|
Cross_ posted:I really don't understand why camera manufacturers insist on having front facing flashes. Just add $2 hinges to the side and you could have a cheap bounce flash and another bullet point for your product. On-camera flashes aren't really powerful enough to do good bouncing, and idea of pointing it up to take a picture of something in front of you would create such a huge cognitive disconnect in the average consumer that you could hear the snap. It's really just another situation of "if you know how to use this feature properly, you won't be satisfied with it." There are plenty of ways around it, too. I know a guy who shoots with a (literally) $15 640x480 camera that doesn't even have a screen, but it has a flash, which he uses to optically trigger a handheld speedlite, and gets these awful grainy low-resolution photos with wonderful lighting.
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 04:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 00:27 |
|
|
orange lime posted:I know a guy who shoots with a (literally) $15 640x480 camera that doesn't even have a screen, but it has a flash, which he uses to optically trigger a handheld speedlite, and gets these awful grainy low-resolution photos with wonderful lighting. Hahahaha what the hell? Why? Any examples you could share? e: I feel like I should contribute this product to the conversation: http://www.lightscoop.com/ I don't really have anything constructive to add other than yes people do buy a $30 mirror to bounce their underpowered on-board flash. I don't know who, but the man makes a profit. I'm with orange lime, I'd assume that when you reach the point that you understand and appreciate diffused light, even if you consider bouncing your onboard flash, you wouldn't be happy with the power/direction/diffusing/control/etc. and would invest in a speedlite for off-camera work. ...but judging by the existence of the Light Scoop I suppose that's not really the case! 
BobTheCow fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Apr 22, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 04:20
|
|
|
Let me fix that for you:BobTheCow posted:Nikon's spokesman: Ashton Kutcher I love Canon... but come on. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 04:26
|
|
|
Well after a little loving around I found a way to make my own working flash bounce! Seems to work okay for what one would expect from something made from construction paper. Still a lot cheaper then say the "Light Scoop", an by cheaper I mean free.. I used my sons toy inky to try it out. The only light in the room was a table lamp. Plain old flash.  Click here for the full 1227x815 image. Homemade flash bounce!  Click here for the full 1227x815 image.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 05:59
|
|
|
Anyone know of a source of "behind the scenes" food styling blogs or flickr groups? I specifically want to see the dirty tricks of it, that go beyond normal cooking and arranging.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 12:19
|
|
|
Obscurum posted:
Seems somewhat underexposed, though..
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 12:43
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Anyone know of a source of "behind the scenes" food styling blogs or flickr groups? I specifically want to see the dirty tricks of it, that go beyond normal cooking and arranging. http://www.blogged.com/topics/food-styling/ Out of curiosity, I did a Google search of behind the scenes food styling and that was the only hit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 13:06
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Anyone know of a source of "behind the scenes" food styling blogs or flickr groups? I specifically want to see the dirty tricks of it, that go beyond normal cooking and arranging. There's a bunch of food styling stuff on youtube too. It can be a little hit or miss, but there's some interesting videos. This one always cracks me up it's like a PSA from the 80s. Paragon8 fucked around with this message at 15:56 on Apr 22, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 15:52
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:Nikon's spokesman: Ashton Kutcher But that's an Adobe business card...
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 15:57
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:e: I feel like I should contribute this product to the conversation: http://www.lightscoop.com/ The Lightscoop web site posted:Simply slip the Lightscoop® over your SLR camera’s pop-up flash, follow the easy camera set-up steps, and immediately transform the ugly direct light from your tiny pop-up flash into pro-quality light. WOAH! Where I do get me some of that pro-quality light?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 16:01
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:But that's an Adobe business card... ...damnit. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 16:11
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:WOAH! Where I do get me some of that pro-quality light? Pro-quality light only comes from distant stars and is captured and packaged in speedlights, this guy doesnt know what he's talking about
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 16:12
|
|
|
Hop Pocket posted:Seems somewhat underexposed, though.. I just turned all the settings on automatic. I figure the average person who would buy a Light Scoop would do the same anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 16:23
|
|
|
I'm surprised there isn't a thread here for compact cameras, perhaps I'm just not seeing it? Unless you want to be 'that guy', sometimes its inappropriate to bring along a huge DSLR. I'm interested in an affordable compact camera that will work both for hiking, and for parties. Any particular recommendations, or things that I should avoid?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 16:35
|
|
|
jonus posted:I'm surprised there isn't a thread here for compact cameras, perhaps I'm just not seeing it? Unless you want to be 'that guy', sometimes its inappropriate to bring along a huge DSLR. I'm interested in an affordable compact camera that will work both for hiking, and for parties. Any particular recommendations, or things that I should avoid? Figure out how much money you want to spend, then compare that to the list of Canon compacts. Pick what seems appropriate. The SD series tend to be good for tiny cameras-- I have the SD940IS and it has performed admirably.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 16:48
|
|
|
On a scale from skinny jeans to trench coat, how compact do you want it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 16:50
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:On a scale from skinny jeans to trench coat, how compact do you want it? Small enough that people won't be 'oh look he brought the loving camera again'. edit : relaxed fit jeans?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 17:09
|
|
|
jonus posted:Small enough that people won't be 'oh look he brought the loving camera again'. Oh, are your friends really like that? People had a lot of fun with my camera at the party. The host even took our her 400D and we played with lenses for a little while.  I don't even know who took this one but I like it.  The makeshift bounce worked pretty well, I think this needs a better crop but whatever.  But, if you're really set on this, I would look into getting a used Nikon Coolpix S51 It takes pretty good shots, the low light is alright, and it's cheap enough that I wouldn't worry about carrying it in my pocket. The lens doesn't pop out either so it's a bit more durable if it's going to be used with drinking. I can post some examples if you want...
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 17:19
|
|
|
I've said it before and I'll say it again, I maintain that the Olympus Stylus series is the ultimate party camera. Waterproof, shockproof, basically idiotproof, I regularly just leave it lying around at parties and just see what people do with it the next morning. Plus, taking pictures from inside a glass of beer is a fun gimmick. On the flip side, it's not a serious contender for making outstanding images. It's fine for a party camera/take anywhere P&S, but there are no manual controls. But I love mine!
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 18:43
|
|
|
jonus posted:I'm surprised there isn't a thread here for compact cameras, perhaps I'm just not seeing it? Unless you want to be 'that guy', sometimes its inappropriate to bring along a huge DSLR. I'm interested in an affordable compact camera that will work both for hiking, and for parties. Any particular recommendations, or things that I should avoid? I was not aware of the 'that guy' label for people who turn up with SLRs. I started taking mine everywhere and taking photos of everything. But the secret sauce is when people see how awesome they look and I make the party seem 10x more crowded and lively, they can't wait to see more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 20:17
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I was not aware of the 'that guy' label for people who turn up with SLRs. I started taking mine everywhere and taking photos of everything. But the secret sauce is when people see how awesome they look and I make the party seem 10x more crowded and lively, they can't wait to see more. Worst case you just get a bunch of comical but slightly out of focus pictures of your friends.  http://i42.tinypic.com/2r5rksp.jpg
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 21:22
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I was not aware of the 'that guy' label for people who turn up with SLRs. I started taking mine everywhere and taking photos of everything. But the secret sauce is when people see how awesome they look and I make the party seem 10x more crowded and lively, they can't wait to see more. I'm that guy at children's functions. My friends' kids, my son's daycare classmates, etc... So much so, I have a couple of sets of parents who didn't bring cameras to their own kid's birthday party, as the knew I'd be there and take good, DSLR photos. But, it's a thin line. You can also get the "jeez, you've got your camera again?" from people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 21:43
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:
Yer sometimes I have to force myself to leave the camera in the bag (I always have it on me though, what if the bar gets taken over by mercenaries, or a bomb goes off, or or...) because sometimes you've just got to enjoy yourself/get drunk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 21:53
|
|
|
TBH no one complained after they had seen a couple of pics (it was more hello what is your email dear sir I demand you send me these).
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 21:59
|
|
|
I've never had anyone bug me about carrying an SLR around with me. The worst I get is the usual "well, my cell phone has 8 megapickles and it fits right in my pocket" kind of folks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 22:13
|
|
|
orange lime posted:I've never had anyone bug me about carrying an SLR around with me. The worst I get is the usual "well, my cell phone has 8 megapickles and it fits right in my pocket" kind of folks. It's never random people...it's your friends, family, co-workers who see you with your camera everywhere that will sometimes roll their eyes that you have it with you again...
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 22:19
|
|
|
I only ever get people asking me why I didn't bring my camera or they will often tell me to bring my camera before hand. A cousin told me she didn't take pictures of her kids anymore because the ones I take are better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 22:28
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:It's never random people...it's your friends, family, co-workers who see you with your camera everywhere that will sometimes roll their eyes that you have it with you again... And the one time you don't have it because you're sick of people commenting on it, or you just forget it, everyone complains.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 22:57
|
|
|
I always get the thing from my family where they want me to take pictures, but oh, I also brought my eleventy megapickle camera so can you show me how to use it and take pictures as good as yours and also pose everyone for me, then take the picture, but just pretend I did it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 23:28
|
|
|
orange lime posted:On-camera flashes aren't really powerful enough to do good bouncing
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2010 23:55
|
|
|
jonus posted:Small enough that people won't be 'oh look he brought the loving camera again'. The correct response is: "Deal with it baby, I'm making an art  "
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2010 02:57
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:The correct response is: "Deal with it baby, I'm making an art Dress up like Pompous' avatar for added effect. Monocle not optional.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2010 04:26
|
|
|
Cross_ posted:Underexposed picture with even lighting or hotspot mugshot- I think that's a pretty obvious choice. Just push your ISO a bit and voilà: super range with poo poo light output I tried it with my SB-900 when I had just gotten it, and you can get shots in the middle of the night at 100+ meters at ISO 1600.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2010 07:34
|
|
|
Question about focusing for someone that wears glasses. I only wear mine for distance (near-sighted a bit, find it hard to read signs and such at distance). I can see fine without them, so I'm not wearing them "full-time." My issue is I find trying to use the viewfinder with glasses on a bit awkward, but if I take my glasses off and manually focus, that will actually make it out of focus (duh). Then again, I hate to have to take my glasses off every time I shoot a manual focus shot. So anyone that does a lot of photos and takes glasses on/off a lot: do you manual focus with or without glasses? I realize its a personal preference, but if you set the diopter one way, do you often find yourself having to adjust?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2010 11:05
|
|
|
subx posted:Question about focusing for someone that wears glasses. I only wear mine for distance (near-sighted a bit, find it hard to read signs and such at distance). I can see fine without them, so I'm not wearing them "full-time." I'm in a similar situation, my vision is just barely bad enough to need them to drive, but other than that I can go without them. Without glasses it's not so much focusing incorrectly as it is not having the resolution/fine detail to get it exactly right. I lost/had my glasses stolen and switched to contacts and have had no problems since.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2010 15:58
|
|
|
subx posted:My issue is I find trying to use the viewfinder with glasses on a bit awkward, but if I take my glasses off and manually focus, that will actually make it out of focus (duh). Then again, I hate to have to take my glasses off every time I shoot a manual focus shot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2010 16:26
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:Focus on something with your glasses on, take your glasses off, and adjust the little wheel next to the eyepiece until it's in focus. This will be a pain if anyone else ever uses your camera, just like in high school and college bio lab it was a pain to share a microscope with a lab partner who had to take their glasses off to see anything through the eyepiece. Well yea I know how to fix as I mentioned adjusting the diopter, I'm just not sure if its better to fix it or just leave it. I was hoping someone that is pro/semi-pro would give me a bit of advice. I just got my lens prescription from my eye doctor, so I don't need to mess with the whole dial adjusting thing, I know exactly where to put it. Also contacts scare me, I hate anything being near my eyes 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2010 18:15
|
|
|
subx posted:Also contacts scare me, I hate anything being near my eyes Nobody liked it, but you get used it. I tried them in high school and it was a big PITA putting them in and everything, a few years later found out I had a slight astigmatism and it was much easier (even after literally 6+ years of not using them). I mean, give it a shot; they gave me a free sample pair with my eye exam that I used for
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2010 20:29
|
|
|
Quick question, I've got a Phottix TC-501 release for my Canon 40D, for some reason the shutter button on it just seems to work the autofocus when pressed and wont fire the shutter. Is it likely a malfunction with the release? Or am I an idiot and I've got some setting wrong somewhere. (for reference none of the functions on the release seem to make the shutter fire)
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 05:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 00:27 |
|
|
Aargh posted:Quick question, I've got a Phottix TC-501 release for my Canon 40D, for some reason the shutter button on it just seems to work the autofocus when pressed and wont fire the shutter. Is it likely a malfunction with the release? Or am I an idiot and I've got some setting wrong somewhere. Broken wire or dirty connection, most likely.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2010 07:33
|
|