|
Haggins posted:My favorite shuttle launch photos are those where the photographer tries to do something no one else has done before. Now I have no idea if some hasn’t tried this before, but these are some of the best I’ve seen: Wait- with the second one, is it the shuttle causing those cloud formations? Like smoke rings?
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2010 17:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:44 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Wait- with the second one, is it the shuttle causing those cloud formations? Like smoke rings?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2010 17:54
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Wait- with the second one, is it the shuttle causing those cloud formations? Like smoke rings? Yeah, it does that every now and then. I'm not exactly sure why.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2010 17:54
|
|
|
That second shot is awesome. The smoke rings and colors are very  The first one however... it just... doesn't seem as special. To me it's about as silly as someone doing a 10 second exposure and writing "dix" with their cell phone or something. I know this isn't PAD, but what the hell, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 01:07
|
|
|
The disney logo animation has a shooting star rainbow thing* that goes up and around, the shuttle makes half of it! *i think it's tinkerbell
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 01:37
|
|
|
Dread Head posted:Sony manufactures the Nikon sensors but they are designed by Nikon. Nope, they are pretty much the same sensors, designed and fabricated by Sony. The D700/D3/D3s sensor is fabbed by Samsung, though. What's different about Nikon is their ADCs (if not using on-chip) and the options used such as CFAs or low pass filters. These are well later in the pipeline than the actual sensor. Since Sony Semiconductor is one of the world's largest semiconductor manufacturers, they tend to work with their customers (which consist of Nikon, Pentax, Canon, and yes Sony's own digital camera division) to tweak what they do for what a customer wants. Ultimately the design and R&D comes down to the semiconductor manufacturer and the compromises they make in production. Ultimately, the Nikon/Sony relationship will probably continue for the time being as currently Sony is the only fab that can stand toe-to-toe with Canon. Nikon tried semiconductors once already and crashed and burned. While Not Invented here is big in Japanese circles, these types of risk sharing businesses are not unusual. Look to their participation in aerospace and automotive engineering to see similar shenanigans. quote:I cannot wait till Sony´s back illuminated sensors make it into DSLRs. They have so much more R&D money than Nikon/canon it's not even funny. Back-illuminated technology only gives gains on very, very dense sensors (e.g. small pocket camera sensors). The marginal gains on a larger sensor with bigger photosites is much less pronounced.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 05:23
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:Back-illuminated technology only gives gains on very, very dense sensors (e.g. small pocket camera sensors). The marginal gains on a larger sensor with bigger photosites is much less pronounced.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 09:04
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:
Even if this is true (like evil_bunny I want to see a source on this), so were gapless microlenses, 12 bit < 14 bit < 16 bit, etc. Every one of these improvements gives us a leg up, and for people like me that upgrade bodies on a 5+ year timeline, that amounts to quite a significant upgrade when you finally do bump.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 11:44
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Even if this is true (like evil_bunny I want to see a source on this), so were gapless microlenses, 12 bit < 14 bit < 16 bit, etc. Every one of these improvements gives us a leg up, and for people like me that upgrade bodies on a 5+ year timeline, that amounts to quite a significant upgrade when you finally do bump. The word is from Sony's mouths. The main reason is because on the smaller sensor the electronics take up proportionally more space on the smaller sensors relative to the photosites than the larger ones. The idea of back-illuminated CMOS is to get the electronics behind the photosites to allow more light through. This brings massive gains on the small sensors where SNR is already impacted due to density. However, on bigger pixels, the support electronics take up a lot less space compared to the photosites and you're already getting the most light in there. The gains would be marginal or perhaps even nonexistent. The law of diminishing returns be a cruel mistress.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 14:08
|
|
|
http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/21/enthusiastic-shutterbug-immortalizes-nikon-on-his-forearm/#continued Awful Nikon tattoo that looks like a penis if you squint.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 16:14
|
|
|
Ringo R posted:http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/21/enthusiastic-shutterbug-immortalizes-nikon-on-his-forearm/#continued I feel like we should be laughing at him for the fact that the camera is set to program mode and there's no hood on that lens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 18:07
|
|
|
According to DPReview's new review on the Canon S90, the sensor in it is made by Sony.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 18:07
|
|
|
Ringo R posted:http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/21/enthusiastic-shutterbug-immortalizes-nikon-on-his-forearm/#continued If I were tattoo artist and got one of those requests I'd be sure to make the camera I tattooed be set to Full Auto
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 18:07
|
|
|
HPL posted:According to DPReview's new review on the Canon S90, the sensor in it is made by Sony. Finally, they get round to reviewing it. Is it my imagination, or are they getting slower and slower at reviewing stuff?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 18:43
|
|
|
spog posted:Finally, they get round to reviewing it. It varies a lot. Sometimes they'll review stuff before anyone else, sometimes like with the S90 it's so late they almost might as well not bother.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 20:15
|
|
|
Someone pointed this out on my local craigslist. BeastOfExmoor fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Apr 8, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 21:08
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Someone pointed this out on my local craigslist. If I shot Canon I would own the gently caress out of that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 21:41
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Someone pointed this out on my local craigslist. Buy it. That's how much a regular 50/1.8 costs new -- you could undoubtedly sell a white one for 2-3 times (or more!) what you paid for it to the right Canon fanboy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 23:40
|
|
|
So I just found this video. I had no idea that content-aware fill could do so much! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ScWu7pG7r0
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 00:41
|
|
|
orange lime posted:So I just found this video. I had no idea that content-aware fill could do so much!
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 04:33
|
|
|
Season finale of house shot entirely on a 5d  http://photocinenews.com/2010/04/08/house-season-finale-shot-on-canon-5d/
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 20:52
|
|
|
I have worked with a lot of video people recently who have declared the RED cameras completely dead, and that the 5Ds/7Ds are the future. The majority of non-hero footage on TV is already being shot on them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 20:55
|
|
|
Ahh the "novelty" position of video on a DSLR body is going to be harder and harder to stand behind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 21:21
|
|
|
I haven't met anyone in video production who thinks they are a novelty, it's a big deal. This is the filmmaking equivalent of the first affordable DSLRs, you can shoot better footage with less production. And on that topic, can anyone recommend music videos that were shot on DSLRs? I found this stop motion one that's pretty cool but I want to see real video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvNZKQ8gywY&feature=player_embedded I'm shooting a music video soon, probably on a 5D/7D, pretty excited about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 21:28
|
|
|
If it drives the price of the cameras down, I'm all for it. If they start jacking up the price because of this hot new feature, I'll be agin' it!
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 21:29
|
|
|
brad industry posted:I have worked with a lot of video people recently who have declared the RED cameras completely dead, and that the 5Ds/7Ds are the future. The majority of non-hero footage on TV is already being shot on them. Quite often nowadays when I go to a small concert and there's a video guy or crew, they're using DSLRs. Very few full-on video cameras aside from camcorders. brad industry posted:And on that topic, can anyone recommend music videos that were shot on DSLRs? I found this stop motion one that's pretty cool but I want to see real video: Some Iranian band shot a music video with nothing but a Canon 1DMkIII blazing away: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lfQHqGOPYA Again, not what you're looking for, but neat all the same.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 22:05
|
|
|
Question regarding D2x color modes for D300. Has anyone shot with them yet? http://www.dpreview.com/news/0711/07112701nikond2xmode.asp Do you prefer these modes to what shipped with the D300? Im noticing that they might actually be better in terms of color pre-post than the original color profiles that came with the D300. Am i seeing things? Musket fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Apr 9, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 22:08
|
|
|
brad industry posted:I haven't met anyone in video production who thinks they are a novelty, it's a big deal. This is the filmmaking equivalent of the first affordable DSLRs, you can shoot better footage with less production. *still* maybe not quite what you're looking for, but there are several videos from last year's Nine Inch Nails tour shot by Rob Sheridan, the band's art director. He apparently used a 5dmkII with a nifty fifty for the whole show. Another release, The Gift, I *believe* was all shot on 5D's, but the only reference I can find just says 'consumer HD camera' so I can't say for sure.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 22:27
|
|
|
I've seen a bunch of live stuff I'm more interested in stuff that was a little more produced. This is a pretty simple idea executed really well http://vimeo.com/3600278 That guy's other videos are all really good and I think shot with the same setup. A little more typical music video http://vimeo.com/4434571 Guy who did that talks about using CS4 Camera Raw to color grade the footage: http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=2474&p=16300#p16300 brad industry fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Apr 9, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 22:57
|
|
|
This is a short film I made in February using a D90, not really a music video proper but it's musical in nature http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGmnFGnXelw
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 23:22
|
|
|
What would be the best video editing software for a beginner - is there a LR type equivalent?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 23:30
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:What would be the best video editing software for a beginner - is there a LR type equivalent? Not that it was necessarily quality, but learning the controls and abilities of the software was easy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 23:39
|
|
|
Interrupting Moss posted:Long ago I edited some video with literally no background in editing at all on iMovie and then Final Cut Express. It was amazingly easy. I tired using iMovie but seemed to get frustrated by adding an mp3 audio track to the video and slowing it down. Am I just being retarded?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 23:44
|
|
|
I am curious tho, do they just focus manually with the 5d and 7d?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2010 02:10
|
|
|
ease posted:I am curious tho, do they just focus manually with the 5d and 7d? Yeah, most non-consumer video is actually shot manually focused.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2010 02:24
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Yeah, most non-consumer video is actually shot manually focused. Yeah...imagine how great it would be to be shooting 80 feet of film per minute while the camera's autofocus racks in and out because of a reflection on a car passing by.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2010 02:52
|
|
|
I don't have any real prospects of making any part of my living from photography, so keep that in mind with this statement. After a week of travel/vacation to various parks and places, I'm beginning to wonder if the DSLR format is right for me. The crop of the more affordable (sub-$1900) bodies, the viewfinders that are darker than my 30 year-old cameras, and size in general have me looking at the Micro 4/3rds. I don't need to do billboard shots, and likely never will- and I am seriously questioning how the DSLR market is going to keep me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2010 03:04
|
|
|
hybr1d posted:I don't have any real prospects of making any part of my living from photography, so keep that in mind with this statement. After a week of travel/vacation to various parks and places, I'm beginning to wonder if the DSLR format is right for me. The crop of the more affordable (sub-$1900) bodies, the viewfinders that are darker than my 30 year-old cameras, and size in general have me looking at the Micro 4/3rds. I don't need to do billboard shots, and likely never will- and I am seriously questioning how the DSLR market is going to keep me. Do you shoot full frame? While it's not as good as an old OM or anything, the finder on the full frame DSLR's is a lot nicer than the crops. 5D1's are hovering around a grand or a bit over. I've felt the same way at times though, for me it's the high ISO performance that keeps me with my Canon system more than anything. I don't shoot sports or action very often so shutter lag and all that aren't a huge issue, and I'd love something smaller for travel. But being able to crank it to ISO 1600 (3200 or higher when I'm shooting with a 5D2) and not really have to worry about it is great, and I'm really happy with my Canon lenses and the options I have open to me with the system. Whether I could go back to shooting with an LCD screen to compose on is an unknown, but I've been strongly considering selling off some film gear I don't use a lot and buying a secondhand EP1 to see how I like it. On the other hand I've been getting in to 4x5 so maybe I just have a secret need to burden myself with unwieldy photographic equipment. If I'm already carting that poo poo around on trips I don't think a 5D is really too much to ask 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2010 03:20
|
|
|
ease posted:I am curious tho, do they just focus manually with the 5d and 7d? Yes. For someone that actually has a crew you would have a focus puller who pretty much just keeps stuff in focus and makes sure its all going alright. Which is why lenses like these http://photocinenews.com/2010/02/18/zeiss-unveils-new-dslr-cine-lens/ are much more handy for getting spot on focus. You can set your mark and hit it whereas its much harder with a normal lens where the markings are usually quite narrow and harder to pinpoint.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2010 03:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:44 |
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Do you shoot full frame? While it's not as good as an old OM or anything, the finder on the full frame DSLR's is a lot nicer than the crops. 5D1's are hovering around a grand or a bit over. I took 3 cameras with me on my trip. Here's the summary of each one: Nikon D80: Good camera, but the technical limitations (noise is noticeable as low as ISO 800, crop). I ditched my battery grip and took just it and a rented 24-35 1.8. Very acceptable weight until I had to start two-handing trail obstacles, then it was a liability/risk. Overall the best camera of the trip so far for photos- getting reliable light readings in the woods with spots of heavy shade and full sun is nothing short of a crapshoot. Being able to easily bracket was a huge help, not to mention reviewing them- but the tiny LCD, dark viewfinder (typical on a 2-3 year old model??) made it a pain at times. Bronica ETRSi: A tank, and my biggest mistake was not bringing a shoulder strap. It was too heavy to ask my small wife or kids to carry on the hike, so I only got a few shots close to the main part of the park. It only got brought on one trip due to its size. We'll have to see how the pics turn out, because of obvious developing delays/costs for color film. Crown Speed Graphic: I took a total of 2 photos with this, not only because of logistics of such a camera in the park, but also because I forgot to take the changing bag with me, making the $80 of film unusable. Logistics played heavily into this, and I'm not even bringing up trips to the museums where a smaller camera would have been far easier on the shoulder. I have considered a full-frame, but another $2500 investment into something that may work just as well for me on a 4/3rds and some older glass.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2010 03:55
|
|