|
The Finn posted:I am, the strap hangs right there, sometimes it flops over in front of the viewfinder, it's just distracting and annoying. You have options. If you get the battery grip, you can do like I do, which is connect both ends of the strap to the right side, one to camera, one to grip. Keeps it out of the way. Second, you can get an R-strap, which connects to the tripod mount.
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2009 18:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 10:27 |
|
|
A5H posted:Cheers guys Generally, just shoot raw. Unless you need a marginal frame increase (and only then in some cameras), shoot raw. There are some photojournalistic reasons for jpg (Tsaraleksi shoots in jpg sometimes), but really, raw isn't that much slower, and with card sizes where they are, there's not much of a down side.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2009 01:51
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:I guess it all depends (tm). I shoot a fair bit of jpeg, the reasons being not having to fuss with raw conversion, and the subject being exposed well enough and not needing the extra flexibility of a raw shot. And buffering when shooting fast can have an impact. My 50D will fill up the buffer with something like 15 raw files while it'll go seemingly endlessly when shooting in jpeg. For someone who is very likely to get the exposure and white balance they want on the first shot, I'd still say shoot raw, but there'd be a lot less rationale. Buffer fills up faster, but you don't get more shots per second, just more total shots, right? How do your xD and xxD compare in that regard, by the way?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2009 02:12
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Yesterday I went to a prison to visit someone, got there, then was told that I had to wait a half hour before I could get in. So as a photographer in a scary looking place, I did what came natural to kill the time. I took some shots then came back to wait for entry. As I was waiting, the Dept. Of Corrections Officer told me to delete the photos I took. In such a situation I'd normally tell the guy to gently caress off, however, this situation was different and I complied. The various card manufacturers make recovery software. Just plug in the name of your card and recovery software in google, you should be good.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2009 16:04
|
|
|
Radbot posted:This is the right answer in my opinion. RAW is not always better, one of those cases is when you could be missing shots when your card fills up due to your format choice. Sometimes it seems like certain people would rather not take the shot than take it in JPG. Sort of. I use small jpg when shooting hundreds of pictures to make a time lapse. But in that case, no individual shot has to be particularly high quality. I avoid jpg for other shooting because a) I have never, never, in a normal situation run out of space on an 8 gig card, shooting raw, and b) having more control is almost never bad. If it were necessary for me to get through processing hundreds of shots for a professional reason, I'd still rather batch process raw files than depend on jpg in camera work.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2009 17:33
|
|
|
Radbot posted:Did you read my post? RAW may be a good choice, but not if you're going to miss shots because of it. The post I was referencing was about a guy taking a 6GB card for a 5 day trip. I don't know about you but I'd fill that up. Yes, I did. As you said, and as I agreed, IF, and it's a big if, you are going to miss shots, then you should either shoot raw or get more card. I'd go with get more card, though, as did the OP here. Oh, and I routinely take one 8 gig card on 4 day trips without issue. A 6 gig card would give me 328 shots, which is more than 60 per day. I think I'd wait until I was under 100 shots left, then switch to jpg.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2009 18:30
|
|
|
jackpot posted:Ha, I've finally made it, I have arrived: Jeez, it took that long for your friends to say it? drat, I get it a lot (the parents of other children in my son's daycare, mostly). My favorite was after shooting a reception where my pictures were widely preferred over the professional's wedding shots (two separate events, so we never overlapped), the "compliment" I got most was just that. Fuckers.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2009 02:04
|
|
|
ImprovEverywhere did a photography bit that's pretty interesting. http://improveverywhere.com/2009/09/22/subway-yearbook-photos/
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2009 19:51
|
|
|
A5H posted:Fantastic, cheers! What body? That's the only point of having ISO 50 on some bodies.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2009 18:25
|
|
|
Remember, tonight is another good meteor night. http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20091020/sc_space/getoutorionidmeteorshowerpeaksovernight
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2009 20:06
|
|
|
Captain Hair posted:I need some advice on getting better pictures of quite specific objects. First, brad industry has the background for the technical problems. Second, your lighting sucks. Since using natural light seems unlikely for your product, you need daylight balanced light. Strobes, or even constant light fluorescent lights would do it, and light it as brad suggests.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2009 20:26
|
|
|
Captain Hair posted:Never heard of "daylight balanced light", from what i've read up on it quickly it appears to be of the same "brightness" and colour of sunlight, but would this mean I would get colour coming through the crystal, or is that not possible with artificial lights? You won't use a black background. Use white, well lit, with good light, and use black cards to add definition. Think of the cards this way...they won't be in the picture, you want them to be reflected in the glass/crystal, to add edge. Here's a setup that Mannequin did for a similar effect. http://www.flickr.com/photos/mannequin-/3668396679/ torgeaux fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Oct 22, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2009 21:15
|
|
|
Malalol posted:Any reviews for this Targus battery grip? http://www.amazon.com/Targus-TG-BGXTI-Battery-Canon-Rebel/dp/B001AK2VPQ I'd recommend this instead: http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-Grip-Vertical-XT-Batteries/dp/B000G3KLPA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1256559193&sr=1-1 Or, without the extra batteries, it's only $59. It's made at the same plant as the Canon, it is identical in every way.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2009 13:14
|
|
|
germskr posted:I'm retarded. If only I'd seen the original post. torgeaux fucked around with this message at 00:25 on Oct 28, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2009 22:12
|
|
|
No. 9 posted:Stupid question, but it's always been nagging me. This is odd. ISO 100 is the base ISO, available in everything but some autoiso situations. If you can't set it to 100, there's a problem. Did you buy it used? Take a look at the manual. Manual
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2009 19:28
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:You have on highlight tone priority. REad the manual. It's limited to 200 ISO when that's enabled. Ha. I completely forgot about that limitation. Don't use it, don't have those situations that often.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2009 20:35
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:I'm pretty much a complete newbie, so forgive the potentially really lame question that follows. Any camera with some level of manual control. Turn off the flash, set to lowest ISO, shoot for long exposure. Self-timer and camera not hand held. Ta da.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2009 14:13
|
|
|
DreadCthulhu posted:Hello folks, First, try here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2934270 Second, I have no idea about the nikon kit lens, but the D90 has a good reputation. Third. Nikon? Really. All the smart kids go canon.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2009 22:42
|
|
|
DreadCthulhu posted:Pardon my noobness, but what exactly is considered a fast prime? f/2.8 as a max aperture is slow for a prime lens, fast for a zoom lens. A fast prime is f/2.0 or faster. The 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 are good, reasonably priced fast primes. Sigma's 30mm f/1.4 gets great reviews also.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2009 03:25
|
|
|
Z posted:If he were talking about getting a D40 I'd say you're right, but the D90 is about where Nikon's sweet spot is right now. No, I'm saying all canons of any kind are better than any nikon. Canon 300D versus Nikon D3x? Take the canon. It's just superior in every possible way.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2009 13:13
|
|
|
The Wensey posted:I officially now have no idea what the gently caress. I tried it again and got this: Do you have autofocus on? Linked to the shutter button? If so, it's likely hunting for focus lock. Turn off autofocus, or link it to something other than your shutter button, as your ghetto setup may be causing that problem.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2009 16:28
|
|
|
jackpot posted:If there's a better thread for this, let me know. I prefer Blurb to Kodak, but both are ok. Neither are really good for truly best displaying pictures, as the paper is too glossy and not really great.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2009 20:47
|
|
|
Tziko posted:I'd say that the only thing that might damage your camera is condensation when you go back inside. Moisture from the air will condense on the cold camera. Yes, this. going from dry to moist is the problem, and cold to heated usually fits the bill for those conditions. Equally applies to going from air conditioned interior to humid hot exteriors, e.g. tropical locations.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2009 16:28
|
|
|
albedoa posted:Yeah I appreciate the response pwn, but you might be on the other end of the curve from me I do pretty much what pwn does. I crop to 8x10 dimensions mostly, or leave it uncropped, and save at 12, then post full size to flickr...mostly as a storage/backup medium.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2009 23:41
|
|
Maybe some more average users can share their habits?
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:1920x1200 Are the 24" iMac's also hit with the yellow monitor issue? Check it out first, and be careful as the problem still hasn't been resolved on the affected iMacs.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2010 17:15
|
|
|
Ziir posted:Thanks, I'll check that out later. I'm running Windows by the way, to the guy who suggested Mac software. Open up means get wider aperture, or lower number. Stop down means a more narrow aperture, or bigger number.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2010 11:47
|
|
|
Ziir posted:What's the difference between changing my AE/AF Lock button on my D80 to have it focus when pressed to just switching my camera from AF to manual focus after I set my focus? one unnecessary button push.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2010 12:03
|
|
|
nonanone posted:How many other people use back-button AF? I recently decided to permanently switch over, because I like the control more and it fits the way I shoot. I only know of one other photographer that actually does this though, so I'm curious about who else does. Me. Once I switched for some particular shots I realized it was much more versatile, and just as easy, as the single button AF/Meter/Shutter use.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2010 20:18
|
|
|
Ziir posted:I asked before but didn't get a response so I'll ask again. What's the difference between setting my back button to AF when held versus just leaving it normal and switching the camera from AF to MF after I set my focus? I assume all cameras have this switch in the front where it's easily accessible. I tried setting the back button to AF but it's just really annoying to keep it held down constantly. I answered the first time. You've added an unnecessary step to the process, and that's rarely a good thing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2010 14:56
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:I just changed mine because of this discussion to be the AF button. Makes perfect sense and I'm sure I'll get used to it quickly. I'm sure it's not for everyone, but once you get used to the slight difference, it seems more intuitive.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2010 15:22
|
|
|
Eutheria posted:What's the general consensus on SmugMug? There are also some programs out there to suck all your current stuff from flickr to smugmug.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2010 15:07
|
|
|
therattle posted:Hi there, BobTheCow posted:The better question is why are you using the filter to begin with? If you don't have a very specific reason to use it, you probably shouldn't, as obviously it's detrimental to image quality. It would make more sense to simply not use a filter than try and undo the damage in post (assuming, again, you don't have a specific reason to use one). I gotta disagree with Bob here. A circular polarizer is very useful, unlike protective filters, if used in the right circumstances. Assuming you know that, yes, low profile filters lessen vignetting. You can also address post, but that's less effective. Low profile filters are more expensive, though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2010 19:10
|
|
|
TheFuglyStik posted:Are we talking about the number of pixels as an important factor, or as the only factor? That's all I've been seeing on this page. Of course you're going to be getting better performance at the same ISO with a >20MP full-frame beast, which would be a great point to bring up if it weren't a comparison between a 40D and 450D. I don't think that's the point. I think we'd all agree the 40D is an upgrade. Unfortunately, in a "General Photography Questions" thread, you made a broad, inaccurate statement instead of a narrowly tailored answer. This is SA, you'll get called on that every time. Remember, the 5Di has larger photosites at 12mp since it's full frame, and in the ballpark on price with the 40D now, I think.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2010 14:57
|
|
|
TheFuglyStik posted:Fair enough. I was interpreting the context as people slamming the 40D over the 450D because of the megapixel count, so I can see how things got wrapped around. Good to know that wasn't the case. This is a place where routinely the 30D and 20D are still pimped hard over the Rebel series...and for good reason in many cases. We loves our xxD line.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2010 15:49
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:At what temps do I have to worry about condensation in the lens when coming from outdoors to inside? I just bought a Canon 100-400mm and am paranoid about this now. When going from dry cold to warm moist, while in the cool area, put the camera in a plastic bag (preferably sealed, like a gallon ziplock, and let it come up to temperature in the bag.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2010 13:08
|
|
|
Phat_Albert posted:Unfortunately the nifty fifty has no focus markings, so I guess I'll just have to eyeball it. In daylight, focus on something that is clearly at infinity. Mark that on your lens (use a needle and put a small scratch mark).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2010 13:01
|
|
|
brad industry posted:Look at images constantly, you have to build visual literacy in the same way you learn to read text. Piffle. Just buy a better camera. And lenses. Filters. New tripod. More lenses. New version of camera. Continue until you feel that your pictures are good enough.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2010 20:00
|
|
|
TheFuglyStik posted:I started by learning the technical stuff first, and then figuring out the aesthetic part as I went along. It's not so much a series of hurdles as it is a gradual climb with a few "holy poo poo I just realized this!" you come to on your own along the way. There's no magic formula or advice that instantly causes good photography or complete understanding of why others like certain images. Yeah, it's always possible someone won't see the satirical nature. It was more for brad than for the newbie, but yes, I was kidding. God, that comment could go straight to FM forums without edit.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2010 21:21
|
|
|
jackpot posted:Billy Hunt Photography: 4 Tips for Looking Beautiful in Photos I want him to be my photographer from now on. As long as this was self-aware.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2010 17:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 10:27 |
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Anyone know of a source of "behind the scenes" food styling blogs or flickr groups? I specifically want to see the dirty tricks of it, that go beyond normal cooking and arranging. http://www.blogged.com/topics/food-styling/ Out of curiosity, I did a Google search of behind the scenes food styling and that was the only hit.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2010 13:06
|
|