|
Well you know, Cartier-Bresson for the most part shot with nothing but a 50mm and he did pretty well for himself. The more PIMM talks about this camera, the more I like it. I'm a big fan of the going out with one lens philosophy and I spent a year with nothing but a 50mm and an Xti. It both pushes you to work harder and relieves you of stresses at the same time. I think the optical view finder is a big deal too. I love my s90 but I really, really hate composing on a LCD. It's a lot harder for me. However, I just don't have the $1000 to spend on such a camera. I still have a few more DSLR things to buy before I'd even think about it.
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2011 18:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 10:42 |
|
|
 Sounds like a good deal!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2011 05:07
|
|
|
I don't know, I like the idea of a camra but I think I might hold off for someone selling a camrawr
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2011 05:28
|
|
|
Not for the ladies...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2011 06:42
|
|
|
Just read an interesting article from Jeff Revell about being a color blind photographer. TL;DR: X-rite has an Online Color Challenge where you can test how well you see color. I scored 23 drunk at 3am on a laptop screen. Gonna try again sober on a calibrated monitor to see if I do any better.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2011 18:15
|
|
|
Casu Marzu posted:Haha, I scored a 154 on my laptop, but I didn't think my eyes were that bad. So I hopped onto one of the PC lab computers that gets calibrated fairly frequently and got a 122. You might want to take the other test mentioned in the blog post too http://www.opticien-lentilles.com/daltonien_beta/new_test_daltonien.php
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2011 19:45
|
|
|
spog posted:So, that photo of Obama playing Counterstrike: What a moving image, I'm so glad they published it. I could stare at it forever and just guess at what was running through their minds at that moment. The other thing I find interesting about this image is that the subject matter is so compelling, you don't even think about the composition or technical aspects of it. The moment and emotion take over this image.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2011 09:46
|
|
|
I was thinking the same thing.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2011 09:58
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:Yeah, in my admittedly limited experience, the photojournalists I've worked with rarely shoot RAW simply because of tight deadlines and relatively low standards of newsprint and low-res web images. Also, heavy post processing and pj don't mix unless you're in Iran or something.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2011 03:51
|
|
|
aliencowboy posted:Does anyone have any recommendations for photography podcasts? The Candid Frame seems alright, but a lot of the other ones I've found are a little too gear-obsessive for me. Sure, I've listened to a lot of different ones and there a few i stick to. Here they are in order of best to decent: 1. I'd say The Candid Frame is the best, but since you're familiar with it, I won't go on about it. 2. Photofocus. It's a photography Q&A show hosted by Scott Bourne and a different guest host each episode. It's not deep and thought provoking like TCF, but it is fun to listen to and I end up learning something new every episode. It's a very well paced show and never has any episodes that drag on. 3. This Week in Photography. This podcast originally started out as just being a roundtable discussion about photography news and issues with experts in the field (kinda like This Week in Tech and Macbreak Weekly). Being a fan of TWIT and MBW, I really enjoy that part of the show. In the last year or two they've been mixing up the format every week and adding either interviews or Q&A sections. For the most part the interviews have been with social media types like marketing companies, community managers, and self portrait super star chicks on flickr. Most of the time they drag on and I really don't care for them. As far as the Q&A goes, I get my fill of that with Photofocus. I'd say it's worth listening to just for the roundtable part. 4. Camera Dojo. I got into this podcast about 2 years after it started but I've listened to every episode. It was originally hosted by Kerry Garrison and David Esquire and started off as a kind of a podcast for emerging wedding photographers. It started off pretty strong but has the months went on, David Esquire became more and more annoying. It was like listening to a dumbass frat boy. It got to the point where I was going to stop listening then finally, Esquire stopped appearing on the show. Now the show is completely in Kerry's hands and I'm thankful for that. He's a level headed, no nonsense, likable guy. Sometimes it's hosted by Kerry alone and sometimes he'll have another quality guest host on like David Ziser or Syl Arena. In the current format, the hosts will pick a topic, then elaborate on it for the rest of the show. It's could be about off camera lighting, the business of wedding photography, or a number of different topics. Over all it's pretty informative and I can't remember hearing a bad episode since Esquire has been off the show. 5. Nik Radio. I was skeptical that this was going to be a shill show going into this podcast, but after listening for awhile I've become a fan. It's put on by Nik Software and hosted by Scott Shepard. There are two types of episodes, interviews and news about Nik Software. I usually skip the news episodes and go straight to the interview episodes. Scott has a great interviewing style and the guests chosen for the show are generally pretty interesting. The only potential drawback to the show is that each guests usually spends a couple minutes talking about how they use Nik Software. Personally, I'm a big fan of Nik and I don't mind it, but I could see why this could be a turn off to some people. I'd probably rank it higher if it weren't for this. I'm interested in hearing what other goons have to suggest. Ever since I've been listening to podcasts at 2x speed, I've been running out of shows to listen to.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2011 05:12
|
|
|
surgical scar posted:haha that book is such bullshit. it's nothing but an exercise in narcissism. a photobook, except they forgot to put good photos in it. Hey well these guys look like serious artists with their beards, glasses, and silly hats and they approve. So obviously you're wrong!
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2011 16:21
|
|
|
A couple things about insurance. If you do work for money make sure it's covered for commercial use. If you don't and you get caught, you may get nothing. Secondly, be sure it covers the replacement value of your gear. I don't know what they pay if you don't, but I've heard it won't be enough for you buy a new copy of what you had.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2011 23:03
|
|
|
Edit: nm, they're actually paying.
Haggins fucked around with this message at 19:32 on May 11, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 11, 2011 18:52
|
|
|
If you really have to shoot hanging off the side of a roof or something close to where you can fall, there are safe ways of doing it. Looking to renting fall protection gear or maybe even climbing gear. Be a professional about your work and not some loving cowboy. No photo is worth your life. Paragon8 posted:Just impulse bought a $25 ringflash from these guys - Looks pretty chintzy to me. i couldn't see that thing holding up at all unless you do nothing but shoot in a studio.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2011 04:32
|
|
|
psylent posted:Hey Dorks. DSLR, it's the cross all photographers bear.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2011 03:46
|
|
|
dakana posted:This fall, I'll be going back to school for my last year in college, earning a bachelor's in psychology. I plan on going to grad school for psychology to become a psychologist. Do you like doing photography for a living? Do you have a scholarship for grad school, or are you paying for it yourself? Are you going for just a masters or a doctorate? I think it's a good idea to finish up your BS, but I'd think twice about grad school if you're just going for a masters that'll put you in debt. A BS will help you get a job in your field, a MS will only help you get a slightly better job. Having a masters will eventually pay off, but it will take several years (over 5, maybe 10+) before you see a return on investment. Instead of going into debt before you get a job, consider finding an employer that will pay your way through grad school. That way you don't rack up any debt and you make good money while you're going through school. You could also just forget about grad school and focus on your photography but that's entirely up to you. If you're going for a doctorate, then you should probably just jump right in and get it done. Just be sure that you're positive that you want to be a psychologist for the rest of your life. Otherwise you're wasting your time and money.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2011 03:15
|
|
|
Liquid_Table posted:I don't understand the jokes about UV filters. Are they really just worthless? Can I now laugh at my friend for spending $70 on one? Yeah, the only thing they do for you is decrease your image quality ever so slightly. As for protection, they're really not that good. First off, there is no guarantee that the filter will save your front element if a major accident happens (like say you drop your lens onto concrete). Secondly, small scratches don't really affect image quality. Try putting putting your index finger right up against the glass when you shoot; you'll barely notice it. Also check out {url=http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008/10/front-element-scratches]this blog post[/url] if you don't believe me. Third, the front element is the cheapest part of the lens to replace. I've never had to do it myself, but I've heard Scott Bourne say it cost him something like $300 to replace the front element on his $8000 Sigma 300-800. If you want good protection for your lens, I suggest picking up a lens hood. Unless you're shooting on an ultra-wide, nothing will get close to your front element.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2011 05:50
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Isn't one required for complete weathersealing of most manufacturer's "weatherproof" setups? I can't say for certain. There is no mention of this in the manual for my 70-200 2.8 IS II. My guess is that it's already sealed because there are no moving parts on the front element.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2011 06:41
|
|
|
Helmacron posted:You get so much from photography. This may sound weird, but I like photography because I don't have to follow anyone's drat rules if I don't want to. In addition, if I don't want to, I don't have to work anyone else. It's not that I hate working with other people, it's just sometimes I don't want any "help" or "input"; I just want to do things my own way. I guess you can call that creative freedom. That's probably the biggest thing I hated about working for NASA. For most jobs there you don't excel for being creative, you excel by following the rules to a tee.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2011 19:22
|
|
|
aliencowboy posted:Could anyone who has stayed in hostels with camera gear give me a rundown of their experiences or any security issues they've run into? I've only stayed in one a couple times so I can't offer much. Just make sure you're poo poo can fit in a locker and get a good lock.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2011 19:05
|
|
|
FLX posted:Photography newbie here: what makes Hasselblad cameras so expensive/special? If you're looking at digital medium format, it's partly because those sensors cost a lot to make. Not only because they're physically much larger than a 35mm, but they're also not mass produced on the same level as 35mm cameras since they're mostly used by high end professionals. The more you make of something, the cheaper it costs to produce. Same goes for the lenses and other medium format specific gear. Leica on the other hand, is a different story. I'm sure their poo poo is top notch, but I think you pay mostly for the name. People who own them swear by them, but I think it's just a luxury item no different than a rolex.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2011 22:36
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:Like Nikons! They only take Nikons to the ISS because no one on earth is going to miss them 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 01:25
|
|
|
There are other factors to consider. First, the price of components go down when you buy in bulk. Secondly, the more you build of something, the more efficient you become at building it. You collect data, study the processes, and find places to improve. It's just like anything else; the more you do it, the better you get at it. For an example I can look to my iPhone 3GS. I bought it when it came out and it cost me $200. A Year later, you could get the same model for $100. Now it's two years after and it costs $50. I know it's subsidized by my carrier, but the price drop is because it doesn't cost Apple as much to make them from when they first came out. Almost any electronic device could be used as an example here.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 06:25
|
|
|
Elite Taco posted:That's what I keep running into when I think through the workshop thing. It's like selling pans to prospectors and claiming to teach others how to find gold. For a good number of local dudes, it appears to be more lucrative to teach photography than to shoot. $500 for a day is a lot of money for a workshop. I've seen day long hands on workshops with Joe Mcnally and Syl Arena for less money. Workshops can be good things but you have to make sure you're getting a good value. You need to consider the teaching background of the leader, how long the workshop is, how much hands on you'll get, and the class size. If I were paying that much for a day of speedliting, I'd except a well known photographer, a dawn to dusk day, and less than 10 people in the class. But before you start looking at workshops, try to find things that are free and cheap to do. First thing to do is find some one to shoot. Start with your SO, your Mom, your sister, your brother, or your buddy. It doesn't matter what the end photo is gonna look like, you're just using them to learn how to use your gear. Next, search for free Webinars, live or prerecorded. These are almost like taking a workshop except you don't have to go anywhere and they're free. Peachpit has live and prerecorded lectures from their book authors and Creative Live lets you attend their classes for free if you have the time to watch them live. After that, I'd highly recommend giving Kelby Training a try for a month for $25. They have a ton of top notch videos from some of the best photographers out there. i only subscribe for a month here and there but I always learn a lot from their videos.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2011 03:16
|
|
|
rear end is my canvas posted:Whenever I see that picture it takes me back to- Ha I reminded me of that movie too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2011 05:48
|
|
|
I played with a hoodman loupe the other day. It seemed pretty cool but I don't know if I wanna spend $80 for it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2011 01:44
|
|
|
^^^ God help if you walk in there and mention that you want to go shoot a politician at an upcoming rally. The main camera store in Orlando is also a hobby store (model trains, RC cars/planes, etc...). I guess everything can be a hobby but I don't really get the connection. Maybe "things that nerds like"?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2011 01:05
|
|
|
Just saw this on Macworld today: Link Macworld posted:Ricoh to buy Pentax, set sights on digital SLR market
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2011 17:28
|
|
|
There is no plain TTL. It's either E-TTL (II if you want to be very specific) or manual. There was a "plain TTL" at one point but that hasn't been around since before 1995.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2011 21:26
|
|
|
Are you walking to the dealership too? I bet the gas you spend getting there and back is going to make the first car you shoot free or nearly free.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2011 01:46
|
|
|
Probably rednecks who think one of their greatest accomplishments in life is buying, driving, and maintaining "fill in the blank" car/truck.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2011 21:38
|
|
|
His plane could have gotten hit by a rouge ray, like from a solar flare or something. Other than that, i'm not buying it. With all the photographers that constantly fly, why have we not heard any complaints about this yet.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2011 00:13
|
|
|
EatinCake posted:Maybe just start with some simpler themes and see where it goes from there then? I did think the system of having the winner choose five themes to vote on was great and should still carry over. I was thinking the kind of the same thing, except there will be a pool of pre-approved themes that the winner could draw from so things don't get out of hand. As for themes, personally, I think they should be vague and open to interpretation. Like "Red" or "Power" or "Grim". That way your creativity isn't boxed in. As far as GBS goes, I think it could be a good idea as long as there are ground rules for posting and it's well moderated.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2011 21:31
|
|
|
Just saw this this guy pop up on one of my news feeds: http://carenalpertfineart.com/ He shoots food with a microscope, pretty cool stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2011 00:22
|
|
|
brad industry posted:Hah that's funny I just met her a few months ago (she shares a studio in SF with a guy I work with) and had no idea she was doing that. Awesome. Her commercial work is really good too. I guess I should have read the "Caren" part before jumping to the gallery.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
My protocol with dealing with authority is as follows: If anyone asks what I'm doing, I just tell them the truth "taking pictures". If they ask for what I say "personal art". If I'm on private property and I'm told to stop taking pictures, I just leave. I tell them I'm leaving, stop answering any questions, and just walk away. If I'm asked to stop shooting on public property by anyone, cop or security, I tell them to gently caress off. There is nothing they can legally do to me. Now if I were doing something illegal, like trespassing, then the rules change. Haven't had that happen.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2011 04:52
|
|
|
Why even bother with film for a wedding? Just seems stupid.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2011 21:47
|
|
|
spog posted:Sorry Martytoof, I am with Haggins here: film is dumb for a wedding. Not to mention gently caress ups at the lab that are beyond your control. A good photo is a good photo regardless what medium it's shot on. If your photos don't look good without the "film look", you're doing something wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2011 18:19
|
|
|
As much as we bitch about the cost of gear, if you really think about it, photography isn't that expensive of a hobby now that we're all digital. Sure we spend money on bodies, lenses, lights, but all that stuff lasts for years and years and costs nothing to operate. I'm jobless and broke most of the time but I can still go out shooting whenever I want.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2011 17:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 10:42 |
|
|
Speaking of photography as a hobby, the main thing that has always attracted me to it, is that I'm out there creating something other people can enjoy (at least I try to). I feel like a lot of hobbies people around me take up are just out there to be "consumed". By that, I mean they spend time and money on it and have nothing to show for that anyone outside their circle will ever care about. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong taking up a hobby that's only meant to be consumed. I just think it's more fulfilling to balance those out with creative endeavors.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2011 21:24
|
|