|
huhu posted:I photographed Day of the Dead in Mexico. I was in a cemetery after dark with candles as the only source of light. This photo really stretched the limits of my camera and lens. I shot it at 1/40s, f3.5, ISO 25,600, manual focus. Would love to hear anyone's thoughts on how they might have handled this situation differently to capture a higher quality photo. Is there anything to do in Lightroom or would I need a better sensor/lens or better lighting to capture such a photo. Since you needed to freeze motion of a human subject, I suppose a tripod or IBIS wouldn't really have helped much (if either of these were absent) with regards to enabling a slower shutter. A fast prime lens for a wider aperture and thus lower ISO is basically the best you could've changed without switching to a sensor with better high-ISO performance or using some kind of lighting rig, which wouldn't have been appropriate in the situation. Nonetheless, toying around with other noise reduction approaches may yield improved results.
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 21:29 |
|
|
The more affordable options for fast primes are the nikon 35mm 1.8 dx and the fx 50mm 1.8. That would have put you into more reasonable territory at iso 6400. Converting to black and white can help. Edit: In a outdoor/candle light scenario you can wait to for a subject to move opposite a group of lights. You can also underexpose significantly. You don't need to turn night to day, you can expose for the brightest areas and have a more moodier feeling of little islands of light in the dark. Fools Infinite fucked around with this message at 01:54 on Nov 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:44
|
|
|
huhu posted:I photographed Day of the Dead in Mexico. I was in a cemetery after dark with candles as the only source of light. This photo really stretched the limits of my camera and lens. I shot it at 1/40s, f3.5, ISO 25,600, manual focus. Would love to hear anyone's thoughts on how they might have handled this situation differently to capture a higher quality photo. Is there anything to do in Lightroom or would I need a better sensor/lens or better lighting to capture such a photo. Well at that point you're already hitting upper limits of what a lot of cameras can do in that situation. You'll have image noise no matter what but it only really matters if you were trying to blow it up for large prints or something. For social media/internet posting you'd be fine really. What you have there already works to a point (and it's not a bad image really). And as others have mentioned there's a few other ways to solve for some of this outside of the camera if you really wanted to. But I have to wonder if you might be overthinking this pic at least on the tech side of things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 04:10
|
|
|
You can't really go slower without getting motion blur from your subject, and presumably f/3.5 is the widest your lens will go. At that point you only have two options, change the light or push the ISO. I'm going to say that the background does nothing for you and it's already pretty bright, I'd probably have shot the image darker than you did by maybe two stops and then tried to rescue the shadows and blacks in the foreground with a graduated filter (in post, not on the camera), or with tone curve fuckery. That way you get mostly light from the candles and a vague bright glow behind, which might set off your subject better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
ReverendHammer posted:But I have to wonder if you might be overthinking this pic at least on the tech side of things. I'm just using the photo as a case study. I struggled all night taking pictures. First it was an outdoor street concert with smoke machines and then it was to a graveyard. All night I was paying way more attention to my camera's settings than I usually do. Thanks for all the feedback.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 15:54
|
|
|
huhu posted:I'm just using the photo as a case study. I struggled all night taking pictures. First it was an outdoor street concert with smoke machines and then it was to a graveyard. All night I was paying way more attention to my camera's settings than I usually do. Ahhhhhh, that makes sense. Experimentation is good especially when you're trying to figure out the upper limits of your camera/lens and how to work around them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 11:36
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 19:14
|
|
|
Today marks the 1 year anniversary from just starting to shoot portraiture, it's been kind of interesting so far, meeting new people in the scene and making a lot of friends. Here's some of the work I've done. I cringe at things I don't like about some of them, but I'm growing and learning. Figuring out what does and doesn't work for me and the subjects I shoot for is all part of the fun.       
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 07:36
|
|
|
does your camera not photograph men?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
Ignore the grumpy old man. That's a lot better than I was a year out. Couple of things. That first shot feels forced to include the leg tattoos. There's huge amounts of dead space. The second shot feels like the model and her reflection would be better centered in the composition since there's nothing particularly note worthy going on in the bokeh. Great temperature contrast on the face, though. But overall they're great shots. Keep moving forward. You might have a knack for this sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:04
|
|
|
Congratulations on your well executed male gaze.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Ignore the grumpy old man. yes, ignore any feedback that you don't like, it will make you a better photographer
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:24
|
|
|
What feedback? Feedback generally consists of more than a snarky comment. Having insight on why something is bad and then not sharing it just makes you an rear end.
um excuse me fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Dec 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:25
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:What feedback? Anything that doesn't conform to the standards in this 10-point list titled "How To Critique Good" isn't feedback.  edit: um excuse me posted:Having insight on why something is bad and then not sharing it just makes you an rear end. Maybe you need a list titled "How To Read Good."
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
Yea forget it. This is why I stopped posting in Dorkroom years ago. There's nothing wrong with the way that information was presented at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:What feedback? Feedback generally consists of more than a snarky comment. Having insight on why something is bad and then not sharing it just makes you an rear end. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_gaze
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Yea forget it. This is why I stopped posting in Dorkroom. There's nothing wrong with the way that information was presented at all. feedback consists of more than a snarky comment 
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:34
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Yea forget it. This is why I stopped posting in Dorkroom years ago. There's nothing wrong with the way that information was presented at all. If you feel attacked when male gazey photography is pointed out for being what it is, maybe the problem is you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:38
|
|
|
You're right, I started with the explanation, then provided the snarky comment. Nah I just don't think we're looking at the whole protfolio. Seems wild to assume otherwise. Benefit of the doubt makes you a less lovely person.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:does your camera not photograph men? Would you mind posting your list of approved cameras, films and subjects? It would make it easier to post here. Also the minimum amount you have to spend would be handy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:You're right, I started with the explanation, then provided the snarky comment. Pointing out the male gaze makes us lovely people? Yikes. ImplicitAssembler posted:Would you mind posting your list of approved cameras, films and subjects? It would make it easier to post here. Also the minimum amount you have to spend would be handy. Cameras: - ones that don't have light leaks Films: - it doesn't matter, just don't rely on them to make choices you're too lazy to make yourself Subjects: - maybe don't perpetuate the objectification of women
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:44
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:You're right, I started with the explanation, then provided the snarky comment. True, not the whole portfolio, but a group of images selected by the photographer as representative of their year of shooting portraiture. Benefit of the doubt, they shot some pictures of a man at some point, but they also didn't feel any of those pictures were important enough to share in that post.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:44
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Pointing out the male gaze makes us lovely people? Yikes. We're all lovely people. We can only do our best to be less lovely. Guess which people we have control over? Throwing unsubstantiated accusations at strangers on the basis of that's what you think they are seems like a lovely thing to do. Awkward Davies posted:True, not the whole portfolio, but a group of images selected by the photographer as representative of their year of shooting portraiture. Benefit of the doubt, they shot some pictures of a man at some point, but they also didn't feel any of those pictures were important enough to share in that post. I agree it seems likely, but not certain. That's what the benefit of the doubt emphasizes. um excuse me fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Dec 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:49
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:We're all lovely people. We can only do our best to be less lovely. Guess which people we have control over? Nobody here made any accusations. That's you projecting because you feel attacked that other people don't find the male gaze interesting or worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Alright man, in the end it's up to Linux Nazi to decide whether or not any of this has been useful. There's really nothing else to discuss.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:57
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:Would you mind posting your list of approved cameras, films and subjects? It would make it easier to post here. Also the minimum amount you have to spend would be handy. aw sweetie you don't understand what that meant, do you
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:58
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Alright man, in the end it's up to Linux Nazi to decide whether or not any of this has been useful. There's really nothing else to discuss. why don't we discuss why people (especially male photographers) generally focus on taking pretty pictures of women vs men? that seems like an interesting discussion to me
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:Would you mind posting your list of approved cameras, films and subjects? It would make it easier to post here. Also the minimum amount you have to spend would be handy. i know you want nice affirmations every time you post here, but i try to provide information (in the film thread, where you seem to want to import perceived drama) based on my experience. you can either engage with me and try to learn something, or you can dip out immediately and pretend i'm wrong just because you don't like what i have to say. photographs of women gazing lustily into the camera are a dime a dozen and not particularly interesting. if someone's not willing to hear feedback about their images or answers to questions posed, perhaps they should yell into a void instead of posting on an internet forum
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:There's really nothing else to discuss. Speak for yourself, man. RangerScum posted:why don't we discuss why people (especially male photographers) generally focus on taking pretty pictures of women vs men? that seems like an interesting discussion to me I'm on board! I think that it's genuinely hard to form a human connection through a photograph, and the photographers that do it consistently well have my admiration. What this means for photographers that can't do that or haven't learned how yet, though, is that it's too easy to treat people in front of the camera as fungible objects that represent something else (in this case, it seems, thinly veiled sexual desire). I also think websites like Model Mayhem (is this "the scene"?) and the strategies models have to use to market themselves to get noticed there only make it easier to think that way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:why don't we discuss why people (especially male photographers) generally focus on taking pretty pictures of women vs men? that seems like an interesting discussion to me It's what sells, dude. I take lovely photos for customers because that's what they want, not what I want. That's the distinction you folks are missing. Having someone come to me with a picture and asking "can you do this?" is infuriating but it's the specification they set. In the end if you're doing this professionally you have to draw the line somewhere to put food on the table. Customers have expectations, very few actually want art more than something they saw on Pinterest or Instagram. I try to shove a new idea into every session I sell, but it's only ever one shot because I don't have the fidelity to do complex set ups and multiple tries under the contraints of the client.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
why are you coming at this from the assumption that everything must be commercialized?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:It's what sells, dude. I take lovely photos for customers because that's what they want, not what I want. That's the distinction you folks are missing. Having someone come to me with a picture and asking "can you do this?" is infuriating but it's the specification they set. In the end if you're doing this professionally you have to draw the line somewhere to put food on the table. Customers have expectations, very few actually want art more than something they saw on Pinterest or Instagram. I try to shove a new idea into every session I sell, but it's only ever one shot because I don't have the fidelity to do complex set ups and multiple tries under the contraints of the client. We're not your customers and nobody makes money posting things in the Dorkroom. This is a discussion forum. If this isn't the kind of discussion you can tolerate, go to 500px or wherever the other people who are similarly invested in milking the teat of the patriarchy post these days.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:16
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:It's what sells, dude. I take lovely photos for customers because that's what they want, not what I want. That's the distinction you folks are missing. Having someone come to me with a picture and asking "can you do this?" is infuriating but it's the specification they set. In the end if you're doing this professionally you have to draw the line somewhere to put food on the table. Customers have expectations, very few actually want art more than something they saw on Pinterest or Instagram. I try to shove a new idea into every session I sell, but it's only ever one shot because I don't have the fidelity to do complex set ups and multiple tries under the contraints of the client. Look, the "does the camera photograph men" line is, without context, useless criticism. But, here, in this thread, where critiqued was asked for, it's the perfect jumping off point for that portfolio, and there is plenty of context. This answer of yours dodges everything about that criticism, and is a great defense for why one may do something commercially but does not answer the question, why are these just sexy time photos without regard for other considerations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:19
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:We're not your customers and nobody makes money posting things in the Dorkroom. This is a discussion forum. If this isn't the kind of discussion you can tolerate, go to 500px or wherever the other people who are similarly invested in milking the teat of the patriarchy post these days. Are you aware of the source of the photos? Again I'm not going to assume they didn't originate from a commercial setting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:i know you want nice affirmations every time you post here, but i try to provide information (in the film thread, where you seem to want to import perceived drama) based on my experience. you can either engage with me and try to learn something, or you can dip out immediately and pretend i'm wrong just because you don't like what i have to say. If you're going to argue from authority, you'll need to back it up with more than snarky one-liners.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Are you aware of the source of the photos? Again I'm not going to assume they didn't originate from a commercial setting. Does that change the critique though? If anything it makes it more valid as it’s a perpetuation of this kind of photography more broadly, as it’s considered socially acceptable rather than just a dude take male gaze shots for his own benefit
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:27
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Are you aware of the source of the photos? Again I'm not going to assume they didn't originate from a commercial setting. this forum is not a commercial setting ImplicitAssembler posted:If you're going to argue from authority, you'll need to back it up with more than snarky one-liners. You know there are other threads in this subforum that have photos in them, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:28
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:If you're going to argue from authority, you'll need to back it up with more than snarky one-liners. i have been an established poster here for years. my photographs and opinions are available for you to peruse right here, in this very forum. it is up to you if you choose to actually engage with me or ignore the substance of my posting because you do not like it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 21:29 |
|
|
Spedman posted:Does that change the critique though? If anything it makes it more valid as it’s a perpetuation of this kind of photography more broadly, as it’s considered socially acceptable rather than just a dude take male gaze shots for his own benefit I don't disagree with the sentiment, but that's a very complicated problem that requires tremendous socioeconomic pressure to resolve, nothing that can really be applied to any single individual. MrBlandAverage posted:this forum is not a commercial setting I know the forum of discussion isn't commercial, but the context in which a photo is taken matters if you're going to tie motive back to the photographer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 20:32
|
|