|
Zlatan Imhobitch posted:Does anyone else get really wound up by people who pixel peep and complain about how they could never use 3rd party lenses and NEED L-Glass for their 1000px wide images on 500px? DPReview is the best for this. There's a panic in the entry-level Nikon SLR forum right now because the D5200 produces banding in the shadows when you push a RAW file five loving stops in post. Half of them have preordered the 7100 though as it's the successor to the One True Camera so there's that.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
On the other hand, I've got a huge boner for L glass because of how fast they can focus. My cheapo lenses are really starting to hold me back on the things I want to take pictures of because mechanically they just aren't as snappy. Granted, the Sigma 35 1.4 apparently is very quick to focus so the point is moot in this specific discussion, but L lenses have always had the reputation for giving top of the line focus speeds, which makes them pretty easy to lust after. More manufacturers making awesome lenses just make buying harder because I have to do a shitton more reading. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
Hmm, the Sigma 35 mm f/1.4 really is better than the 35L, it seems. I’d heard it was good, but I didn’t know it was that good. Theoretically, I could sell my 35L and get enough money to buy the Sigma 35 new. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 18:25
|
|
|
xzzy posted:but L lenses have always had the reputation for giving top of the line focus speeds Not with the 50L or 85L. You can actually feel the weight shift from the amount of glass that needs to move in those two lenses. The 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 are much faster comparatively. I'm definitely considering the Sigma 35 instead of the 35L, but I want to test it out first and see how the Sigma holds up over the next few months.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
Hey guys! Ever wanted to "Go Pro" like Sara Francis! Well now you can! Her new kind of blog is like a tutorial for becoming a professional photographer, and this latest installment is all about making Valentine's Day special! http://www.pixiq.com/article/hearty-photoshop-tips-to-please-your-valentine
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:Hey guys! Ever wanted to "Go Pro" like Sara Francis! That really takes the cake. I lo  e it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
Commuters http://vimeo.com/57909511
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 00:08
|
|
|
These are some good photographs in this here link: http://www.slate.com/blogs/behold/2013/02/20/world_press_photo_2013_awards_announced_for_the_prestigious_international.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 09:09
|
|
|
beergod posted:These are some good photographs in this here link: #3 is insanely good
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
The Face of Bureaucracy: Portraits of Civil Servants Around the World is really awesome. Full gallery here: http://www.janbanning.com/gallery/bureaucratics/
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
Eegah posted:DPReview is the best for this. There's a panic in the entry-level Nikon SLR forum right now because the D5200 produces banding in the shadows when you push a RAW file five loving stops in post. I mean... Just...  
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 02:46
|
|
|
Man so 500px is really just a place for tits now? I just searched "Film" and "35mm" to see if there was anything beyond digital there. Every page has tits on it, it's incredible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:Man so 500px is really just a place for tits now? I just searched "Film" and "35mm" to see if there was anything beyond digital there. Every page has tits on it, it's incredible. When I searched for boobs every photo had boobs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
500px seems the same to me. Bunch of overprocessed landscapes. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 00:21
|
|
|
Someone should find this guy and make him the star of pretty much every movie: From that Bureaucrats series.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 02:15
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:Man so 500px is really just a place for tits now? I just searched "Film" and "35mm" to see if there was anything beyond digital there. Every page has tits on it, it's incredible. The only pic I've ever gotten a response about on 500px was a nice pic of my fiancée. No tits, but still creepy. Not as creepy as the speediness in which Flickr people will tag and favorite your picture of someone's foot, but still creepy. I'm considering Squarespace for my next attempt at a portfolio site but I already pay $20 a month for my linode so at some point ill have to roll something myself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 02:55
|
|
|
ahmeni posted:The only pic I've ever gotten a response about on 500px was a nice pic of my fiancée. No tits, but still creepy. Not as creepy as the speediness in which Flickr people will tag and favorite your picture of someone's foot, but still creepy. A portfolio is stupid simple to make if you just want a simple one. Sidebar plus huge ol jquery slideshow or just a succession of images. You could do it in a weekend.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 05:12
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:A portfolio is stupid simple to make if you just want a simple one. Sidebar plus huge ol jquery slideshow or just a succession of images. You could do it in a weekend. I actually started doing exactly that a few weeks ago.. don't really like any of the gallery sites out there, so I put on my javascript pants and went to town. Got a nice proof of concept going in a couple days, just gotta polish it off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 05:49
|
|
|
So I'm wondering if anyone can help me find a photographer whose name I can't remember. He did a series of portraits in the back of what I believe was a truck. The roll door of the truck was open, so you could see the landscape outside, with the subject just inside. The photographer shot wide enough that you saw not just the scenery around the truck, but the inside of the truck as well, including the lights all set up; it was a very cool framing device. Any idea who this was?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 13:07
|
|
|
thetzar posted:So I'm wondering if anyone can help me find a photographer whose name I can't remember. He did a series of portraits in the back of what I believe was a truck. The roll door of the truck was open, so you could see the landscape outside, with the subject just inside. The photographer shot wide enough that you saw not just the scenery around the truck, but the inside of the truck as well, including the lights all set up; it was a very cool framing device. Any idea who this was? Hmm, I'm pretty sure you would have remembered it was set in Iraq, but by any chance is it Ben Lowy's pictures of Iraq? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 16:41
|
|
|
Fragrag posted:Hmm, I'm pretty sure you would have remembered it was set in Iraq, but by any chance is it Ben Lowy's pictures of Iraq? Nope! He was shooting environmental set-up portraits in like a U-Haul truck around the US. It's been digging in my head for weeks because I have a fantasy of doing something like this, but I don't want to rip the guy off too closely. So now I need to find the work again so that I know what bits of it in my head are original. I think I saw it referenced on Strobist, but I can't seem to find it. (Not that I'd ever really be able to afford doing it anyway)
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 16:47
|
|
|
I have no idea which thread is the best one to post this in, but here goes. onOne Software are currently giving away copies of Perfect Effects 4 Premium, normally valued at $99, for both Windows and OSX. Click here to get the free version: https://www.ononesoftware.com/store/cart-add/763&utm_campaign=CLive_PE4FullFree_0213&utm_medium=banner&utm_source=creativelive Click here for info about the software: https://www.ononesoftware.com/products/perfect-effects/ I'm grabbing my copy now, I hope some people find this useful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2013 10:03
|
|
|
That seems to be tossing an error. They probably didn't mean to make it free.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2013 16:57
|
|
|
price comes up as $99.95 for me
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
It looks like it's no longer available for free unfortunately, must've been a time-limited offer. =0(
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 02:12
|
|
|
How much heat does a studio flash give off? I'm trying to recreate an underwater environment and the best way to get it seems to put your hand about a foot in front of the flash. I've only tried it out with the pilot light and I just want to make sure I'm not doing something ridiculously stupid. (FYI, it's an Elinchrom Style RX600 at 3.0 power.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 12:03
|
|
|
That gives off 600 joules per second at full power, for 1/2000th of a second:quote:The kilojoule (kJ) is equal to one thousand (103) joules. Nutritional food labels in certain countries express energy in standard kilojoules (kJ). So, 600/2000 = the energy of 2 slices of apply falling one metre = bugger all heat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 12:59
|
|
|
Fragrag posted:How much heat does a studio flash give off? I'm trying to recreate an underwater environment and the best way to get it seems to put your hand about a foot in front of the flash. I've only tried it out with the pilot light and I just want to make sure I'm not doing something ridiculously stupid. (FYI, it's an Elinchrom Style RX600 at 3.0 power.) the modelling bulb is probably going to end up giving off much more heat than the flash tube. Are you talking about like rippling water shadows by underwater environment?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 15:09
|
|
|
I've done this a couple of times. You can use smoke or steam to give everything that hazy look, and if you're trying to replicate the banding you get under shallow water, put a small amount of water in a very large ziplock bag. Flatten it out and then squeeze all the air out so you have a thin layer of water and no air in the bag. Gel your light blue-green, then snoot your flash and hang the bag in front of the snoot. More water in the bag will give you more waves. Just be real careful about the modeling light melting the plastic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
Yeah, I couldn't get the effect I wanted so I'll try again next week. I'll try the waterbag effect then!spog posted:That gives off 600 joules per second at full power, for 1/2000th of a second: Thanks! I was pretty sure it didn't give off much heat, but then again, I didn't want to singe off my hair on my hand in order to find out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 17:37
|
|
|
Fragrag posted:Thanks! I was pretty sure it didn't give off much heat, but then again, I didn't want to singe off my hair on my hand in order to find out. Not sure of how powerful of a flash it takes, but I've seen a video where somebody took their flash against some arm hair and shot off a 1/1 power flash and it definitely had an affect on the hair. It wasn't gone, but it was sort of like if you get too close to a flame and they shrivel and smell awful, but aren't completely burned off. But from a foot away- there is no chance of it happening. e: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt5tnY_c09k Check this video.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
I think that video is more due to the compactness of the unit rather than raw power. I mean I wouldn't want to touch a flash tube going off but the bigger strobes disperse heat better and have built in fans as well. I might have to try this water bag trick myself. I've idly pondered how to get that effect.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
I have definitely melted colored gels on flash heads before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 19:36
|
|
|
bisticles posted:I have definitely melted colored gels on flash heads before. I always thought most gels were sourced from theatre lighting which usually burns super hot. I've only ever used ND gels and they were fine wrapped around the flash tube. I'm glad I don't regularly use gels now!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
bisticles posted:I have definitely melted colored gels on flash heads before. The theatre ones melt on our lights too. I have a gel on the wall in my office that has a fist-sized hole melted through the middle. Your best bet is to keep the gel half an inch or more from the flash head. Even if it's not touching, if it's REALLY close, the dye can sublimate from the heat of the flash and be deposited on the flash head. And yeah, an SB800 at full power will burn off arm hair. So over time, no, they aren't very hot, but for a very short period of time, they really really are.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The theatre ones melt on our lights too. I have a gel on the wall in my office that has a fist-sized hole melted through the middle. Yup, that's exactly what happened to the head on my 600EX-RT. I had a red Rogue gel strapped to the top inside a Saber Strip. At the end of the shoot when I took it off, it was stuck to it, leaving a little red spot (it scrubbed off easily enough). Now, I make sure to have a healthy bend to the gel so it won't sit directly above the flashtube.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 22:58
|
|
|
bisticles posted:Yup, that's exactly what happened to the head on my 600EX-RT. I had a red Rogue gel strapped to the top inside a Saber Strip. At the end of the shoot when I took it off, it was stuck to it, leaving a little red spot (it scrubbed off easily enough). Now, I make sure to have a healthy bend to the gel so it won't sit directly above the flashtube. It should also be noted that you can get both clear (Rosco #00) and heat-shield gel (Rosco somethingsomething) to put between your gel and your flash and just never care about this ever again. Bear in mind that if you use their actual ThermaShield gel, not just the clear gel, you might wanna keep an eye on your flash's temperature, because that particular one reflects heat directly back into source (which is no big deal on a 20-pound thousand watt theatre light, but probably a bigger deal on a hotshoe flash). Also, if you have a gel swatchbook, just make a note to be careful with anything with a 'trans' number of 40% or less. R59, which transmits 2% of the light that passes through it (meaning it's really loving dark), will melt and burn within ten minutes in a theatrical light fixture, and that's with it being nearly two feet from the bulb. Just consider, when putting gel on, that you're asking a really thin sheet of polycarbonate to absorb a large portion of the energy coming out of what is potentially a really big flash.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
Fragrag posted:How much heat does a studio flash give off? I'm trying to recreate an underwater environment and the best way to get it seems to put your hand about a foot in front of the flash. I've only tried it out with the pilot light and I just want to make sure I'm not doing something ridiculously stupid. (FYI, it's an Elinchrom Style RX600 at 3.0 power.) Are you afraid you're going to set your hand on fire? Because you won't. As for the gels, I put mine right on the flash bulbs but I pulled out the modeling bulbs so there's no chance of accidentally turning them on and cooking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
Even an SB-900 will burn the poo poo out of you if you put your skin on the lens. 1cm away and you can flash 1/1 forever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Even an SB-900 will burn the poo poo out of you if you put your skin on the lens. 1cm away and you can flash 1/1 forever. It will not burn the poo poo out of you, nor will it even hurt, pressed directly against your skin. It's actually quite an odd feeling because the heat is so brief that it doesn't really register as pain. EDIT: Assuming you're caucasian, at least. I guess flashes are racist. SoundMonkey fucked around with this message at 01:51 on Mar 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2013 01:42
|
|