|
brad industry posted:Just buy 2 scrim jims. Accomplishes the same thing, cheap, but isn't made out of cardboard. You can use them for a lot of other things since the fabric is easily changeable. How are scrim jims cheap? I love mine, but even the cheapest option is at least 100 per scrim with diffusion fabric. Vs a cardboard box and white paper that costs less than a dollar. Sometimes business don't work out. I think a big problem is that the only business model anyone is willing to pursue any more is large investment of (your or someone else's) money up front for a ton of stuff and hope your business flies. What ever happened to slow growth? The cardboard and paper isn't even going to be in the final image, and it diffuses the light in the same way. If you can't swing it without looking unprofessional in front of these clients and you're fairly sure you will have steady work from them, go for something dedicated, but if you're unsure in the slightest, do something low cost till you know you are going to offset the cost of better gear.
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2011 23:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:37 |
|
|
Everyone here owns thousands of dollars worth of cameras and lenses so 100 bucks for a scrim that will last forever and has a million uses doesn't seem like a big expense to me. You can also rent them for like $15, and they are obviously DIY-able to look professional without having to resort to stuff you pulled out of the trash. Maybe a cardboard box is functionally the same, but your client doesn't know that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2011 23:32
|
|
|
asteroceras posted:Secondly, how much difference would I notice by upgrading my processor from a dual core 2.8GHz to quad core ~3.0GHz, given the following setup, and bearing in mind that my biggest annoyance is the time it takes to save large images, not slowness in general operations? : quote:Would I notice much difference going all the way to the newest motherboard and processor? I went with an i5 2500k (the i7 2600k has 4 cores but hyper threading makes it the same as an octa-core processor) because the $150 difference isn't worth it to me. If you're working with loads of video encoding as well as photos, then get the i7 (Or if photography is your main income generator-- Don't skimp on something that will cut down minutes from your workflow for the next 2+ years)
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 00:24
|
|
|
I need copyright advice. I work at a zoo (as a keeper) and spend a lot of time there outside of work (during my lunch breaks, on my weekends, etc.) taking pictures. Occasionally someone there will want to use a picture of mine for a press release, publication, or whatever; I have no problem allowing them to use some of my stuff for those purposes with my permission, as long as I am credited for the photo. But their official policy is that they will not credit the individual employee (only the Zoo) for external uses; although internally, they'll credit me to my heart's content. But the kicker is that volunteers who take pictures are fully credited, as they are not paid employees. So from what I understand of copyright, unless I am being paid specifically to take photographs (which I am not) or agree to some sort of contract in which I transfer ownership of my picture(s) (which I have not,) then I retain full copyright over my work. And should receive credit if I allow them to use any of my photos. Correct? There's a gray area about stuff that I take while on the clock, but that's a whole 'nother issue. Right now, it's about what I do on my own time. As it stands, I disagree with the current policy and will refuse to let anyone use my photos for anything (which makes me seem like a dick in many people's eyes) until they agree to credit me. I have yet to directly confront the administration about this, but want some sort of validation of my stance on the issue for when I eventually do go talk to them. Do I have a leg to stand on here?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 00:52
|
|
|
William T. Hornaday posted:I need copyright advice. you are right. they are wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 00:58
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:Pic so we can see what you're dealing with? Can't say I've ever thought of using liquify to remove them, that sounds like a tremendous pain in the rear end... usually I just spot heal or clone. Bleepbloop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 01:27
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:you are right. they are wrong. They are wrong, but the downside is that being too stubborn about it can one's reputation around the workplace. Pissing off the wrong boss will result in otherwise minor slip-ups getting blown out of proportion as an excuse for termination. It happens all the loving time to otherwise great employees, once someone loses that "team player" status it's pretty much over. So the choice comes down to exerting his rights, or looking over his shoulder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 01:43
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:you are right. they are wrong. Just to get a little more clarification, if I allow someone to use a photo of mine in something as simple as a powerpoint, they're obligated to credit me if I request them to? xzzy posted:They are wrong, but the downside is that being too stubborn about it can one's reputation around the workplace. Pissing off the wrong boss will result in otherwise minor slip-ups getting blown out of proportion as an excuse for termination. Yeah, this is kind of an issue I hoped I'd never have to confront. Luckily, unless I start raising holy hell about this, it shouldn't really have any negative effects on my job. The thing that sucks is that this would never even be an issue if everyone had a rudimentary understanding of copyright in the first place. I shouldn't have to feel like an anal-retentive jagoff for seeking due credit for my intellectual and creative property. Although on a bright note, rumor has it that they're currently thinking about changing the policy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 02:06
|
|
|
brad industry posted:Everyone here owns thousands of dollars worth of cameras and lenses so 100 bucks for a scrim that will last forever and has a million uses doesn't seem like a big expense to me. You can also rent them for like $15, and they are obviously DIY-able to look professional without having to resort to stuff you pulled out of the trash. Lots of people get paid, and paid well, to do this, and that's fantastic - enjoying one's job is a wonderful thing. This is why we have a photo-business thread, right? But not every shutterbug goes on to professional status, or even makes a few bucks here and there to help cover expenses. I'd like to be able to spend thousands and buy really top-of-the-line stuff, but it's not going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 02:57
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Maybe a battery grip would have fewer issues? Not sure. But I think in sub-zero temps, tucking the camera into a coat when not shooting will help its performance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 03:59
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:You make some good points, and I'm not trying to call you or anybody else out here, but "Everyone here owns thousands of dollars worth of cameras and lenses" is not true. I've spent about $1000 total for my DSLR, my lenses, and all of the accessories I've accumulated so far. Everything, with the sole exception of a holster-type bag, has been second hand, mainly from ebay. This has wrecked my already pathetic budget, but I did it because I really enjoy photography. It's a hobby to me, and will never be my day-job; it's unlikely I'll ever get paid to take a picture. For what it's worth, brad may have thought this was the business thread, I definitely got mixed up myself throughout this discussion. It was business advice and for the business crowd those assumptions are perfectly reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 04:03
|
|
|
That is also true. I think if Psylent wants to impress the jewelry store and get repeat business taking pictures of their wares, he would do well to show up with something that isn't a cardboard box. Renting some gear seems like a good middle ground between pour-on-the-money and dig-thru-a-dumpster. \/\/\/ Fair enough. Certainly we're in agreement on the point about cardboard != professional-looking. ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 02:56 on Jan 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 04:46
|
|
|
I think I did mistake for this business thread, I was responding to:psylent posted:I'd be photographing a lot of valuable jewellery so I'm assuming they'd probably want me to do it onsite, so I think I'd need something a bit more professional than a cardboard box. Scrims would be the more professional version and they are relatively cheap / easy to rent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 06:48
|
|
|
brad industry posted:
Agreed. Rented them out before- ended up making a good impression with the client. Remember, those are the same guys who usually think that the price of your gear directly correlates to your merit as a photographer/artist. Even better though: buy/rent the scrims one day before you show up and set them up at home, sort of a dry-run or practice. I wouldn't want to get myself caught helplessly fumbling around with those on location. But then again I'm an IKEA victim so YMMV.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 07:00
|
|
|
brad industry posted:Scrims would be the more professional version and they are relatively cheap / easy to rent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 07:53
|
|
|
psylent posted:Wouldn't a 16" light tent do the job and still look decent anyway? I can get one of those for around $50. Yes. There are very nice collapsible ones that fold up and have a handle. They are extremely convenient and shouldn't be more than 50. That said, they are worthless for anything other than small product photography, vs scrims that can be used for almost anything. I own scrims and no light tent, but if I were to ever get regular paying work for product photography I would buy a collapsible tent in a heartbeat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 11:02
|
|
|
Shmoogy posted:From what processor to what processor? Photoshop and Lightroom can take advantage of extra cores and hyper threading, so it does help. To what extent depends on how old your dual core is, and which quad core you're looking for. (Clock speed matters obviously, but the newer architectures are more efficient especially with turbo/hyper threading) Thanks for the advice. I suppose I could try overclocking and underclocking my existing processor to guage how much difference a new processor might make to my specific workflow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 11:46
|
|
|
Cyberbob posted:Bleepbloop. Probably belongs more in the post processing thread, but after messing with it a few minutes, I think your best bet is to copy the left half of her chest, flip it, super-impose it on top of the right side and erase out all of the parts where you want to see the hair. This way you aren't dealing with any weird smudges from cloning/healing since there is detail in her skin. This isn't perfect and I messed up a spot or two, but using the method above I got this in about a minute. Should be an easy fix given a bit more time... though how much of the loose hair you cut is up to you. It might be best to get it real close and then just burn the small transition pieces into shadow for the most natural look.  Click here for the full 800x1176 image.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 18:58
|
|
|
psylent posted:Wouldn't a 16" light tent do the job and still look decent anyway? I can get one of those for around $50. Like poop said they are kind of single purpose, where scrims can be used for practically anything. FWIW I work on a lot of product shoots and we never use tents.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 18:58
|
|
|
psylent posted:I've had a couple of people I know working at jewellery shops ask me about doing photography for them. At the moment I don't even own a macro lens so I've had to politely decline, but I can see it being a way of making some cash if I can turn out a quality product. They are trying to sell you some light tent kits, but there is some useful advice on these pages: http://www.tabletopstudio.com/documents/jewelry_photography.htm The basic setup seems to be two light behind diffusion panels and one or two lights for direct reflections and sparkle. What output size do they want? A macro might not be required as long as you have enough resolution to crop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 19:59
|
|
|
So I have a bit of an issue with my Nikon 20mm f2.8, specifically with auto focusing. The motor seems to engage but doesn't actually rotate the ring or change the focal plane. Is there any trusted repair shops, or is it not even worth the hassle?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 06:31
|
|
|
Lord Rupert posted:So I have a bit of an issue with my Nikon 20mm f2.8, specifically with auto focusing. The motor seems to engage but doesn't actually rotate the ring or change the focal plane. Is there any trusted repair shops, or is it not even worth the hassle? I've taken a couple lenses to a local repair shop around here and never had an issue. It's not super fast (took about 6 weeks), but the prices were way less than replacing the lens and he cleaned up all the optics while they were apart. Find a local place that's been in business for a while and you should have a similarly good experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 07:16
|
|
|
subx posted:I've taken a couple lenses to a local repair shop around here and never had an issue. It's not super fast (took about 6 weeks), but the prices were way less than replacing the lens and he cleaned up all the optics while they were apart. Thanks man I will look into some local places around here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 20:25
|
|
|
I'm entering a photo competition at work whereby we submit a photo that represents a word. We can submit up to 3 photos total (either 3 in one word category or 3 across 3 categories) Problem is I have way too many to choose from. Would you all vote on which pictures you think would have the best shot at winning? There are between 150-500 entries per word, but about 80% of the pictures are god awful shots. Here's a word doc of what I have so far: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11221822/Photocategories.docx Right now the only one I know I will submit is under Industry (the shanghai skyline picture). Appreciate it!
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 21:55
|
|
|
I'd submit the guy doing a flip in the air under People and the Invention one (which is already highlighted).
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2011 04:23
|
|
|
r03 is making me want to blow my loving head off. I have a Nikon D80 and it doesn't want me to take pictures. Supposedly it has to do with what buffer I have left? Could a semi-low battery be the cause of this r03 bullshit that won't let me take pictures? The charger is at home and I'm in the office so I can't put it on just yet to test the theory. Also when I try to go into the menu it might load for 2 seconds then go black again, because it does this I think it may be a battery issue (trying to save battery life?) I've gotten this message in the past, and normally taking the lens on and off, or taking the battery out and back in fixes it. But tonight nothing will fix it. Disclaimer, I am not a real photographer, I do all the design work for a small company and apparently product images fall under that category, I'm competent enough at taking photo's, but I don't know the Nikon inside and out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 00:37
|
|
|
RizieN posted:r03 is making me want to blow my loving head off. I have a Nikon D80 and it doesn't want me to take pictures. R03 is not an error and unrelated to the fact that your camera won't take pictures. r03 indicates that 03 frames can R-emain in the Buffer. Usually it is shown when you half-depress the shutter release, at the office right now so I can't verify. You can try switching off "Long Exposure NR" or JPEG/RAW modes to get a larger buffer, but I kind of doubt this is your problem. Other than that try re-seating the battery, a different memory card and re-seating your lens. Make sure to wipe down the lens contacts (the little ball-heads) with a soft cloth and do the same for your camera -- just in case. Also make sure that you are not in "Focus priority" mode, where the camera won't fire unless it has acquired focus. Try setting it to manual and see if that works.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 01:47
|
|
|
R03 means you can take 3 photos before it has to pause. Is it letting you take any? Is it seeking focus when you go to take a shot? It sounds like an issue with the memory card.. only a 3 shot buffer sounds like a crappy card  The LCD screen going black is to do with the auto-dim feature.. When you put your head up to the camera, it'll automatically black out the screen.. Sometimes when there's either low light or a lot of dust on the camera, it'll think it's being blocked by a face when it's really not. Reset the camera back to factory default settings with a full battery and a different memory card and start from there. Cyberbob fucked around with this message at 02:00 on Feb 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 01:56
|
|
|
Cyberbob posted:The LCD screen going black is to do with the auto-dim feature.. When you put your head up to the camera, it'll automatically black out the screen.. Sometimes when there's either low light or a lot of dust on the camera, it'll think it's being blocked by a face when it's really not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 11:23
|
|
|
The LCD was shutting off on its own last night, It would load up for a second then just go blank, no shutter release, no face up close(my D80 has never done that anyway though). This morning, with a full battery and before I tried any of the other solutions posted, the stupid thing works. Maybe the batter was just on the verge of death last night. Thanks for the help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
RizieN posted:The LCD was shutting off on its own last night, It would load up for a second then just go blank, no shutter release, no face up close(my D80 has never done that anyway though). Was it really cold or anything? Cold batteries can essentially be dead batteries, especially if they are a bit older and/or worn out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 20:19
|
|
|
Nah it was a fully heated office, it was just on it's last bar of health, and the charger was at home and I was in the office and needed some quick product images then and there, but obviously it had to wait until the D80 felt it was ok for me to take pictures again, so I snagged em this morning and all is well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 22:00
|
|
|
psylent posted:I'd be photographing a lot of valuable jewellery so I'm assuming they'd probably want me to do it onsite, so I think I'd need something a bit more professional than a cardboard box. I'll definitely set one up to play around with at home though Then again there's something to be said for spending money to make money; if you look like a professional they're more likely to pay you like one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 15:47
|
|
|
Alternately, if you want something that LOOKS a little better than a cardboard box, perhaps give something like this a shot: I made it for probably like $40 with parts from Home Depot: 4 pieces of .. I forget what it's called, it's like a cross between really really hard cardboard and really really light particleboard. 10 little l-brackets to mount the pieces to each other, a few boxes of small wingnuts and bolts. I cut holes into the sides so I can put translucent paper on the sides and diffuse directed light in. You can opt for smaller lights. I added a top for stability but I found later that it's not really necessary at all (and why I recommend just four pieces of this material instead of five. I just used a utility knife to score the holes into the sides. It takes a little more work than it might seem since it's actually really hard material. If I had to do it over again I would make the holes a little smaller though. It comes apart incredibly easily (thanks to the wingnuts) which would be good for you if you have to transport it to a client's site, and looks a little better than a cardboard box. Plus you can dress it up by painting it black or something. It was a fun project, even though I've used it all of twice since I built it two years ago  e: Though if you can get an actual light tent for $50 then I probably wouldn't bother.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 16:05
|
|
|
If you guys were shooting pictures in a garage with the door open would you spot meter and just accept the door being totally blown out?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 16:17
|
|
|
A5H posted:If you guys were shooting pictures in a garage with the door open would you spot meter and just accept the door being totally blown out? Either that or expose for the outside then use strobes or bracket photos and merge in post.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 16:58
|
|
|
Ah yeah. I've not actually used bracketing on my 7D yet. I'll give it a go. I'll have to shoot from somewhere fixed then.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 17:07
|
|
|
Just get something like http://www.adorama.com/CRL100897.html and be done.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 18:15
|
|
|
That is pretty cool. Here is another one : http://www.amazon.com/CowboyStudio-Table-Photo-Studio-Light/dp/B001MYASTG/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1296667697&sr=8-4 And another 30" pop up tent : http://www.amazon.com/CowboyStudio-30-Photo-Soft-Light/dp/B001TKCZVM/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1296667697&sr=8-8
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 18:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 19:37 |
|
|
No flashes to put in anything like that atm and no $$$ to get a lighting setup.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 18:49
|
|