robertfarnham

Plus:

Pretty. Great photography. An option to click through to larger versions of the photos would be nice.

Minus: Doesn't need to be in flash. The "dragging the page corner to get to the next page" thing is extremely annoying - just a button (in the same place on every page) with "Next page" on it would be much better because the user doesn't need to do anything except click.

That's my Web site usability expert 2 cents worth. My boss pays me $30 and hour plus benefits for it...RF

Images and soundbites rule the American media. The Pentagon doesn't want photos of coffins published because the photos communicate in an instant far more than thousands of small headlines that read "40 soldiers killed in siege of Falluja" ever could. It's their version of damage control, and by having this rule they are admitting that the war never should have happened. By refusing to acknowledge the existence of their dead service men and women through photography they are doing them a disservice and, in essence, admitting that their deaths are an embarassment to the country. As a non-American that is the feel I get from this whole situation - the practice doesn't fit the theory. I think if the fight is just you must glorify the dead because they are the heros who have sacrificed everything. Glorification = publication. Shout it from the hilltops - "our son died for a just cause!!". If the fight is unjust, hide the ugliness and hope nobody notices what the reality is. My question is - and it's an honest question because I wasn't around at the time - did the Pentagon have the same rule for the WWII dead?

Put her in Doc Martens, get her drunk, give her some bad tattoos, knock out a tooth and shave at least part of her head and you'll have something like punk.

 

But I like the photos, Igor.

Mary, Tom has a good point about site depth. Though I hate to admit it, mostly because I work for a big stupid dumb-ass corporation, but I do site usability for a living. For photography sites I find it's better to give a site visitor a page full of thumbnails to scan through than make them click through a large number of images. Your images themselves are lovely. I'm sure you'll have your fair share of clients. I would, however, give them some idea about how much you charge. And if you're like me, and have the "I'm just starting out and I don't really know if I'm good enough to make a go of it and I honestly feel weird charging for doing something I'd do for free" syndrome, you can always "offer a deal" to those clients you really want to photograph. But post a price list. Otherwise people will think you're like a fancy restaurant - too fancy (and costly) to worry yourself with details like money. Good luck with the site and the business. All that said, if you look at my own site you'll notice that it pretty much sucks, but I'm working on it... ;) What's that saying..."do as I say, not as I do."?

Just bought myself a Colorvision Spyder and have calibrated my monitor. I think the problem was two-fold...the color temperature was set incorrectly and my eye isn't trained enough to recognize when the colors are off. Getting there slowly, though...

Thanks for all for the interesting comments. I asked the question because I recently had a discussion with someone about what key ingredients are required to make a good portrait vs simply make a good photo. The topic of identifiable character or personality came up, naturally. I was testing this particular photo for the sheer hell of it.

 

To Steve Levine - I wish I could raise the key light - this is an unfortunate side effect of my low basement ceiling. My wife wouldn't appreciate migrating my makeshift studio to the upper reaches of our house.

 

Yes, Tom, I am married. Yes, she doesn't particularly enjoy being photographed, as you can tell from the look on her face here: http://www.photo.net/photo/1414154 The other inferences you make about me are close: pedestal? - yes it's true I love women...guilty as charged; intimidated? - I think I'll need to be around far more beautiful women to truly test this one out - I'll get back to you; wanna be a pro? - well don't a lot of people who haunt this site?; confidence? - I'd love to have more but I don't know if I could handle the responsibility; skills? - working on 'em - and your additions to this site have helped quite a bit thank you very much.

 

I won't tell you anything at all about Karolyn. More fun that way :)

Please tell me if you can infer something about this woman's

character from this portrait. If yes, take a guess - that way I

know if I've been successful or not!

Thanks. Rob<div></div>

I agree with Mr Lai. Having tried the SC-17, SC-19, SU-4 TTL route I switched to all manual strobes and a flashmeter. Total control is what you want. Relying on the camera gives inconsistent results, especially when changing compositions on the fly, and it's not as gratifying. Read a bunch of threads in the lighting archives for instruction from people on how to do it all manually - that's where I learned.

No duty, always tax (unless value is less than $50), but brokerage charges vary. Have it shipped by USPS (insured) so it comes through Canada Post. Never have somethng shipped UPS if you have a choice - brokerage charges are extremely high - example being a C$400 value strobe was charged about C$40 brokerage along with 15% tax.

I have a new D100 and had similar questions. Can't answer everythng for you but here's a shot at the CF card questions.

 

On one 512 Mb card I can hold 151 large size jpg files and I think it's about 50 uncompressed RAW files.

 

I'm considering a laptop, but since I really don't need the latest and greatest for simple storage and I'm looking at getting a used, refurbished one for a couple hundred bucks. Should be able to get a Pentium 3 with a 20 meg hard drive pretty cheap - maybe cheaper than a new portable CD burner.

Mark, every picture I have posted was scanned with the IV. I've got very nice 12x18 prints from a digital print upload service similar to the Adorama one linked through the PN home page.

 

I find it is fantastic with slide film. Haven't done as much scanning of negatives, but results have been good there, too. BW is a bit more work since ICE can't be used. Not bad if your negs are really clean.

 

Slow is relative, of course. I find mine just fine but I've never used another one. I've developed a workflow where I do the editing/tweaking of images while the scanner is doing it's thing.

 

If you were a pro I'd say 400dpi is required, but 2900 is just fine for amateur use - lots more resolution than digital cameras give. And the current price is much less than what I paid for it.

 

Hope that helps.

Thanks for the comments, guys. I knew there would be a reaction to the high contrast - totally subjective, true - but I kind of like it. Soon I'll be posting some more of her with much more even lighting. Regarding the film, I got a bit carried away on ebay a while ago and bought a little over a truckload of Provia (anybody want to buy some off me?). Great grain but nasty blue cast on people for sure, which I try to correct with PS. I used some new Astia in 4x5 in the same shoot - needless to say I've found my new favourite film.

So far I've learned most of what I know about technique from reading

the wise remarks of people like Ellis V., Kevin K. and Todd F. I just

wanted to thank you all. (Still a ton to learn but I'm slowly

absorbing information)

 

Now I'm hoping forum participants will give me some feedback in words

rather than useless, wordless ratings. This is my latest post.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo.tcl?photo_id=1970384

I've got the same lens and have found no vignetting problems using a regular, nice, thick polarizing filter - and that with a film camera. Lots of the scenics I have on the site here were shot at the 18mm end with a filter.

A good lesson to learn is never ever buy anything from anyone who won't accept escrow even if you offer to pay all fees. I had a long e-mail conversation a couple of weeks ago with a guy who wanted to sell me a New D1X plus about $5000 worth of lenses and accessories - all for the bargain low price of $2000. Said it was a customs seizure and he got it real cheap. Would not go for Paypal, escrow, or anything other than Western Union. He was in Switzerland, and I could smell the rank stench of fraud from Ontario!

If you've got Photoshop, try "Auto levels". When I get scans like this the program often does a great job of bringing it close to how the slide looks. (And often it does not!!)

 

 

If you want a little more info on how to tweak photos like this, read these:

 

http://www.vividlight.com/articles/1014.htm

 

http://www.vividlight.com/articles/1215.htm

 

http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2316.htm

 

--RF

I think Wayne and I are living parallel lives. I started with the SV hotlights and within a year have moved up to 2 B800 Alien Bees - $279 each. The problem I had with the hotlights wasn't colour cast but amount and quality of light. I had to diffuse the hell out of them to get the softness I needed, so much so that I was pretty much limited to f2.8 @ 1/60 for every shot, and that was with 400 speed film. Now I pop away with impunity with whatever aperture I want. I did have to buy a flash meter - an extra expense to consider - but the photos are 100X better - worth it in the long run. I chose the Bees because of all the very favourable reviews - nobody seems to have had problems - and from what I hear, the customer service is exemplary.

After a grand total of (maybe) 30 exposures, I'll have to say that my 20-odd yr old Calument monorail with Rodenstock Ysarex 210mm lens is just what I needed to enter the LF world. I'm having a blast with it - learning more with every shot. Paid $230 for it on ebay. Considerably less than I paid for the Gitzo it sits on.

 

I'll give it another few years worth of use before I re-evaluate both the camera and my skill and decide if I should move up the quality ladder. Until then, I'll avoid looking at, touching, or using anything that might shift my paradigm. Same reason I won't drive a Mercedes - I don't know what I haven't got until I know what I haven't got, if you know what I mean...

 

And it serves the entirely non-photographic purposes of keep in me in shape. Camera plus G320 plus holders make an excellent replacement for a gym membership.

I do fully understand the value of instant feedback, whether through Polaroid, digital, or those glares I occasionally get from my wife when I say something stupid.

 

I would gladly use digital, and likely will some day, I just can't afford it at the moment (apparently I have to make mortgage payments every week - don't these bank people know I have a hobby?).

Ellis...Polaroid!! If I do that I may as well completely give up learning this stuff and go digital!! OK I'm kidding. I love digital. Like I love Salma Hayek...lustily, from afar...

 

Richard...thank you. That's actually the first really clear explanation I've read. I find so many sources assume a basic knowledge of the theory and jump right into the mathematics. Some of us just need the instructions like "Do A, then B then C and you'll be fine". Lesson very much appreciated.

Hoping someone can clear this up in my head. I have read that when

using a main and a fill you should meter only for the main, with the

fill turned off.

 

1. Is this correct? (Because I have also read that I should meter

the exact light that's hitting the subject, which to me means the

fill light should be on while metering, with the dome pointed at the

camera.)

 

2. If it is correct, would the fill light not add to the main to

create an overexposure in places when the photo is taken? I'm

thinking that an f8 main plus a f5.6 fill creates more than an f8 in

total - which spells hot spots to me.

 

Perhaps I'm just misinterpreting. Perhaps when he instruction

is 'meter the main' they are just saying "point the dome directly at

the main, not at the fill or the camera". I could "perhaps" myself

stupid here...

 

Can anyone explain, and 'perhaps' give an idea about where I should

point the meter.

 

Many thanks.

If you don't find one close by, I know the lab I use will take your business. It's called Exposed Photo Service Inc in Kitchener Ontario. I'm lucky that I live just down the street, but I know they do tons of work for out of town photographers, including some from the US. A single E6 4x5 for C$3.50 including taxes.

11-842 Victoria Street North, Kitchener, ON N2B 3C1 -

(519)742-2565

Oh, and if you do everything manually, you don't need the SC17 either. It's very short - 5 ft stretched out of it's coil. I found it limiting enough to buy two and linked them. Bloody thing kept pulling over the stand with the main light when I moved around!

 

Go out and buy a plain old 15 ft long PC sync cord and link it into your main from the terminal on the camera. That way you can be a lot more mobile with the camera in your hands.

Jeffrey, if you have a flash meter I think you'd be better off perfecting it's use rather than relying on the camera's meter to do your thinking. I find it far more satisfying and has really helped me understand lighting ratios, fill etc. Plus, though the Nikon meters are very good, they can still be fooled, especially of you're dealing with a black or white background or other difficult lighting situations. The flashmeter will read the actual light hitting the subject, not what's bounced off it.

 

It took me about four months to move up from using TTL. Now I do everything manually when I have the time to set up.

 

But to answer your question, yes, the dedicated Nikon cords and slave controller can be used in manual mode, but they make for expensive sync cords - something I learned the hard way! Good luck.

I have both the SC19 and SU4. Both allow you to keep TTL. The cord has a length limitation of course - it's 10 ft long, I think, which isn't much, and it's always in the way. The SU4 keeps TTL for quite a distance - the specs can be found online somewhere through Google - and will fire at manual from a longer distance. I'd go with the SU4 if you need TTL. Alternatively, buy a flash meter and a Wein. If you plan on doing much studio work in the future you'll get the meter eventually.