|
Yeah I'm hoping later in the year anyway, relying on my current one getting a GPU fix because it's crashing a ton then selling it and putting with some work bonus cash to cover a good chunk of the cost. Or maybe I'll ride it out another 24 months and buy when I'm moving to the states and saving some money (and not having to ship or sell a more recent one).
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:22 |
|
|
e: wrong thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Do you ever reach a point where you feel like you're not utter poo poo? Or is this perpetual cycle of take pictures, self-critique to the point of hatred something that I'm going to learn to deal with? Every time I go through my pictures, all I see are the flaws and missed opportunities. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
Muttonchips posted:Do you ever reach a point where you feel like you're not utter poo poo? Right before you die.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
Muttonchips posted:Do you ever reach a point where you feel like you're not utter poo poo? Honestly as a rule if you don't think you're improving go back and look at the shots you thought were good when you first started shooting. If you still think they're good you probably haven't improved.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Muttonchips posted:Do you ever reach a point where you feel like you're not utter poo poo? Or is this perpetual cycle of take pictures, self-critique to the point of hatred something that I'm going to learn to deal with? It's always going to be a perpetual cycle. Shoot even more and curate even harder. Look out for emerging trends in your own photos that you like and hone them further. If you think you've missed opportunities, get out and create even more!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
Muttonchips posted:Do you ever reach a point where you feel like you're not utter poo poo? Or is this perpetual cycle of take pictures, self-critique to the point of hatred something that I'm going to learn to deal with? Harsh, merciless self criticism is the fastest road to improvement. The lovely photographer thread was full of jackasses that were convinced their  work was a gift from the gods. Take note of your perceived mistakes and take pains not to repeat them, and you will improve.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
Muttonchips posted:Do you ever reach a point where you feel like you're not utter poo poo? Also as a counterpoint to the rest of the thread - yes it's good to be self critical, but it's also important to enjoy what you do. I am an amateur, and I suspect a lot of other dorkroom posters are as well. I know that I'm not making high art, but every once in a while I'll make photos that I'm happy with. I know they can be better but I'm happy with what I have, and happy to know that I still have room to improve. Basically, you can enjoy yourself while still pushing yourself. Shoot who you are! Shoot what you love!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
Actually I don't even think it's a counterpoint, I think the most important point is that you have to be happy shooting what you shoot. Even if you're just happy shooting random stuff, do that. Don't ever shoot to make anyone else happy, like the posters here, your friends, or some gallery critics. Always shoot for yourself first. Critique and all that comes later.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 06:13
|
|
|
You should definitely enjoy the actual practice of photography but if you don't think at least 95% of your photos are bad when editing then you are not being critical enough of your work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
deaders posted:...if you don't think at least 95% of your photos are bad when editing then you are not being critical enough of your work. In my experience with a lot of beginning or aspiring photographers, this is probably the part most people can't get past.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
The better I get at photography the more my photos suck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 12:10
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI23U7U2aUY
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Just curious, does anyone have any experience with this style of reflector? I have a big circle silver reflector, but I want a white one that isn't so harsh. Was thinking of trying this style, since I mostly hand hold the reflector anyway
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Would any of you ever sign this?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
VendaGoat posted:Would any of you ever sign this? I shot a show where they threw a contract like that in front of me. I handed it back with no signature, they didn't notice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
I'm not sure how in point 3 'non-commercial' can include publicity and marketing. I got into a row about 10 years ago with security as I had a photo pass that the guitarist friend of a well known band arranged for me so I could video a few songs of their set, standard 'first 3 only' thing. Ended up with them ripping the tape out of my camera. My mate actually spotted the tape afterwards and yoinked it but sadly I never got it back due to never really crossing paths regularly after that. Also got my SLR pulled off me at a festival in 99 for taking shots over a railing on my very last picture. I was annoyed because I'd run through security with my bag as the ticket I had didn't say no photography on it, but others did, and escaped that frisk. An hour or two later, Fat Mike of NOFX was saying how punk rock the festival was... yeah real punk rock to only give passes to lovely mainstream press and do the usual extortionate rates for any food/drinks sold in the grounds. NOFX still rocked, mind and I failed the exam I had the next day because I decided a weekend to London for a punk festival was better than revising.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
VendaGoat posted:Would any of you ever sign this? Is that part about only shooting during the second and third songs of the inial set normal? That seems very weirdly specific.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:poo poo, no. But I am not a professional, so YMMV. Things aren't really THAT bad for shooting concerts, are they? That's an extreme example, isn't it? Having shot concerts, yes, they normally give the photographers one to three songs to get their shots then tell them to go away. I've been told it's flattering and they want the pictures, but it's also distracting. Which I understand. That's Taylor Swift's contract for photographers. Did you notice the part where they get to destroy your gear for breach of contract? VendaGoat fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Jun 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Is that the bit in part 6? Legalise sends my brain into a coma and I find it a nightmare to parse. But that's essentially what the security did at that festival - grabbed my camera, pulled the film out the back and passed it back to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
I'd start looking for a new career if verbiage like that was SOP. Considering Taylor Swift is always preaching from the podium about ARTIST RIGHTS it's pretty lame she doesn't extend the same courtesy to other disciplines, but it's her sandbox so I guess she gets to make the rules. I'd just go find my own sandbox.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Is that the bit in part 6? Legalise sends my brain into a coma and I find it a nightmare to parse. But that's essentially what the security did at that festival - grabbed my camera, pulled the film out the back and passed it back to me. Yup. Not only can they destroy your gear, you are releasing them from any legal action for them doing it. They could, not that they would, but they could just smash your camera into a thousand pieces, eject you and you couldn't even sue them for damages. They could honestly invite you in, beat the living poo poo out of you, steal your gear, pawn it and you can not do poo poo in return to them. You couldn't even sue the concert hall for allowing it to go on, on their property. Not only that. If you take a picture, they don't like and publish it, even with their prior consent. Under term 5. they can receive restitution from you and you can't fight it. You might as well just shove a broomstick up your rear end, attach strings to your extremities and allow them to use you for whatever their whims desire. And some photographer is going to sign this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
I saw that "destroy your stuff" part. Contracts can't do everything, or let either party get away with absolutely anything. You can't (to use an extreme example) agree to be enslaved, or murdered. I don't know if destruction of personal property is covered by those "your signature means nothing here" laws or not, and I am certainly not a lawyer. But I hope some lawyer looking to make a name for themselves steps forward and takes on contract bullshit like this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:I saw that "destroy your stuff" part. It's not, hence the film portion. It also depends on just how severe of bullshit some security or Taylor's lawyers decide to take it. Sure, my example of having the poo poo beat out of you legally is about as extreme as it can get and I wouldn't expect Taylor's lawyers to condone that or even defend it. However, it is allowed for under the language of this contract. So if they were so inclined.... In other words, who has the most money/biggest lawyers at the end of the day. A media organization or Taylor Swift? Who wins? The lawyers win.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I'd start looking for a new career if verbiage like that was SOP. I would pretty surprised if Tswizz handled any part of writing contracts for photographers. More likely an army of lawyers and agents from Universal handles it. But I'm a noobie amateur, so someone here can probably set the record straight.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
hi liter posted:I would pretty surprised if Tswizz handled any part of writing contracts for photographers. More likely an army of lawyers and agents from Universal handles it. But I'm a noobie amateur, so someone here can probably set the record straight. You're likely right, she probably doesn't even know that sheet of paper exists as a real thing. But it's still her name attached to it and that's one of the downsides to being a public figure, you get to take responsibility for anyone that does a thing under your name. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
gently caress rich people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
I dropped my Nikon D90. The mirror is being weird and isn't going up and down properly about 1/3 of the time. I made a video of it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U992VFLAWF0 So now I have no idea if I should continue, buy a new dslr, switch to glorious film only, or buy a mirrorless whatever 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 06:29
|
|
|
A good time to check d7000 prices in your area!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 06:31
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:I dropped my Nikon D90. The camera gods are telling you to upgrade, or at least ship it to KEH/Nikon and get them to look at it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 07:12
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:switch to glorious film only
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 12:07
|
|
|
I wouldn't be surprised if the whole Taylor Swift/Apple thing was just some publicity stunt organized by the two parties like that whole corny U2/Apple thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
Lens pen users, how much residue should the pen be leaving behind? Seems like an excessive amount when I do it. This is also under flashlight scrutiny, so maybe it doesn't matter?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
I'm having some lens flare issues. Here's an unretouched shot: Is there a way I should be shooting to avoid that streaky flare along the edges? I'm going for the glowy backlit look, but I don't want the streaks. I'm using a nifty 50 on a Canon 5D with a lens hood. I'm just using a cheapo $4 knockoff Chinese hood though, maybe it's not long enough? Or is it just that I'm using a cheap lens?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:I'm having some lens flare issues. Here's an unretouched shot: that lens has atrocious coatings. the new stm one is much better in that department, but if you have a lot of light hitting the front element at an angle its still gonna happen somewhat. you can try using your left hand or a big piece of black construction paper to shield it a bit better when you're deliberately shooting into the sun
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:that lens has atrocious coatings. the new stm one is much better in that department, but if you have a lot of light hitting the front element at an angle its still gonna happen somewhat. you can try using your left hand or a big piece of black construction paper to shield it a bit better when you're deliberately shooting into the sun Interesting, thanks for the quick response! I've been meaning to buy a nicer lens anyway, since right now all I have is the cheapo 40mm & 50mm. Maybe this is a good excuse to treat myself. I'm generally holding a reflector with my left hand, I need to figure out a way to grow more arms.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Interesting, thanks for the quick response! I've been meaning to buy a nicer lens anyway, since right now all I have is the cheapo 40mm & 50mm. Maybe this is a good excuse to treat myself. That 'cheapo' 40mm is a fantastic lens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
Yeah if you have the 40 you should take the 50 and throw it away or feed it to a dog.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Interesting, thanks for the quick response! I've been meaning to buy a nicer lens anyway, since right now all I have is the cheapo 40mm & 50mm. Maybe this is a good excuse to treat myself. rubber band + piece of black construction paper works too 
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:22 |
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Yeah if you have the 40 you should take the 50 and throw it away or feed it to a dog. Really, I didn't know that was the case! I've just been using the 40 indoors when space gets tight. I'll have to experiment using it way more often then!
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 16:07
|
|