ptucci

<div></div>

Nice photos--I wouldn't feel the need to drag the shutter anymore. Where were you when you got the MOG and MOB coming down the aisle? It looks like you were on a ladder on the altar.

Contact me at my listed email address. I have a wedding in Royal Oak on September 2, and afterward, we'll do some formals in Ford Field.

You'll always get a sincere smile from your subjects--but they may be laughing so hard their eyes close.

 

Is it my imagination, or does "boy with small blue hat" look slightly side-lit? It may be technique, but the amount of fill varied greatly from shot to shot.

I have a widescreen TV--don't worry about formats (unless you have a great shot that screams out panoramic). All widescreen TVs must handle regular (4:3) aspect ratios. Mine simply shows middle gray vertical bars on the left on the left and right. If I don't like it, and the program suits it, I push a button a few times to zoom in so that I lose a little info on the top and bottom, but fill the screen left to right.

Using a PC cord doesn't negate the voltage issues. It simply exposes the camera's switch to the same voltage through a different route.

 

There's a simple way to find your synch voltage: turn on your flash, wait for the light to come on, then measure the voltage between the two contacts (one is hidden in the shoulder area) with a voltmeter.

 

I have used the 285 (unknown age) on a Canon G3 with no problems.

It fired, but it wasn't the only flash. Note the up-shadow on the torchier and table lamps. The flash wasn't aimed straight up, but up at about a 30 degree angle.

Well, I know Crown Point isn't a stones throw to Chicago, but there is an excellent and affordable photography center in Chicago called the Chicago Photography Center. For something like $350, you get 10 classes, once a week of among other things, portrait lighting.

I was seriously looking at purchasing a Sigma lens, one of their wider zooms. I was comparing MTF charts, reading everything I could, and comparing them to Canon's mid-range and L lines. I almost got the Sigma (love that f2.8 on a zoom), but I didn't because I want snap-fast focussing. I ended up getting a Canon 24-85 f3.5-4.5 USM. Sigma has an equivalent technology, HD, but not on this drive. Because you have a 20D, you can get the EFS 17-85 f4-5.6 USM with IS for $500. If you have a 50 f1.8, you'll be able to get shallow DOF portraits when needed.

Lenticular lenses are those ribbed pieces of clear plastic that, when placed over an image, change the image when you move it. When I was a kid, they'd put them on the back of cereal boxes so you could see a simple two frame animation by moving the box back and forth. They can be made so that, when held just so, your left eye sees the image from the left camera lens, and your right eye sees the image from the right camera lens. Voila, 3D.

Kevin Cook wrote: <i>I use 3D Combine (but this is a trade UK only software) but I also use Callypagian 3D...</i><p><p>

 

From my high school Latin/Greek, I seem to remember callipagian means "having a nice @ss"

Well, I can see who Lisa's favorites are ;-). I sure wish I got one that looked like *4084. The photographer had a portfolio and was mid-priced, so she probably wasn't one of the people asking on this forum last month what an aperture was, and is it necessary?

Here's what I got, and what I returned:<div></div>

I'll fix 5--send it to ptocci at indy.rr dot com. Was the photographer an established one, or just starting out? Was she priced on the low end?

To get back to your original question, which I think was: should I use all of the power of my powerful strobes or should I cut it back to allow some of the ambient to record?</p></p>

 

I think most people here agree: the ISO 400, f4, 1/60s looks better. I wouldn't really call 1/60s "dragging the shutter" because that's the highest synch speed of a Mamiya 645, and many other cameras.</p></p>

 

Some quick figures:</p>

 

Ambient</p>

1/4s f4 400iso EV4</p>

Flash 1</p>

1/125s f8 100iso EV13 <- you're underexposing ambient by 9 stops!</p>

Flash 2</p>

1/60s f4 400iso EV8 <- you're underexposing ambient by 4 stops</p></p>

 

So, the consensus seems to be: use 400ISO, f4 to f8, and 1/60 to 1/15. Adjust strobe power to taste.</p></p>

 

That globe modifier seems like a waste of 2 stops. How much softer will the light be if the strobe is 20 feet from the subjects? You're increasing the light's size from 1/2" diameter (bare bulb) to 12" diameter, but from 20' what's the dif?</p></p>

 

Alter=/=altar. One letter difference, big difference in meaning.

To answer your original question, focussing a wide angle, either automatically or manually, is difficult. The fine details are so small on the focussing screen or the sensor, it's hard to tell when it's really sharp or not. Since you had a zoom, try this: zoom out to the widest setting. Autofocus on some tree branches 20 or 30 feet away. Zoom in to the longest focal length. You'll probably see that it's not quite in focus. Press the shutter release halfway to refocus. It should be as sharp as it's going to get. Zoom back out to your preferred focal length. You can then take a sharp shot.

I have the 55-110, the 80/1.9 and the 35mm. The zoom is heavy, but very well built, and is actually sharper than the other two. 55mm is often not quite wide enough, and it is hard to focus at f4.5--I have a standard focussing screen--but if I decide to sell off some MF lenses, this will be the last one in the bag.

I had a 383, which used this cord:

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=52935&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

 

could it be the same?

Is it a permanent or temporary condition? If you think it's temporary (stress zits?) it would be easier to broach. I'd just ask if they would like you to take care of it in the formals, or on enlargements. Don't volunteer to do every picture, because you could be committing yourself to dozens of hours of CRT time. One thing I don't recommend doing is just going ahead without asking. I did a portrait session for a family, and in tweaking the photos, I decided to use the desaturate tool on their teeth, to take away some of the yellowness. I didn't brighten them as that would look unnatural. I didn't do it to all the proofs, either. Fast forward a few weeks and the client called me up to ask why their teeth were whiter in some than others. I stammered something about global color adjustments. She chose one without the adjustment, anyway.

Uhh... That's Vivitar getting out of the flash business.

PrintLab in Chicago. See printlab.com. They are excellent. As an aside, I was taking a photo I class at a center that shall remain nameless. The instructor told us to buy stainless steel reels. I stated that I had plastic, had used them for years, they could be used for both 35mm and MF, would that be okay? He huffed and puffed, said my negs would be flat, but if I insisted on doing things half-assed, that was up to me. Well, I took the first week's roll to Print Lab, had them develop only (they definitely use SS reels), and lo and behold, he glanced at my negs and barked "Flat!". I developed my own after that but the first week's were beautiful.

I'll be getting a 24-85 f3.5/4.5 for my 10D. I understand that this

lens is flare prone, so I'll be getting a hood. Given that this lens

has the FOV of a 38mm, I thought I'd use a hood for a 28-105 or...

anything better? I know the filter sizes are different. Do they

thread into the filter threads?

I have a 10D and several Sunpak 383's, usually used with umbrellas or bounce. First of all, you are using too high of a shutter speed. Nothing higher than 1/250S. Secondly, your technique is wrong. Think of flash photography as two exposures: the ambient, and the flash (which is really only about 1/10,000 of a second or so, regardless of your shutter speed). So:

 

1. Set camera mode to manual. Aperture f8, shutter 1/250s (sunny f16 rule in open shade, 400ISO). This should give you well exposed backgrounds, which won't be affected by the flash (too far away). Adjust these settings to taste, depending on ambient light, and how prominent you want the flash to look.

2. Set flash to f8 (sorry, I'm not familiar with your flash).

3. Shoot.

4. Chimp. If the flash is too prominent, close the aperture 1/2 stop, open up shutter speed 1/2 stop (make it longer). Repeat 3 & 4 as necessary. If the background is too light, or too dark, adjust the shutter speed (just keep it between 1/30 and 1/250).

I know this isn't a direct answer to your question, but an earlier answer got me thinking... I dropped a PDA with an SD card, from a height of 3'. It wouldn't start. It ended up, the SD card had been cracked slightly (invisible, under the label). I'm now a bigger fan of CF cards.

The halo around the groom and the horrible grain tell me too much sharpening is being applied. I use Vuescan for medium format scans (I no longer have a dedicated 35mm scanner) and I have to turn off all scanner software sharpening, unless I want Tri-X to look like TMax 3200. Sharpen and tweak in the photo editing program of your choice.

I have a 4990 (and previously had a 3750). Your scan looks fine (from what i can tell on the low res jpg). The software can be frustrating, I know. Your doing fine for where you are--the beginning. The paper you're using probably isn't very good, just newsprint, so any super sharpness will probably not show up in the final product anyway. Nice shot, BTW.

 

Practice, practice.