May 16, 2006, 8:48 PM
Post #28 of 53
(335 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mnealtx] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
it's damn hard (at least for me) to get the right light on the people. I know it has to do with the camera metering, but I just haven't "got it" yet.
I haven't got it consistent, either....not yet. I still am putting together all the pieces of the puzzle, and hope that someday I will be far more consistent than I am now.
One of the beauties of digital is that you can shoot, shoot, shoot and delete those you don't like. I have a huge card in my camera - I can shoot something like 600 RAW, and not think twice. And the other wonderful part is you can look at the EXIF info (I forget what that stands for), and it will show you what settings you were on when you took that great shot. It's no longer having to keep track of what you did on X frame on Y roll...it's embedded into the shot so it's an easy look up. And that, frankly, is one of the best features for digi v. film that I needed.
Yes, pick people's brains, but don't hesitate to shoot what you see. Use the programmed stuff for a while, read the EXIF data, and start to experiment with it. The most important thing is being able to see the shot just before it happens, and clicking right on time. I'm not too good at that yet, either, but I'm getting better.
And in no way am I holding myself out to be any sort of expert. I know less about photography than I do about skydiving...and that's sayin' something! ROFL.
May 16, 2006, 8:54 PM
Post #30 of 53
(330 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Zipp0] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
BTW Michele, I love the flamingo shot. The bold color against the black is striking, as is the lighting.
Thanks. It was weird with that shot - I saw it, took it, chimped it, and said "nah, not gonna look good big..." but left it in the camera...got home, downloaded, played around a bit with some levels of colors, and this thing jumped out at me. I swear someone else took it while I wasn't watching, 'cause it sure surprised me to find it in the camera! LOL.
Yes, I use filters, too. Even though I can play around with filters in PS, for me, the less fiddling in PS the better - both for the quality of the print (should I decide to print something or someone buy one), as well as for the purity of planning, shooting, and getting what you saw when you saw it. The filters in my bag right now are polarizer, yellow, and the half/half one for sunsets/sunrises. I have tons of fun layering them, but I think I need to expand my filter collection. They're somewhat cheap, so it's not too problematic - not like wanting the lens I'm drooling over right now: it's L, it's 100-400, and it's $1500+....so I keep drooling...shooting wildlife with that one will be a blast, so someday, I'll manage to get one.
May 16, 2006, 8:57 PM
Post #32 of 53
(324 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Michele] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
600 RAW... gotta be 4GB cards, then... aint it nice??
I mainly shoot aperture mode right now... I think for the jumping shots, I need to change to shutter mode to keep the speed up to an acceptable level to 'catch' the shots.
Of course, my max aperture now is an f/3.5 on the short end of my 100-400... so I need all the light I can get!! The 24-105 is f/4...but dang I like this lens!!
I had a couple shots of Brains swooping the pond at San Marcos and of Douva wakeboarding across it, but the light was so low by that point that they were all blurred out.
May 16, 2006, 9:01 PM
Post #33 of 53
(321 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Zipp0] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Isn't that a great shot? I love the lighting there. Finally nailed it after twiddling with lights and reflectors. He wasn't going to use it as a headshot, but...well...he saw what I saw, and for some roles it's perfect. So he's using it.
Yes, Dad is Uncle Leo. The shot you've attached is one of the headshots he had done about 20 years ago...I told him he was due for more, and I'd take them. He laughed, and said "I don't promise to use them, dear..." but he is using them. He chose two others to get printed up, but likes the one I attached for certain, more intense roles than what he's recently been doing.
And yes, I'm oodles proud of my father. He rocks...and he really is "Uncle Leo" in real life. We went to the Getty Museum on Mother's Day, just me and him, and had a contest to see who could wish mothers Happy Mother's Day first. He's such a nut...and so am I.
May 16, 2006, 9:12 PM
Post #34 of 53
(318 views)
Shortcut
Re: [irisheyes] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Well I finally have time to get back into photography and was looking for some advice:
1) I have a 35mm with a 28 - 80mm and a 70 - 300mm lens, and I am ready for a new one but I can't decide if I should invest in a 50mm or a wide angle.
2) Also, any recommendations for a decent but inexpensive digital camera? Not looking to do anything extraordinary with it, just want one as a back up.
Thanks
Go digital - and invest in a nice one. I am a fan of the raw old film cameras, but you can also create some good shit with the digital - Just look at Communication Arts magazine (which I'm sure you have/do), plus it's instant and, chances are, you will be able to get more work out of it when you do start making money from shootin'.
May 16, 2006, 9:32 PM
Post #35 of 53
(312 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Michele] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Yes, Dad is Uncle Leo. The shot you've attached is one of the headshots he had done about 20 years ago...
Wow, that's pretty damn cool! I actually just thought it was a coincidence that they looked very similar. Tell him "Thank You" from me for his absolutely fantastic work. I worked briefly with a guy at a local PBS station that went on to work on Seinfeld - Darin Henry. He, I believe, was the inspiration for Kramer's intern.
May 16, 2006, 9:38 PM
Post #36 of 53
(308 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Zipp0] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
Tell him "Thank You" from me for his absolutely fantastic work.
He was up for Emmies at different times during Seinfeld, but never got the nod nor the award. I think he should've gotten it for the episode "The Bookstore", but I'm not one of the voters. LOL.
May 16, 2006, 9:42 PM
Post #37 of 53
(307 views)
Shortcut
Re: [irisheyes] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
you didn't ask, but I wish I would have gotten the good Canon flash (now, the 580ex) at first instead of shooting the 420ex for a couple years. You can just dial the 580ex down manually if you'd like; the back-lit portraits turn out great.
Also, I'd not pile a ton of money into digital-only lenses. No reason to think full-frame digital sensors won't be commmon in a few years, obsoleting those lenses.
Swoop comp winners @ SDO Saturday evening on film with the 580ex.
May 16, 2006, 9:50 PM
Post #38 of 53
(303 views)
Shortcut
Re: [1010] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
1010, I agree about the flash. I was thinking about getting something less expensive, but decided to go full bore. I love, love, love it. I had to learn it all as well as learn to shoot, but I've got a decent handle on it.
A photo tip...if you're somewhere you really wish you had a diffuser but there is none in sight - it's at home in your photo trunk - you can use a "rain coat" device or...and very apt for this board, a bit of a light panel of a parachute...or, a tissue - but remember to use white, or you might get some interesting color swapping happening (yes, I forgot and used a pink tissue; when processing that series, I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out why everything had the slightest, wee bit of pink floating...LOL! *[it was so faint it was an easy adjust in PS, but still...shouldn't have been there in the first place!]). I now use the rain coat to diffuse when in a jam. Not perfect, but if I need it, I'm glad I've got it!
May 16, 2006, 10:03 PM
Post #40 of 53
(297 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Michele] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
well, I wasn't going to say anything, trying to get some work done around the house ya know .... but check out the 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM lens from Canon before purchasing the 100-400 ... obviously both sweet glass, if you're in for that money might as well go the extra few hundred .
(This post was edited by 1010 on May 16, 2006, 10:19 PM)
May 16, 2006, 10:06 PM
Post #41 of 53
(294 views)
Shortcut
Re: [1010] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Mike, you're right, the Omnibounce is good...but if I can make do for now with what I have so I can save for some glass crack, then that's what I've got to do...but someday, my friend...someday!
Quote:
obviously both sweet glass, if you're in for that money might as well go the extra few hundred
I want the distance, frankly. Because I like to shoot wildlife and things flying around in the sky (jumpers), my measly 75-300 doesn't do for me. I love that lens, don't get me wrong, but I want the distance a lot! Shoot, I was considering the 600, and the 800; both L glass. Both a down payment on a house.
So...
Well...
Maybe I'll just have to get both. Yeah, like that's gonna happen anytime soon...
May 16, 2006, 10:11 PM
Post #43 of 53
(291 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Michele] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
(sounding a little too harsh I am sure ) but you can put the 1.4x on the big 70-200 and still have better quality than the 100-400, and still half a stop (?) better, constant aperature ... but that's another small car payment for the 1.4x piece too yeah easy for me to talk I'll be renting that glass mnay times before I buy it.
>Shoot, I was considering the 600, and the 800; both L glass.
my heart just went pitter-patter those would be nice to shoot!
(This post was edited by 1010 on May 16, 2006, 10:13 PM)
May 16, 2006, 10:16 PM
Post #44 of 53
(285 views)
Shortcut
Re: [1010] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
(sounding a little too harsh I am sure ) but you can put the 1.4x on the big 70-200 and still have better quality than the 100-400, and still half a stop (?) better, constant aperature ... but that's another small car payment for the 1.4x piece too yeah easy for me to talk I'll be renting that glass mnay times before I buy it.
The image quality is roughly the same, but you lose distance. It also depends on which 70-200 you have. If you have the f/4 version, you end up losing your autofocus ability at anything other than wide-open.
Don't get me wrong - I *LOVE* my 70-200 f/2.8... but I wouldn't give up my 100-400 either.
Eventually, for birding, I'd like to get the 600mm prime... stick a 1.4x or 2x TC on there and go to town!!
May 16, 2006, 10:16 PM
Post #45 of 53
(285 views)
Shortcut
Re: [1010] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
You're right, I could get the 1.4...but I've had nothing but softness from another extender I have...and so I'm somewhat burnt on that. Still, it's something to consider...cost wise, it's a bit more expensive, but it's also a tad more versitile...
In any event, I haven't the cash, so it's not something I need to decide right now anyway. LOL!
Yeah, watch it with that rental stuff...it gets under your skin, and you then sit there, and look at what you have...and are dissatisfied with it. Why do you think I want the 800? that's professional glass there...like newspaper, television type of professional...but I want it....
May 16, 2006, 10:26 PM
Post #47 of 53
(275 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bob.dino] Any photography buffs out there?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Bob.dino, you are totally correct. Thanks very much for catching that. I didn't put the Http in front, and I've got it bookmarked, so just click in. At least I think that's what's wrong, no HTTP...and no hyphens. I've edited it now.
Appreciate the link...
Ciels- Michele
(This post was edited by Michele on May 16, 2006, 10:29 PM)
lesser.jpg
