|
Santa is strapped posted:I like the premise of this new show, Capture. Take a look Ep2 is out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKcqEBw-l1U evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 11:30 on Aug 29, 2012 |
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 11:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:47 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:It's more his lighting than the gear. yeah, me too. i know this is the no advice thread but what would his lighting be like? from what i can see he uses a pretty high center mainlight, it must be a beauty dish or something because there's almost no reflection in the eyes of his subjects.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 15:26
|
|
|
whereismyshoe posted:yeah, me too. i know this is the no advice thread but what would his lighting be like? from what i can see he uses a pretty high center mainlight, it must be a beauty dish or something because there's almost no reflection in the eyes of his subjects. I think it's a ridiculously large parabolic umbrella e: http://guessthelighting.com/post/1298751485/platons-lighting-for-the-controversial-bill-clinton for the bill clinton shot in particular.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 15:27
|
|
|
Tunnelman posted:He's really fantastic, he did a workshop in Santa Fe and I got to hear him do a talk about his shoots, really funny and extremely nice guy. His book is wonderful as well, it includes his journal pages scanned in at the back about some of the shoots. gently caress. I knew I should have picked up his book when it was $15 at a Second & Charles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 18:09
|
|
|
PIMM did a nice write up about Platon's lighting if you want to try it yourself http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com/2008/11/inspired-by-platon.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 18:13
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:It's more his lighting than the gear. I had the same thought. "Model with Gun" is straight out of model mayhem; and the whole bit about the only subject he would shoot is his kids is straight out of mommy photographer blog #2684. I would bet he has a long statement to make about a photo of train tracks, I get the sense that Platon and Seliger put on the kid gloves a bit. The part about Larry King and the Clinton photo was interesting. I look at that picture and got the sense that Clinton was confident and proud of finishing his term, as well as a bit relieved, whereas King thought the photo was borderline pornographic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 18:41
|
|
|
Man I was so down on mirrorless cameras until I held a NEX-5N in the store. That thing is dead sexy. Tiny AND APS-C? Easily adapted to fit other lenses? Focus peaking? I think I know what my next digital camera will be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 20:59
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Man I was so down on mirrorless cameras until I held a NEX-5N in the store. That thing is dead sexy. Tiny AND APS-C? Easily adapted to fit other lenses? Focus peaking? I think I know what my next digital camera will be. I'm thinking about selling mine, turns out I find it more convenient to carry a DSLR everywhere than wait 3 seconds for the NEX to turn on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:I'm thinking about selling mine, turns out I find it more convenient to carry a DSLR everywhere than wait 3 seconds for the NEX to turn on. Do you mean 3 seconds after you flip the on switch, or does it take 3 seconds to wake from powersaving sleep mode?  At any rate, I'm seeing them to go for like 350 on craigslist here (body only) and throwing an M39 adapter on or F-mount adapter presents some pretty awesome opportunities with focus peaking enabled.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 22:04
|
|
|
You can buy last gen M43 and Nex stuff for peanuts, too. Too bad Sony has no idea what a decent lens lineup looks like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm actually surprised what a 5N body goes for these days. I mean it's really capable for the price.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 23:16
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Do you mean 3 seconds after you flip the on switch, or does it take 3 seconds to wake from powersaving sleep mode? From flipping the power switch, waking from sleep takes maybe half as long. It's not bad if I already have the camera out, but then there's not much advantage to the smaller size. If it's in a hoodie or coat pocket (or backpack or whatever) it takes however much longer to get out. Just not the right balance for me. Of course if they're going for $350 on Craigslist there might not be any point selling it anymore, vs keeping it as a digital back for my Minolta mount macro bellows.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 23:20
|
|
|
The price varies. 350 is just the lowest I've seen for body only. They're mostly sold with the kit lens which drives up the price for a lens I probably won't ever want to use.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
I've been sitting on a Nex 5 (the original one) with both the kit zoom and 16mm that I've been looking to get rid of before they release another five bodies. I bought it thinking I'd be okay with the limited lens selection and just using adapters but I haven't been willing to shell out for quality glass to make adapters work for me. I tried out their fancy SLT mirror adapter with their 35mm f1.8 and while I loved the lens I thought the adapter was too ergonomically awkward. So I returned the adapter, kept the lens and purchased a Minolta 7D and never turned back. I've got a K-mount adapter and a Pentax 110 adapter (heh) but the novelty has worn off for me. The focus peaking is pretty incredible though and if I had plans/funds to adapt some Leica glass I might keep it around but I don't see it happening anytime soon. I know you're looking for the 5N but if you think you'd be interested in the 5 let me know. I've been meaning to make a big post in the buy/sell thread of all the odds and ends I want to get rid of to consolidate things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 00:03
|
|
|
Oh thanks for the thought, but I'm pretty broke at the moment. I also switched to film primarily for now, this is more of a "in a year when I rethink digital" plan 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
nonanone posted:PIMM did a nice write up about Platon's lighting if you want to try it yourself http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com/2008/11/inspired-by-platon.html I want more PIMM posts
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 01:55
|
|
|
Wait until the 5R comes out then get a 5N. I don't think they made enough improvements that you'll be missing much by going for an N. As for startup time, a lot of it depends on the speed of your memory card.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2012 03:41
|
|
|
Camera stores should set up model trains or something around the store to test cameras on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
This week has been a different week for me! I found it kind of funny and exciting that one my my pictures was in a national newspaper today. I think only the Londoners would have seen my work but I took a picture for you! It has gone slightly viral too (by my amateur standards) with 600 likes and 100 shares on someone else's Facebook page. I don't know how I felt about that but the thumbs up on my page tripled overnight so exposure is exposure right? My Facebook page if anyone cares is here: https://www.facebook.com/andrewbphoto. A couple people have messaged me asking if I sell any prints of my pictures. I've never done that before and I don't quite know what to do about it!  London Olympic Stadium. by Clwn, on Flickr  The Metro. by Clwn, on Flickr  http://instagram.com/p/O503yCubZb/
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2012 09:46
|
|
|
Clown posted:A couple people have messaged me asking if I sell any prints of my pictures. I've never done that before and I don't quite know what to do about it! Generally you take their cash monies and send them arts in the mail. It's probably cheaper for you to get them run off at a lab, over here in the states I'd recommend White House Custom Color but I'd imagine shipping overseas is probably a decent chunk of change. Oh also I loving love that shot, do you sell any prints of your pictures?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 02:05
|
|
|
Not sure which thread to put this in so I'm just gonna try it here. Anyone got any advice on mounting a camera in a way that it's "guaranteed" to not move for long periods? As in.. months? I know "guarantee" is a strong word as there's always going to be some single point of failure somewhere, but what I'm trying to get at is I want a camera to stay in the same spot for a long time to generate a time lapse. It would be nice if it were resistant to occasional bumps or movement caused by fiddling with settings. Additionally, are there any methods out there for precisely realigning a camera if it does get moved? edit - methods if I can't actually use the viewfinder would be handy too. Maybe something where I draw lines on the camera and the tripod and re-align them or something? xzzy fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Sep 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 18:00
|
|
|
Superclamp it to a pole that's set in the ground with a ball head on and then glue the ball head.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 18:04
|
|
|
You may have seen this elsewhere: http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/gallery-dumps-artist-over-photo-controversy-20120902-258m4.html Basically a photographer (or whatever he calls himself) is in the poo poo with the gallery that represents him after it was found that he was getting photos from Getty, manipulating them and then not crediting the original photographer. I don't see anything wrong with what he was doing, it's art, and not to far from what some guys on the dorkroom do (ThisQuietReverie - always like your stuff), but it's the not crediting sources is what is rubbing people the wrong way I think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 09:42
|
|
|
edit:double post!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 09:43
|
|
|
That's a clever demo in the article. I think it is clear to me that he is guilty of copying the original art. Simply tweaking the contrast and adding a background/textured overlay doesn't count as anything more than 'retouching'.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 09:54
|
|
|
Spedman posted:You may have seen this elsewhere: I am not a lawyer and it has been a while since I have looked into this but I think if this went through litigation there would be some problems claiming it was protected. First and foremost he used images somebody else was selling. Personally, I think that's hosed up but legally there could probably be a case made that he was depriving the photographer of profits. Secondly, if he had taken the photographs and incorporated them into or changed them into a new piece of art it would be protected. This would be for lawyers to argue over but I think just processing them into "his style" is pretty flimsy. If he moved them into a different medium like a collage or incorporated new elements there would be clear intent that an attempt was made at creating a new and original piece. As it is presented on the website you linked it looks more like an attempt at obfuscation. There is also a change litmus (as measured in percentage) but I don't recall offhand what it is. I'd have to agree with the gallery dropping him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 10:52
|
|
|
The fact that he didn't disclose a very crucial element of his process (and pretty obviously because he knew it would cause controversy) is dishonest and I would drop him in a heartbeat.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 14:44
|
|
|
I'm assuming he bought the stock images. Do you have to credit the original photographer if you purchased the image from a stock website? I always assumed you didn't, in which case legally there's nothing wrong with what he did, is there? Ethically is different, and I agree he misled a lot of people, but he's not claiming to be a photographer so I don't really see it as being such a huge issue.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 18:10
|
|
|
Whether or not he legally purchased the appropriate rights from the copyright holder of the images, not including "I take images others have made and manipulate them" in your artist statement is deliberately misleading and the audience is right to assume the artist has created everything in a piece unless stated otherwise. Calling yourself a "photo media artist" and expecting anyone to know that means you find images on stock websites and edit them with a Wacom is so shady I don't know where to begin. Every work I have ever encountered that uses an object, image, sound, etc. not created by the artist has had it stated clearly either in a title card, artist statement, or didactic. There is zero excuse for his actions, he intended to mislead. There's no way an artist, even one at age 30, is this ignorant (believe me, I work with a lot of them).
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 19:13
|
|
|
decided to build a homemade softbox for shits and giggles, figured 40 inches would be "meh, good enough" gently caress this thing is huge. can't wait to get it mounted / diffused and try it out
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 05:59
|
|
|
JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:Whether or not he legally purchased the appropriate rights from the copyright holder of the images, not including "I take images others have made and manipulate them" in your artist statement is deliberately misleading and the audience is right to assume the artist has created everything in a piece unless stated otherwise. Calling yourself a "photo media artist" and expecting anyone to know that means you find images on stock websites and edit them with a Wacom is so shady I don't know where to begin. That's called a derivative work, and you have to disclose it when you register a copyright to the copyright office. If that guy is taking others' work essentially whole cloth for his own work, he's way in the wrong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 06:51
|
|
|
whereismyshoe posted:decided to build a homemade softbox for shits and giggles, figured 40 inches would be "meh, good enough" rear end is my canvas did that at some point to good effect.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 07:28
|
|
|
whereismyshoe posted:decided to build a homemade softbox for shits and giggles, figured 40 inches would be "meh, good enough" What kind of material do you use to diffuse the light?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 08:39
|
|
|
Can't speak for whereismyshoe, but on my DIY ring-flash I used baking paper.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 10:11
|
|
|
red19fire posted:That's called a derivative work, and you have to disclose it when you register a copyright to the copyright office. If that guy is taking others' work essentially whole cloth for his own work, he's way in the wrong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 12:58
|
|
|
Admiral posted:Australia doesn't have a copyright office the way the US does, there's no formal registering of copyright here. What do you expect from a land of criminals? (Please note that I have formed my opinions on Australia almost exclusively from Top Gear and Mad Max movies)
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 13:05
|
|
|
Prathm posted:What kind of material do you use to diffuse the light? I've got some medium weight white fabric, but I'm starting to think paper might have been a bit easier.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 14:34
|
|
|
Yeah mine was a giant styrofoam ice chest and I used huge sheets of tracing paper. I can't remember if there was a color cast but there usually is from any sort of material.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
might actually be fun to throw in different color fabrics and use em like gels...
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 19:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:47 |
|
|
I don't know if this came up on the previous pages, but has anyone heard of Amazon Glacier? It's really cheap storage from $0.01 /GB per month. The difference between this and S3 is that data can't be accessed instantaneously like you would need for a website. Apparently from the FAQs, it would take 3-5 hours in order to access your data, but be available to download for 24 hours after the fact which wouldn't be a big deal if you're just needing to store your RAW files somewhere in order to have a non-local backup. e: Signed up for this thing, will let everyone know how it goes. e2: Of course there's no easy way of accessing the service since you don't do anything through the web browser. Oh well. 
mes fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Sep 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 02:01
|
|
