|
Are you on Windows? I think that's a Windows setting.
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2010 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:45 |
|
|
.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2010 21:28
|
|
|
thefreshmaker posted:Whenever I plug in any kind of USB drive, Lightroom detects photos on it and automatically starts up. Any idea how to turn this off? I'm sure it's something obvious in the menus that I'm just missing. It's in the preferences, uncheck "present import dialog when media is detected" or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2010 23:20
|
|
|
Thanks, I don't know how I kept missing that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2010 04:21
|
|
|
Shamelessly crossposting from the portrait thread because I'm not sure my question belongs there nor how much traffic this thread gets : ahhh panic mode. I need to do a maternity shoot later today or tomorrow. This is very last minute and the first time I do this. Shooting will be in an outdoor location I've never been to. It will start at ~16:30 (sun sets at 18:30) and it will be loving cold outside (about 10 Celsius). She'd like some pictures with her boyfriend. I do not own a flash (ok, I do have an old vivitar that I don't know how to use correctly) so this will have to be natural light only. Weather for today and tomorrow should alternate between sunny and cloudy. This is for a good friend of my girlfriend so it's no official gig and I won't really get paid for that but I'd still like to do as best as I can. Oh and the girl is very shy so even if it was warm there would be no "hide your boobies with your hands" type of shot. She'll probably be slightly uncomfortable if we do belly shots. I'd like any tips, stuff I could read, example of stuff I could try to do. I need to be prepared because we will need to move fast. I'll have about 1 hour to do this before it gets too dark to do anything worth the hassle. help goons!
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2010 16:08
|
|
|
Considering my Canon's only lenses are my kit 28-135 and a 50 1.8 (poor college student), should I hop on the 18-55 for $70 I just spotted on CL? The alternative is waiting til I can get a Tamron 17-50. Tshirt Ninja fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Oct 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2010 23:51
|
|
|
Tshirt Ninja posted:Considering my Canon's only lenses are my kit 28-135 and a 50 1.8 (poor college student), should I hop on the 18-55 for $70 I just spotted on CL? Only if it's the IS version. The optics are much better on that version from what I understand.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2010 01:06
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Only if it's the IS version. The optics are much better on that version from what I understand. It still bends things on the edges toward the center.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2010 01:19
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Only if it's the IS version. The optics are much better on that version from what I understand.  geeves posted:It still bends things on the edges toward the center. e. Oh, one more thing. Hoya skylight filters - are they UV filters? Tshirt Ninja fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Oct 3, 2010 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2010 01:47
|
|
|
It's supposed to be a warming filter. If you are shooting RAW, don't bother with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2010 22:57
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:I've got a question about this photo: what the hell is going on with the bottom right corner of this image?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2010 00:31
|
|
|
FetusOvaries posted:So is in-camera sharpening a dumb thing to use? If you shoot RAW it has no effect, just a heads-up. Actually, it kind-of depends. If you shoot Nikon and use CaptureNX, then in-camera sharpening will be visible in the RAW file but you can turn it off in the software. Not sure about Canon. Those in-camera settings really only affect JPEGs and TIFFs, and how it might look on the back of your LCD. But that's it. Augmented Dickey posted:what the hell is going on with the bottom right corner of this image? Holy hell, I totally missed that. Wow, that's pretty bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2010 00:57
|
|
|
I've been using some old manual-only lenses on my DSLR lately and after struggling for a bit with good focus at wide aperture, I upgraded to a split prism focusing screen. This thing is fantastic! Why don't they ship with them? Is it just to make narrow apertures easier? Anyone have any good tips on focusing with it? At the moment I'm picking a spot with strong contrast and repeatedly tilting my camera up and down a few degrees to see how much of a discontinuity the screen is making.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2010 20:13
|
|
|
Grazing Occultation posted:I've been using some old manual-only lenses on my DSLR lately and after struggling for a bit with good focus at wide aperture, I upgraded to a split prism focusing screen. This thing is fantastic! Why don't they ship with them? Is it just to make narrow apertures easier? A martian robot landed and bequeathed us cameras and lenses that can focus by themselves!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2010 20:40
|
|
|
I'm just getting into photography seriously with my first DSLR. What is the best photo editing software? Also, what is the best value in photo editing software? I'm hoping you'll tell me there is some free software available for download that would work for a beginner.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2010 20:26
|
|
|
Your camera came with some basic RAW processing software, and there are alternatives to Photoshop like GIMP. But, nothing beats the Photoshop/Lightroom combo. You could easily do everything you'd want in Lightroom alone, but it certainly isn't free.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2010 20:30
|
|
|
Photoshop Elements is great for basic editing. As long as you're not doing anything too wacky, it'll probably cover what you're looking for. It's probably the best bang for the buck. GIMP is free but it's slow as hell and the interface is terrible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2010 20:33
|
|
|
What is the interaction between Photoshop and Lightroom? If I were to buy just one, which would should it be?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2010 20:40
|
|
|
stingray1381 posted:What is the interaction between Photoshop and Lightroom? If I were to buy just one, which would should it be? It depends on the depth of editing you do. Lightroom is basically a library organizer with powerful editing tools built in. Photoshop is even more powerful at editing but has no file support system for organization.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2010 20:43
|
|
|
The student version of Lightroom is reasonably priced on Amazon, so I picked that up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2010 20:47
|
|
|
That's a good choice. Unless you're doing high quality retouching or large photo manipulation projects, Lightroom will serve you better than Photoshop, especially given the price point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2010 21:40
|
|
|
What are peoples thoughts on Capture One as a LR alternative?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 00:14
|
|
|
stingray1381 posted:What is the interaction between Photoshop and Lightroom? If I were to buy just one, which would should it be? I would start with Lightroom and then get Photoshop when the limitations become obvious (you want to do more pixel-manipulation retouching/compositing or need better masking, layers, etc.) quote:What are peoples thoughts on Capture One as a LR alternative? Depends on what you need. LR gives you way, way more control over RAW processing but in my opinion the quality of exported files is very slightly in C1's advantage. And obviously C1 has no file management type features and is set up around "sessions" for shooting tethered. There are no local adjustments in C1 and everything is more limited than LR, or at least has a dumber interface (their color tool drives me crazy). The last few versions of C1 have not exactly been what I would call stable either (unless you are in DB mode, of course). On the other hand LR's tethering sucks at this stage and to me is too much of a resource hog to be responsive enough for shooting like that. I use both on a regular basis but for different things - C1 is for tethering and very basic processing, and Lightroom is for management/more intense processing. brad industry fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Oct 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 00:24
|
|
|
brad industry posted:I would start with Lightroom and then get Photoshop when the limitations become obvious (you want to do more pixel-manipulation retouching/compositing or need better masking, layers, etc.) Have you tried LR3's tethered capabilities yet?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 00:59
|
|
|
It's unreliable and there's not really anything you can do other than restart it if it's not working. It's new so I assume they are working on making it better. I've used it a few times at home in my studio but I still prefer C1 for tethering. I have heard some photographers I work for say they have started using it and it's worked for them, but I don't recommend it to anyone for real shoots (yet). How well it seems to work varies camera by camera. It works ok with Canon 5D mk1 and 2 but I have seen it totally ignore a Nikon D700 (with no options for troubleshooting it) brad industry fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Oct 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 01:06
|
|
|
brad industry posted:It's unreliable and there's not really anything you can do other than restart it if it's not working. It's new so I assume they are working on making it better. I've used it a few times at home in my studio but I still prefer C1 for tethering. Yeah, I've only used C1 while assisting but had a brief crisis where a client miscommunicated what they wanted - I thought they wanted tethered but they only wanted to be shown the unedited pics on a laptop on the day of the shoot but before I found that out I was in a panic as I only have LR3 and thought it was a miracle when I discovered it could support tethered. I only goofed around with it shooting poo poo on my desk because I don't have a long enough cable to do anything else and it did seem a bit unpolished.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 01:32
|
|
|
HPL posted:A martian robot landed and bequeathed us cameras and lenses that can focus by themselves! I'm a control freak who shoots at f/1.4 way too often. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 02:34
|
|
|
I've just done a bunch of portrait shots for people that attended an event. The event organizers asked us to come on board for that purpose. We've been charging $5 for the attendee's to get their photos emailed to them, which has been going well.. One of the attendee's has asked if he can get his photos released to him under a Creative Commons license of some kind, as he's an Open Source junkie, and loves the idea of the cumulative creativity that can come from releasing something under CC. He's a friend, so he's just curiously wondering, rather than trying to extort the images from me or anything. Any major disadvantages? As far as I can see, I'd still need the OK of the event organizers, as they "paid" us to be there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 03:37
|
|
|
Unless there is a huge market for images of this random guy I don't see how releasing them under whatever terms he wants would hurt.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 03:44
|
|
|
On a similar note: Watermarks. I loving hate them. It seems like any photographer with pictures good enough for people to actually want to copy, isn't the type to be having a BOB JONES PHOTOGRAPHY watermark over their photo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 05:24
|
|
|
Watermarks can be done well and they can be absolutely awful as well. There's nothing worse than seeing an amateur photographer with their buiseness name slathered all over a photo via an intrusive and ugly water mark. I see it every day and it annoys the hell out of me. If you must, chuck your name down the very corner in light gray or something. Too easy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 06:03
|
|
|
Quick question, I currently have a Nikon D40 and mainly use the 50mm 1.8 which is a pain to manual focus all the time. Would I be better getting a body that will auto focus that lens or get the 35mm 1.8 AF-S.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 12:04
|
|
|
Depends on whether you see yourself getting a lot of lenses which require in body AF. If you're going to get more lenses like you 50mm, then upgrade the body. If you're going to get more lenses that will AF on your D40, then keep the D40. Either way get the 35 1.8, it's just lovely.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 12:43
|
|
|
Schofferhofer posted:Depends on whether you see yourself getting a lot of lenses which require in body AF. Yeah I think I'll take the 35 route, thanks 
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 12:56
|
|
|
What are the best weather conditions to get those lovely misty mornings that always seem to make awesome photos? I've been forcing myself to get up at 5:30 the past few days so I can meet the sunrise, and haven't seen any mists. Do I need fresh rainfall? Is it a temperature thing? Air pressure? Combination of the three? There's no shortage of dew out there.. I come back with my pants soaked, but I'm not seeing any mist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 14:20
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Do I need fresh rainfall? Is it a temperature thing? Air pressure? Combination of the three? I don't know where you live but in IL having a hot period of time followed by a cool morning causes light mist to rise over bodies of water. Large scale fog is most prevalent here during the winter when there is snow on the ground followed by a very sharp rise in temperature.. this isn't including your general run of the mill unpredictable fog.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 16:48
|
|
|
xzzy posted:What are the best weather conditions to get those lovely misty mornings that always seem to make awesome photos? I've been forcing myself to get up at 5:30 the past few days so I can meet the sunrise, and haven't seen any mists. Move to Northern California, awesome fog every day .
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 20:52
|
|
|
brad industry posted:Move to Northern California, awesome fog every day Most of the Maine coast is the same way. I do a lot of race photography in that area and I'm always amazed by it. I think coastal areas in general produce a lot more fog. A night with thunderstorms followed by a cool morning usually does a pretty good job just about anywhere though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 21:01
|
|
|
Augmented Dickey posted:what the hell is going on with the bottom right corner of this image?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2010 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:45 |
|
|
boydx posted:Quick question, I currently have a Nikon D40 and mainly use the 50mm 1.8 which is a pain to manual focus all the time. Would I be better getting a body that will auto focus that lens or get the 35mm 1.8 AF-S. I've got a D60 and I'm in the exact same boat. Made a newbie mistake of getting the 50mm 1.8 before realizing that the D40/60 don't have an internal AF servo, and rely on AF-S designations and such to do the work for them. Over time, you'd certainly be better getting a body that would do autofocus, but that kind of change doesn't come cheap. In saying that, since I've realized my mistake, I've purchased the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 HSM, and the Sigma 10.5mm F2.8 Fisheye HSM, and absolutely love them both. Yes it's annoying having to ensure that a lens has its own AF servo, but it's not a huge deal breaker yet. The price difference between Nikon's AF and AF-S lenses is pretty big though, so don't go spending too much on AF-S lenses just to compensate for the lack of AF in your camera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2010 00:54
|
|