michael_taylor9

July 2, 2021

This is one of my favorite bottles (in one of my favorite colours, no less). I don't get to use it very often, though, so I thought I'd at least take some pictures of it, since it seemed like a great example for reflections on glass, etc. It was a very hard one to light, and I wasn't entirely happy with any of the photos, since the reflections were a bit all over the place. This was (without photoshop editing) the best of the lot, I thought ... you just have to ignore the small ugly highlight in the inner right-hand side. ;-( With shapes like this, I see why people think glass can be hard to photograph well.

Can anyone suggest how I could have better controlled that particular highlight on this difficult shape?<div>[ATTACH=full]137922[/ATTACH]</div>

Amazing bottle to be sure. What I am wondering is how you lit this bottle. I am having a terrible time in lighting a curvaceous bottle myself.

July 2, 2021

I have found success using a light mounted polarizer in combination with a lens polarizer. It's not perfect, but it gets much of the nasty reflections under control. I've yet to try this technique with a troublesome bottle of drink that is curving in two directions. I used this technique in the attached photo.http://www.miketaylorphotoarts.com/uploads/1/3/5/1/13516347/gran-orendain-comp-1-web_orig.jpg

March 19, 2014

<p>Not much alternative. Assuming you are photographing people, the go-to equipment is 2 flashes inside umbrellas or softbox diffusors. <br>

Time to start reading up on the basics of lighting and see if you can borrow or rent some of it to practice before charging money for your services.</p>

January 19, 2011

<p>I'm a photographer who is pretty good at adjusting and correcting photos for my uses. I've been considering doing it for other photographers.<br>

If you are a wedding photographer (the market I am interested in serving), what exactly do you expect from your retoucher? (assuming that you send your wedding shoots out to be retouched)<br>

Also, what are you being charged for the service? (by the hour)<br>

I have the option to add retouching to my photo services and would like as much of an education as possible before I start approaching shooters.<br>

Thanks for your help</p>

December 20, 2010

<p>This photo on my web site was done with a SB600 shooting through a 24" softbox that was outside a window.</p>

<p>http://twoeyesopen.ca/twoeyesopen/Photos.html#6 </p>

<p>They are certainly powerful enough to get the job done.</p>

December 31, 2009

<p>For the average user the technology is probably already there. Considering what the final images are used for, you probably can't tell the difference.<br>

My concern as a shooter of various subjects is how much time I have to spend working on a specific project in order to achieve my goal. If I spend 1 hour shooting digital on site then have to spend 4 hours editing, dealing with computer image manipulation, batch processing etc. later on I'm not a happy camper. If however, I spend 1 hour shooting film and 1 to 2 hours editing and filing later on I am certainly a much happier camper and I have used my time much more efficiently. <br>

The only advantage I see to using a digital system is the ability to self edit at the shooting stage. What I see happening is people shooting arm loads of crappy images in the hopes that the "good one" is in there somewhere. There is no self editing on site. Which means they end up doing the editing at a later time, even if they beat the crap out of the "delete image" button on the camera. Using my film cameras has taught me to slow down and pay attention. Strictly digital users don't have that frame of mind, in my opinion.<br>

I'll leave you with this link to an article by shooter Chris Nicholson. <br>

http://www.nicholsonprints.com/Articles/digital.htm</p><div></div>

March 9, 2007

Nice people at Eight Elm and a huge selection at Vistek (Queen St.East)

You can also rent at Film Plus on Symington at Dupont and Vistek has a vast rental dept. The rental program at Film Plus is my choice. I go there from Peterborough.

February 26, 2007

I'm thinking that I should re-design my on-line portfolio and divide it up into

two separate sites. I'm going after architectural/building photography clients

with one type of work and editorial with the other. I'd love some feed back on

the current design of the site and if the consensus is that I should divide the

2 areas into 2 sites.

So far I've had very small success with the site as a business generator so I

think this may be the next step. I live in a small community with a large

metropolitan centre an hours drive away. The website needs to do much more than

it is in the way of attracting commercial buyers.

Thanks for any opinions on the design of the site.

www.twoeyesopen.ca

February 22, 2007

Hello there Alexander,

I live in Peterborough now, haveing lived in T.O for 17 years. You could call Kominek on Young St. south of College. Or call Vistek on Queen St. East. Vistek has a web site with contact info. Kominek is a repair shop and you can see them at www.kominek.com. I had a very similar problem with a former Mamiya 67 and took it to a place in Mississauga who, firstly treated me like an idiot and then charged me well over $100. From what I gather this type of body/lens combination seems to be prone to this jamming. It's not really broken, but more likely misaligned in some way. Try to avoid any shop in Miss. My guess is you will still be paying over $80. Good luck.

February 7, 2007

Ryan, I'm interested in how your project turned out and how you dealt with the lighting issue. Might I suggest these books if you can find them: Interior Shots A guide to professional lighting techniques, by Roger Hicks and Frances Schultz, (isbn# 0-88046-247-9) and Photographing Buildings Inside and Out, by Norman McGrath, (isbn# 0-8230-4016-x) Both have extensive information on shooting buildings, the first one dealing more with the technical side of lighting.

The last time I painted with light was of a float plane inside a hanger. All the interior lights are turned off, one person is at the camera controlling the shutter while you with a high power strobe (dressed in black clothing by the way) walk around popping light where you need it. Try it first with a Polaroid to check for the lighting, angles etc., then try it with film. I wouldn't bother with digital for light painting, I don't think the average sub 10,000$ camera could handle the long exposure time.

So, how did your first architecture shoot go?

Write me directly if you can: info@twoeyesopen.ca

Cheers.

February 7, 2007

Michael B., I think that to charge based solely on time ignores the value of the images to the client. For example if I shot images for a 20 room motel and it took me 8 hours, I would not charge as much as if I was shooting for an international hotel chain for the same amount of time.

The larger client is going to be investing much more money into the promotion of their property, which tells me that the images I produce for them have a higher value. Thus I would charge them more than I would charge for the local family motel.

Time is a factor yes, but it's not the only factor to consider in my opinion. I also don't charge a day rate anymore. I charge a price based on the scope, value and usage of the project. I've found it to be a more accurate and flexible formula that I can adjust to suite the estimate I'm working on.

Thanks for your comments.

February 7, 2007

I'm just curious how some photographers would go about pricing a project such is

this one. I've been asked to quote on the photography of an office building in

a major N.A city. This real estate firm is a large international one and the

photos are to promote the leaseing of one of their properties.

As far as I gather the building spaces to be photographed are currently empty.

They need upto 20 images, mostly interior but with a few exterior shots to show

the relationship of the building to those around it. I also understand that I

would be shooting in more than one space, more than one floor of the building.

The images are for their web site only.

My considerations are: the building is for lease not sale, this is an

international real estate firm, there is no furniture to light.

Would you as professional photographers price the job along the same line as a

job for a building that is for sale or price lower? Would you reduce your

overall fee because you don't have to light furniture, just an empty space?

Would you increase your fee due to the size of the company the job is for?

I'd appreciate any input.

PS: I've been shooting hotel pics for a few years and am familiar with pricing

for those situations, but this is a new one for me.

February 7, 2007

I do believe that this forum will never fail me. Thank you everyone for contributing to the discussion of this problem. Since submitting my estimate for the job I have not heard anything back from the potential client. If I do go ahead with it I'll be sure to post some results.

Thanks again for all your help.

January 19, 2007

I need to shoot some images of people to be printed on and attached to the side

of a tractor trailer. The largest dimension would be 8 feet in height and maybe

4 feet in width. A group of the images will be spread over the surface along

with some type etc.

I'm not well versed on shooting digital yet so I will probably use my film based

equipment, the question is what sort of format will be sufficient and would it

be safer to send the film to a good lab for scanning or send it directly to the

printing firm for them to handle it?

I have the option of using 35mm, 6x6, 6x7, or 4x5 formats.

Thanks for the help.

MT

March 30, 2006

Thanks to all who responded. I'll take all your views, opinions and advice to heart when I re-evaluate the site. If anyone else cares to add their two cents, let me reiterate that I am looking for opinions on the [design, structure and ease of use] of the site. Not the composition or lighting in the images.

Thanks again.

www.twoeyesopen.ca

March 28, 2006

Hi folks, I don't normally make such requests but in the interest of

better business and to bring the level of my work up to a higher level

of quality, I think this is a good place to ask such a question.

I've been shooting medium format photography for a good number of

years and just recently built a web site to display the portfolio, in

an effort to attract business. It has been successful to a point, but

I think it could do better.

What I'm hoping is that some of you nice "brutally honest" members

will go through my site and reply either through the on-board email or

this web forum with your opinions on the [design, structure and ease

of use] of the site overall. It needs to tell potential clients that

I am open for business. Does it do that? (In your opinion) I value any

and all opinions and appreciate you taking the time to do it.

Thank you very much.

January 16, 2006

You ask if the lens, being an f8 is hard to focus due to its maximum aperture. I use the lens to shoot a variety of subjects, both outdoors and in a studio setting and don't find it difficult to focus. Keep in mind that if you are shooting a landscape, if you set your front standard at the hyperfocal distance and close down to f16 at least, then your scene is almost guaranteed to be sharp. Of course it depends on what you want to be sharp and where the important parts are in your scene as far as depth of field is concerned. You could also pick up a screen brightener of some sort to help you. If you are using filters that absorb light, focus and compose before attaching the filters.

Hope this help.<div></div>

December 21, 2005

I often get responses that boast about the latetest electronic gadget with the latest software that will give the sunset/rise. I have no problem with that and certainly there is a market for that technology. I on the other hand and along with many others on the planet do not own PDAs and do not want to rely on an electronic gadget that could very well be dropped and destroyed in an instant. Never mind the original cash outlay for the thing. More than just giving the suns position at two times of the day, the Sundicator also acts as a watch, compass and will tell you where in the sky the sun will be anytime of day(sunrise to sunset of course), any day, any location.

And it won't cost you the $200 + that a good PDA will.

Thanks again for your replies. Your input is very appreciated.

December 7, 2005

I'm working on a project to revive the Sundicator and would like any

feedback from members to see what, if any interest there is in the

product. Used in conjunction with a compass this battery free,

hand-held dial type device can very accurately tell you when and where

on the horizon the sun will rise, how it will cross through the sky

and more. It can also be used as a compass if you get lost (and you

don't have a compass). I've used one on architecture shoots with great

success. All you need to know is the latitude of the subject, day of

the year and hope the weather is on your side. Any thoughts on the

tool is appreciated.<div></div>

December 5, 2005

Thank you all for your thoughts. I can appreciate that some have embraced the wonderful technology that is the Personal Digital Assistant and want to use it to its full potential. If you've found what you need in order to tell you where the sun will be at any time of the year, then by all means use it.

I did take a visit to the SunCard site and found that it differs greatly from the product I am working on in a few key ways. First, it is only accurate to within about 5deg, second, it will only indicate where the sun rises and sets, not its path and altitude over the horizon, third you need a compass to use it. The tool I am working on can act as a compass, and a watch providing you have sunshine. You would be unencumbered by batteries dying while on a back woods trip, nor would you have to worry about breaking a delicate screen should you drop it.

If the demand is there (I'm not looking at mass marketing mind you)I will produce versions for a multitude of latitudes both N and S.

I look forward to more feed back on this and other forums. Thank you all for your comments.

MT

November 22, 2005