I want to ask. But ill ask her, through sanja.

Overall the camera is lovely. And to make a final point.

It feels like im finally using the canon 50mm the way it is supposed to be used. Well, im getting the most out of the lens through full frame. I never thought about that. But it all makes sense to me now.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3247/2426823725_03d1baa513_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2156/2427651068_4112ec3328_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3134/2427624126_70e128281d_b.jpg

Before I get a hiss and a roar. I am sorry for posting so many large pics. Sorry for writing a review if it does insult anyone. And I am sorry if the pictures are not up to your standards :)

[Sancho]

Absolutely love it!
And the PP work :D

*blush*

Gosh thanks

[Nzshrimper]

EDIT: Chris, I am making assumptions here, I presume that for your "control" shot, you took a shot of a white card on top of your grey card??

If this is right, you have not done an equal test, looking at the proportions of the "control" shot, much more area of grey than white, the average value of this CWB would be well out. Do the same test but filling the entire frame with a white card and then again with a grey card. If you can be bothered do the same again with the white card over exposed by a couple of stops & the grey card exposed in the centre.


this are pure colour blocks the camera had nothing to do with them - its a pure test - no light casts or exposure issues...

it was a simple test used to show the efect of colour temp (kelvin) on the white and grey....

[Nzshrimper]

My thoughts on the 1ds. First of all, the body. It is solid and feels like a strong tool. I love the feeling of magnesium alloy, the rubber grip and the weight. I now hold my shots a bit longer now when I photograph. Because its so heavy, its not light and plastic like. Therefore camera shake is never there anymore. The big thumb dial on the back of the camera is awesome.

Its so easy to change the aperture now. With my 300D I had to press a button and then run my finger along the main dial. Just the simple things make a huge difference I guess. The viewfinder is something that I have really enjoyed. Being able to see the photograph accurately in full frame is something special. It has made my shot count a lot less and more precise. I only take 50shots now. Where as with my 300D I use to take 80-150 shots in one set.

I dont know why. But it seems like I can trust this camera. I know what the picture will look like. It is so accurate and precise. The focusing screen and focus points are amazing as well. I can work out exactly where and what I want to be in focus. Just allows me to have more options.

Now the image quality. The way I feel about it is that I can see what I want to photograph and it will show the vision of it very accurately. I dont have to heavily edit anymore. I dont have to smart sharpen anymore. The dynamic range is lovely. The images just come out clean. The thing that is strange is the LCD is terrible. It shows the pictures and information in a dull, small, blue tinted screen.

But when you load the pictures onto the computer they just burst out with amazing detail. I am not use to a accurate photograph. The 300D was good. But this is great. Ive never actually realized. But I can see why photojournalists love using 1d series camera's. They are so accurate, powerful and trust worthy.

I just love how the images look with the 1ds. They are large and have a quality to them that picks up the smallest of details. I can actually read letters now in my urban photographs. Instead of getting a blob.

In terms of its size and being in the public eye. It does draw attention. People look straight at the thing I have around my neck. And what im holding. But they respect me, just like when I had the 300D. There is no difference really. It is a tool. And they know why I have the camera and what im doing. So its fine.

I dont know what else I can say about the camera. It has a special quality to it. And has done 40k clicks, owned by a studio photographer. I only have the 50mm. But I really do like Prime. They are so fast, accurate and gets me more active. What I really want to do now is a portrait session. So ill try and get Stella and hopefully Sanja to be my models. I have another girl that I want to ask. But ill ask her, through sanja.

Overall the camera is lovely. And to make a final point.

It feels like im finally using the canon 50mm the way it is supposed to be used. Well, im getting the most out of the lens through full frame. I never thought about that. But it all makes sense to me now.







Before I get a hiss and a roar. I am sorry for posting so many large pics. Sorry for writing a review if it does insult anyone. And I am sorry if the pictures are not up to your standards :)


glad you are enjoying the camera Matt - must say very impressed that you got the smk2 - good choice...

now you impressed with images now - you wait to u get a real piece of glass on there.. (if you have not already had Tony's 50 mm on it) then you will be in heaven....

the sky detail in one of the shots you posted in the last page was great - it had lots of depth to it (and that was just in the sky)

[Mark Vuleta]

this are pure color blocks the camera had nothing to do with them - its a pure test - no light casts or exposure issues...

it was a simple test used to show the effect of color temp (kelvin) on the white and grey....


OK, so they are blocks generated by Photo shop I assume. It is not a fair test then as I believe that the color adjustment is done as a proportional adjustment against the original. Therefor, say a 5% adjustment of color 0,0,0 wont change anything.

I think we are both right to an extent, if you've got the inclination, do the test with your camera using a white card overexposed by 2 stops and another test using your 18% grey card exposed in the middle. They should be more or less the same.

Anyway, this is doing my head in! Its getting late and it hasn't been a great weekend (Crusaders lost:lol:)

Talk to you tomorrow at some stage.

[Nzshrimper]

OK, so they are blocks generated by Photo shop I assume. It is not a fair test then as I believe that the color adjustment is done as a proportional adjustment against the original. Therefor, say a 5% adjustment of color 0,0,0 wont change anything.

I think we are both right to an extent, if you've got the inclination, do the test with your camera using a white card overexposed by 2 stops and another test using your 18% grey card exposed in the middle. They should be more or less the same.

Anyway, this is doing my head in! Its getting late and it hasn't been a great weekend (Crusaders lost:lol:)

Talk to you tomorrow at some stage.

then white would not be white - in a real world test just the cameras intreprtation of white.. hence the need to adjust the white balance in the first place.

hence why yes you can use white but grey allows you to visually see the adjustments and then adjust them accordingly.

in theory any colour can be used if you have reference of the true colour. ( this is again why grey is the best choice as it is truly a neutral mid tone.