|
Sort of a general question, but: Anybody has reccomendations on photographers (Or mixed media artists, really, I'm open) that work with the subject of death and it's rellated emotions? I already got Phillip Toledano and Maria Ionova-Gribina, but I'm looking for more more more more! Cheers! Goddamn new page, hope it's not too empty-material for it.
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 10:26 |
|
|
I need some lens tips for an upcoming shoot. A landscaping company (interlocking stone and masonry) approached me to do some photography work. They need pictures of their completed work for sending to customers. What kind of lens is best for this type of work? They want to capture entire driveways and house frontages, so I'm thinking of a wide-angle lens, like this Rokinon 12mm f2.0. I'll be shooting with a Sony E-mount type DSLR.
melon cat fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Oct 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 12:34
|
|
|
I use Jottacloud for cloud backup, for those who are looking for alternatives to Amazon or whatever. (It is a Norwegian company so i am not sure if it available to users outside of Norway.) The web page is in english so i assume it is available for other countries. I pay ~11 USD per month for "unlimited" storage (10 TB) and no throttling of upstream or downstream. You can upload any type of file and use them for whatever you want. Its a backup service though so you can only backup and restore backups, no retrieval of single files or giving people links to said files. It is also not hosted in USA so those of you that don't want the big agencies snooping around in your stuff might want to have a look at it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 12:42
|
|
|
melon cat posted:I need some lens tips for an upcoming shoot. A landscaping company (interlocking stone and masonry) approached me to do some photography work. They need pictures of their completed work for sending to customers. What kind of lens is best for this type of work? They want to capture entire driveways and house frontages, so I'm thinking of a wide-angle lens, like this Rokinon 12mm f2.0. I'll be shooting with a Sony E-mount type DSLR. I am totally guessing here since I can't see what the scenes look like, but I don't think you'd want to go too wide because then it'll make their work too small in the scene. I would think you'd want maybe 2-3 photos per scene- one showing the entire scene (or as much as you can in a good photograph) and then another one that shows their work in detail, maybe top-down. Either way, I'd think ~30mm would be good enough. You go too wide and you'll have too much other stuff in the scene that isn't their work, which is what they care about the most. Also just wondering, how did they come to approach you, a photographer who asks strangers on the internet how to take photos?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 13:24
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:I am totally guessing here since I can't see what the scenes look like, but I don't think you'd want to go too wide because then it'll make their work too small in the scene. I would think you'd want maybe 2-3 photos per scene- one showing the entire scene (or as much as you can in a good photograph) and then another one that shows their work in detail, maybe top-down. Either way, I'd think ~30mm would be good enough. You go too wide and you'll have too much other stuff in the scene that isn't their work, which is what they care about the most. It's a personal friend of mine who I've done sports photography for. And while I do appreciate your help with the lens suggestion, I feel like you could've done so without the snarky comment at the end of your otherwise helpful reply.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
melon cat posted:I was eyeing the 30mm as well, so I'll probably go with that. Thanks. I could have, but you also could have not agreed to do a professional job without even knowing what lens to use. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
melon cat posted:, I feel like you could've done so without the snarky comment at the end of your otherwise helpful reply. The truth hurts eh
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
I have a portrait shoot tomorrow and I'm thinking about picking up a few new filters for Photoshop Express which ones should I get?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
Dren posted:I have a portrait shoot tomorrow and I'm thinking about picking up a few new filters for Photoshop Express which ones should I get? Ken Rockwell Dot COM endorses PerfectlyClear by Athentech (please buy from my link and support my family , and my paranoid geiger counter habit) for Perfect Portrait Looks!
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
melon cat posted:I need some lens tips for an upcoming shoot. A landscaping company (interlocking stone and masonry) approached me to do some photography work. They need pictures of their completed work for sending to customers. What kind of lens is best for this type of work? They want to capture entire driveways and house frontages, so I'm thinking of a wide-angle lens, like this Rokinon 12mm f2.0. I'll be shooting with a Sony E-mount type DSLR. Rent a 25mm Zeiss Batis f/2. https://www.lensprotogo.com/rent/product/zeiss-25-f20-batis-sony-e/
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Ken Rockwell Dot COM endorses PerfectlyClear by Athentech (please buy from my link and support my family , and my paranoid geiger counter habit) for Perfect Portrait Looks! Thanks. That works on iPhone, right? This wedding I'm shooting is gonna turn out great.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Primo Itch posted:Anybody has reccomendations on photographers (Or mixed media artists, really, I'm open) that work with the subject of death and it's rellated emotions? Jo Spence, particularly A picture of health? (illness, stigma, vulnerability) and The final project (mortality, her own probable death)
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 12:25
|
|
|
I'd recommend checking out Sunny Jo, too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
What are brand names or characteristics to look at for a decent monitor ? I use my old asus laptop for "editing" and the colors are pretty bad, the Dell I have at work sucks the same, my tv and backup laptop are bad too. The screen with the color rendition I like most is the one on a galaxy S3 I found in a field years ago. vvv e: thanks, what about iiyamas ? I think it's the brand I had in mind unpacked robinhood fucked around with this message at 14:56 on Oct 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
unpacked robinhood posted:What are brand names or characteristics to look at for a decent monitor ? Resolution, IPS screen as opposed to TN panel, and color space (sRGB, adobe RGB). e: good brands are dell, acer, benq, LG. VelociBacon fucked around with this message at 14:40 on Oct 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
For editing? A good brand is something like Eizo, more than consumer brands. E: for a working pro with lots of money to spend, that is. Obviously don't pay full retail for one... EL BROMANCE fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Oct 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
Can someone recommend a good primer on color spaces, ICC profiles, monitor calibration, and converting between them? I think I mostly understand the differences between CMYK & RGB, and also the differences between sRGB, Adobe RGB, and ProPhoto RGB. I also think I get that, for example, a camera captures a scene in AdobeRGB and then my monitor displays as many of those colors as it can, converting the colors it CAN'T display by using an ICC profile. My OS's color management engine is involved in this somehow. I'd like to better understand monitor calibration, ICC profiles, and the conversion process -- both for my day job where I'm working with graphic designers and doing some design myself (and the graphic designer in question is having some serious issues), and for my photography business so I'm delivering the best product I can to my clients. Every time I think I understand something I start seeing differences like "Assigning" vs "Embedding" vs "Converting", black point compensation, missing profiles, gamma correction, etc. I'd really like to get this on a more intuitive level. I'm willing to take a course or buy a book. YouTube seems like there are some snippets of wisdom but then a lot of "tutorials" where the creators don't actually know what they're talking about (mixing up color spaces and color modes, for instance, and claiming the human eye can't see all of the adobe rgb spectrum?)
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
dakana posted:Can someone recommend a good primer on color spaces, ICC profiles, monitor calibration, and converting between them? this is the photographic equivalent of "i'd really love to see how sausages are made"
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
WOODS CLOWN MENACE posted:this is the photographic equivalent of "i'd really love to see how sausages are made" well, I'm also dealing with this issue at work with an incompetent graphic designer with some hosed up cmyk/rgb conversion issues, so I'd like to be able to say "this is where you're going wrong"
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
dakana posted:Can someone recommend a good primer on color spaces, ICC profiles, monitor calibration, and converting between them? Color spaces are just the data containers for the colors in an image, the wider the color space, the more colors you can show on an appropriate display. ICC profiles determine the output colors based on calibration, it applies to both monitors and printers, since they're output devices. Monitor calibration is just to create the ICC profile for that monitor. Not sure what you mean by converting between them though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
unpacked robinhood posted:What are brand names or characteristics to look at for a decent monitor ? Unless you already know better, you want a factory-calibrated display (look for spec sheets that claim average delta-E of less than 3 or whatever) with 100% coverage of the sRGB gamut. You also want IPS or IPS-like panels (indicated by PLS or AHVA). LG and Dell factory-calibrate a lot of their displays, most other brands usually don't. Pay attention to gray-to-gray response times in milliseconds; 6ms or less is good for an IPS panel. Longer response times mean that motion can look smeary. Resolution and aspect ratios are mostly a matter of personal taste and how much you want to spend. 1920x1200 displays are becoming less and less common, but they're still out there. Same with 2560x1600. I do all my work on a pair of 2560x1440 monitors. 4K is nice to have but difficult to use without some kind of scaling factor at screen sizes under 30", and it's still hellish to game at that resolution without a super-expensive graphics card if you care. It would be hard to go wrong with the Dell U2415 if it's available in your country. It's factory-calibrated, uses a 24" 1920x1200 panel, and is often available for under $300 US. The U2715H offers more resolution and a bigger screen for twice as much money. Basically, buy Dell unless you have some special snowflake reason not to.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
dakana posted:well, I'm also dealing with this issue at work with an incompetent graphic designer with some hosed up cmyk/rgb conversion issues, so I'd like to be able to say "this is where you're going wrong" WOODS CLOWN MENACE posted:this is the photographic equivalent of "i'd really love to see how sausages are made" I can't claim to know how the sausage machines work in minute detail, but I do have some experience in practical sausage handling and processing, so here goes: On a basic level, a colourspace describes the primary colours in the colourspace (eg. exactly what colour the red, green and blue is in RGB) in a sort of imaginary space of all possible (and some impossible) colours based on a particular model of human colour perception. It also has some information about how those primaries interact and how they scale between minumum and maxumu values (gamma curves). Assigning an ICC profile leaves the actual RGB (or CMYK) numbers in the image unchanged - but the visual appearance of the image will change* because those same numbers represent different actual colours. Converting from one ICC profile to another re-maps the colours to the new profile - so the numbers change, and the visual appearance of the image will change slightly* depending on the characteristics of the two colourspaces. Differences can be so subtle as to be invisible or extremely obvious, depending on the characteristics of the source and destination colourspace. Converting an image with no ICC profile to another ICC profile generally means converting from sRGB to whatever the target is, since most software assumes images to be sRGB in the absence of any other data. * assuming that you are using ICC-profile aware software - some viewers just output the raw numbers or treat everything as sRGB implicitly. Where it gets messy is in moving from one to another, because different colourspaces represent different subsets of the imaginary space (the 'gamut' of the colourspace). One colourspace might have a colour that the other one doesn't. That's where the different "rendering intents" come in:
It's similar with CMYK - but more complex, because while in a RGB colour space a given RGB combo gives a unique colour, it's possible in CMYK to have two or more combinations that end up looking "the same". Paper whiteness and the imperfect nature of inks mean that many CMYK colourspaces are smaller than even the smallest RGB ones. Saturated blues, violets and oranges are impossible to reproduce in CMYK - for which reason most inkjet printers aimed at photographic reproduction use 6 or more colours. Some digital presses like the HP Indigo can take an orange and violet inkset in addition to the standard CMYK to get around this, and the Pantone Hexachrome system was invented for exactly that reason. But without worrying too much about ink coverage/overprint interactions/paper stock characteristics, the workflow for the designer shouldn't change much. Where the madness begins is when you discover that every piece of soft- and hardware in the chain has implicit conversions happening automatically (image->software->video card LUT->monitor LUT->monitor). Because your monitor might not be able to display all of the colours in AdobeRGB, it's going to simulate them - usually with the help of your software. Having a monitor ICC profile (and a calibrated monitor) means you get the closest possible match given the limitations of the display device. Even then, it's basically impossible to directly match colours from screen to print (because one's an emissive medium and the other a reflective one), but quality tools always make it easier to get consistent results. In my studio, most photographic imagery is stored in whatever RGB colourspace we get it in - and if we do any work on it, we usually leave it that way. Images only ever get converted to CMYK when we generate final press-ready artwork. Provided that the chosen CMYK space is appropriate to the printer's ink set and paper stock, you should get a good serviceable result. Working directly is CMYK is really only specific use-cases (such as needing a vector object to seamlessly blend with a solid colour region in a photo). Assuming that any of this made sense you now know more about colour management than 95% of graphic designers. And a significant minority of commercial printers as well. Dia de Pikachutos fucked around with this message at 08:53 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 05:57
|
|
|
dakana posted:I also think I get that, for example, a camera captures a scene in AdobeRGB One thing with colourspaces, they don't define the maximum number of colours within an image but the maximum spread of colours. The bit-depth of the file defines the number of colours; 8bit per channel gives 16,777,216 colours or 16bit/channel is 281 trillion. So a wider colorspace for the same bit-depth does mean the 'gaps' between neighbouring colours is wider., and a slightly higher risk of banding in some circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 10:13
|
|
|
Are there any FREE deleted photo recovery programs? I tried a couple, but they were the ones that scanned and then wanted to charge you for it after. I was made to delete some photos by some dick, so i was like gently caress it - it's 2016, i'll just recover them when i get home.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Recuva
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Recuva Thanks, that got quite a few of them - but wondershare still brought up more of them. Are some of them just unrecoverable? Should i just cough up the money? They were really good shots. Edit: Nevermind, found one that got them all. Erostratus fucked around with this message at 04:39 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
Erostratus posted:
Is there a story here? That's like my worst nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
Red_Fred posted:Is there a story here? That's like my worst nightmare. I was outside a hood grocery story as a small, white kid with a big camera asking for trouble. I took a few ok photos and left, but then the owner came up and said it was "private property" and i was "trespassing" and he was going to call the cops unless i deleted them. I've dealt with the cops a few times and they never give a poo poo but i wasn't sure where i stood legally and knew i could recover them so i just deleted them. Which begs the question - if you go up to a store and just ask people standing outside for street portraits - is that legal? I didn't think it was trespassing because it's a store expecting customers. My impression it was only trespassing after you were asked to leave. One of the more ok photos in question:  Daytona Beach by Kyle Sonnenberg, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 05:51
|
|
|
You definitely didn't have to delete the photos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
rio posted:You definitely didn't have to delete the photos. Thanks, i didn't think i had to as i've never had a problem before - but it didn't seem like a good place to discuss copyright law and such. Some people freak the gently caress out when they see a camera, holy cow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 06:29
|
|
|
You can photograph whatever's in plain view from public space.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 13:56
|
|
|
Even a police officer cannot demand you delete photos - that would take an order from a judge or magistrate. But I can see where you're coming from, knowing you can recover the deleted pics later means it's easy to say "Oh, sorry, sure *DELETE*" when angrywrongman comes up to you. EDIT: You asked about the legality of not just taking pictures of publicly-visible things in public (hella yes legal) but about asking first. Of course that's OK! How could it not be?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Even a police officer cannot demand you delete photos - that would take an order from a judge or magistrate. But I can see where you're coming from, knowing you can recover the deleted pics later means it's easy to say "Oh, sorry, sure *DELETE*" when angrywrongman comes up to you. Well, i know you cannot go into the store and start taking portraits - at least you'd be stopped fast. But i've sometimes hanged around a wal-mart just for for interesting faces to photograph with no problem. I'm not sure where the line is with "public property" that is also owned by someone, like a store. I've been hassled by lots of cops and not once did anything ever happen or did they ever say i was in the wrong. I should've just had more balls i guess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:11
|
|
|
I think at some level you have to respect that some people don't want their photo taken and yeah it's legal but it's also an invasion of privacy. It's like standing extremely close to someone in public for no reason, it's just lovely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
I've read that I can use X-T1 batteries in an X-T2 despite them not being the same and not having the "s" at the end. I just wanted to check here if anyone has done that and if it's ok? I only have one Fuji branded battery and the rest are 3rd party - I'm hoping I can just use them and the camera won't blow up or melt or anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
It's fine. I've used my Watson and Wasabi third-party batteries that I originally purchased for my X-T1 in my X-T2 as well. I'm not sure Fujifilm ever said on the record what the 'S' battery changes since electrical characteristics seem the same. Most people assume it's just better suited to the thermal characteristics of the X-T2, so maybe have the original battery in there when you're shooting 4K video. Also Fujifilm is apparently now shipping the "S" battery across all models, as someone on another forum reported buying a different Fujifilm camera and it has the newer "S" battery inside. They seem fairly interchangeable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
How the heck do guys like KRock and Steve Huff make money to feed their growing families (I.e. Krock's fat son) and how did they get to the point that people apparently go to their webpages to read what they think about the free cameras they wrote about? If these were good photographers then it might make some sense but it seems like there is no reason that anyone would go to those sites and that there is no reason to trust anything they say after reading even one review of nonsense. I am genuinely curious how it all works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
rio posted:I am genuinely curious how it all works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
rio posted:How the heck do guys like KRock and Steve Huff make money to feed their growing families (I.e. Krock's fat son) and how did they get to the point that people apparently go to their webpages to read what they think about the free cameras they wrote about? If these were good photographers then it might make some sense but it seems like there is no reason that anyone would go to those sites and that there is no reason to trust anything they say after reading even one review of nonsense. I am genuinely curious how it all works. They're the first or second results from a google search for almost any photography product so the rule of large numbers dictates they get enough ad views and amazon affiliate clickthroughs to profit significantly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 10:26 |
|
|
So it is schooling the search engine years back and keeping at the top of search results over time? How do they make money, it can't be through people following their links to buy gear.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 06:10
|
|