rob_malkin

<p>Tom, thank you so much. Thats very kind of you. I have just send it onto our publicity person and it should be live very soon. </p>

<p>Thanks again, above and beyond Tom!</p>

<p>Rob</p>

<p>Hi guys,</p>

<p>Thanks very much. I will be honest, I did just upload them all. I was getting a bit sick of doing it and rushed the final image. But you are totally correct. The image is not as good as it could be. </p>

<p>I was shooting RAW so will grab the file tomorrow and update it. Should not be too much work to fix. All the other images were shot as JPEG and custom WB. Also, I was amazed at the colours that came from the D3. For the two days I had it before the shoot I was taking a lot of pictures outside. And the colours are very vibrant. </p>

<p>Anyway, thank you all again very much. Your advice really helped make this a great day. </p>

<p>Rob</p>

<p>Dear photo.net members,</p>

<p>A few weeks (original post <a href="../nikon-camera-forum/00Yr4G">here</a>) ago I asked for some help with shooting my first ever conference. And well, I did it, and I survived!</p>

<p>The link to the gallery is <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/64796777@N04/collections/">here </a>, I am pretty happy and so is my boss. I am most happy with the image of the group!</p>

<p>Firstly I wanted to thank everyone who offered me advice. I read all your tips the night before I started just to refresh. It went well I feel. Also, I was amazed at the speed of the D3. It was so very very fact and responsive. Truly a beautiful camera.</p>

<p>Again, thank you all.</p>

<p>Rob</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks very much for the positive words Dick. Interesting to hear your story too. I hope I will be fine, its just a bit annoying that there is pressure on me to do well. I have to work with these people for a long time, so I need to put it out of the bag! Sure it will be ok.</p>

<p>Tom, thats very interesting. I guess what I will do first is get in the room, get the lighting guys to give it a shot and let me have an attempt. I have a speedlight with me so should I need to, I guess it will be ok. I just dont want to be shooting every single presentation with a flash. I guess I just need to see if its going to get on peoples nerves.</p>

<p>Thanks for all your input guys.</p>

<p>Rob</p>

<p>I will be sure to 100% without a doubt follow all your advice Dan. Every letter. </p>

<p>Hahaha! I guess there is just no was around it other than not to even photograph the event. I am sure most people would understand if I withdrew from the event under "not wishing to induce a measurement effect".</p>

<p>That bed of yours still giving you problems Dan?<br>

I will assume from your ignorance that you have never:<br>

- presented at a scientific conference.<br>

- been to a scientific conference.<br>

- know the purpose of a scientific conference.<br>

I am there to document the conference, to observe the event and produce images which are a realistic representation of the events which transpired. Therefore you could argue that the inclusion of a flash would not be in the keeping with passive observation. By using flash, you become part of the conference, where you should be an independent observer.<br>

[For any physics reading this…. ;-)]<br>

I have seen the work of many wedding photographer who only use ambient light. Thus my requirements for a low light capable camera, step in D3.<br>

Also, dont forget my future in this industry is based around the people I am photographing. So reputation is important. I cant imagine someone saying "I was getting rather annoyed with that guy constantly <strong>not</strong> using his flash."</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi everyone,</p>

<p>Firstly: Dan, I dont know if you got up on the wrong side of bed or what, but I will ignore you being a bit rude. And, well, wrong.<br>

If you even bothered to have a look at the pictures at the start of my post you would see that there is more than enough natural light coming in to negate the need for a flash.</p>

<p>Dwight: Now that is a very handy bit of advice. I was wondering how I was going to match the names to the images. I was thinking I might have to keep a note pad with me. Also, good to know about the facial expressions and the number of images to take. The use of these images is for a website, possible univeristy publications as well as general use around the univeristy.</p>

<p>Hector: I think you are right on the money. Over 50% of the people presenting their work are PhD students in their mid 20's and many will never have presented to an audience of world experts. I know just how hard it is to do this without voice wobble, so a flash popping off all the time will really not help. The idea is to document the event, and not get images of the people for some big press-release. I mean, its hardly a news conference.</p>

<p>Karim: Thank you for the links, and thank your for the encouraging words. It means a lot. I think I will be ok, and at the end of the day, my boss knows that I am not a pro, so even if it all goes very badly I am sure he will understand.And anyway, its not like I have never taken pictures under a bit of pressure.</p>

<p>The only problem I can see is the free-bar my boss has insisted upon.....</p>

<p>Thank you all for your help (Minus a grumpy Dan)</p>

 

<p>Hi guys,</p>

<p>My word! Quite the collection of advice! Where do I begin.....<br>

- I have told my boss to include a little note in the introduction email that there will be a photographer and that the conference will be photographed throughout. Also, all the presentations have been cleared for public presentation so it should all be legit. Also, its only about 200 people or so. Quite a small conference.</p>

<p>- During the presentations I do not want to use the flash at all. I think its too distracting and does not need to be done. I have seen some example shots of the D3 and I think I can get away with ambient only. Even if it means shooting wide open. I dont want to distract people.<br>

- After the presentations and the conference dinner I may use the flash for group pictures. Again, I would rather keep it as ambient as I can, and I think there should be enough light around to stop it from being too dark. I am taking a spare SB600 with me, just incase I have a meltdown!!<br>

- With regards to position, I think for the important presentation and introductory lecture I will shoot from the side and from the front side of the stage. With the 17mm I think I should be able to get some nice audience shots too. </p>

<p>In a way I am really looking forward to doing it as it will give me more experience, and should the aerospace industry collapse maybe I can make a few bucks out of events photography. </p>

<p>I really appreciate all your help and your tips. I will be sure to read them all again and take a few notes. And no doubt share a few with you to let you know how I got on. I also fully expect to get very tired carrying the D3 around, it looks like its going to be heavy. But then again, it going to be a lot of fun. </p>

<p>Anyway, again, thanks for the help. Sorry I could not answer each one of you directly but I am very hungry and need to eat something!!<br>

All the best from Bristol, England. </p>

<p>Rob</p>

<p>Hi Andrew,</p>

<p>Thanks for your input. I didnt know that the MK I was a little soft wide open, but I guess given the D3 ISO performance I could probably get away with shooting f5.6 or so.<br>

I must say that I am really looking forward to using the kit. I know that I am going to come away with a very expensive NAS problem.</p>

<p>Rob</p>

<p>Hello everyone,</p>

<p>Long time no posts from me. Some of you may remember ( I would be impressed if you did ) that a few years ago I asked about what I should do with myself after leaving school. It was a toss up between Physics and Photography. Well Physics won, and I am now doing my PhD in Engineering. But it has all come around and I have been asked to photograph a science conference.... and well, I would like a few tips.</p>

<p>Location: http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=assembly+rooms+bath&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1280&bih=889</p>

<p>Kit: Nikon D3, 70-200mm Mk I, 17-35mm, 50mm, 85mm. And a SB-600.</p>

<p>I have spend 90% of my time using a F100, D100, D70, so this is a bit of a step up for me. But I am confident that it will not take me long to get used to it. I have a few days before the conference to get used to it anyway.</p>

<p>So what I was hoping to get a little help with was this...<br>

1) Have any of you photographed a conference before?<br>

2) Any tips regarding position, angle from the stage.<br>

3) Camera specific tips?</p>

<p>I would really appreciate some help with this. My boss has spend a lot of time and money on this, and I really want it to look great for him.</p>

<p>Thanks for reading, sorry for rambling on sometimes!</p>

<p>Rob</p>

<p>I have the Sigma 20mm f1.8. I have had it about 5 years now. Mostly used on film with a little time on DX.</p>

<p>Observations?<br>

It lacks contrast even at f8. Very soft at f1.8. So soft that you will often not bother using it, thus no point in having a f1.8.</p>

<p>From my experience, look at something different. I am selling mine to get the 20mm f2.8. Fast enough really.</p>

<p>R</p>

<p>Perhaps the two are mutually exclusive. Can you get a technically speaking perfect image while still maintaning content? I would image that the better the quality of the content the lesser the technical quality.</p>

<p>Not always, but often.</p>

<p>Parhaps the situations (such as war etc) that deliver amazing content do not lend themselves to stunning technical quality.</p>

<p>Having said that James Nachtwey proves my point to be on shaky ground!</p>

<p>The dynamics of an impact event are very complex. I have spent the last 12 months reading about impacts of projecectiles into a flat panel of carbon fibre reinforced plastic at various velocities, sounds simple right? Conclusions?</p>

<p>It depends on impact velocity, angle, rotation, temperature, pressure and a whole bunch of other things. You cant just say that plastic body's are better at impact resistance than metal. The issue is so complex that you cant just make a simple statement.</p>

<p>The degree of damage depends on so many factors that I doubt anyone could give real evidence to suggest either way. Till I see a paper in a peer reviewed journal its just an opinion.</p>

<p>Just to add to Wouter's commend regarding engineers...</p>

<p>I am doing a PhD in aerospace materials and when I talk to more experienced engineers they always want to use what they used when they were "growing up".</p>

<p>I cant remeber the exact quote but I think its along the lines...</p>

<p>physics only changes when a physicist dies.</p>

<p>r</p>

<p>What a lot of people dont think about is the fitness for purpose of an object.</p>

<p>Entry level cameras are made the way they are because they fit the purpose for which they are intended.</p>

<p>People who need a ruged camera will have the money to spend on a better made body.</p>

<p>Also, modern plastics are very tough and stiff. Something which I would imagine is very important in a camera. Steel bodies will be prone to flex and warp.</p>

<p>What I would like to see however is a CFRP body, and see what fool would spend good money on it!</p>

<p>Thanks for putting these on here Will.</p>

<p>I had a 28mm E and a 50mm E and found them pretty good. I was using them on a F3 and didnt want to take anything expensive with me (risk of theft etc).</p>

<p>I never had the 135mm, but its something I would be willing to try out I think.</p>

<p>Thanks again,</p>

<p>R</p>

<p>Just a minor correction but not all DX are AF-S, as is the case with the 10.5mm AF.</p>

<p>Duct-tape over the Nikon logo, on body and lens caps. Black strap.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>A Lensbaby might be about right. Optically spekaing it has a focal length of about 50mm, but with the right manipulation it looks like a wide angle might.<br>

Its hard to explain.</p>

<p>Just google image, lensbaby and have a look at some examples.</p>

<p>According to Nikon UK the 85mm f1.8 can not be used with any of its TC's.</p>

<p>According to other sites you can use the TC-201, and TC-14A (with "Usable, but vignetting or other image deterioration may occur ")</p>

<p>Both are Manual Focus ony.</p>

<p>Have a look at a D2X if you can, the difference is not worth paying.</p>

<p>Here in the UK, you can get a D2X with 37k actuations for £825 ($1,245).</p>

<p>If you would like to get your hand on this fella, you should Google..</p>

<p>Grays of Westmister.</p>

<p>They are the most reputable second hand dealers in the UK and only deal with Nikon.</p>

<p>Best of luck in your search.</p>

<p>I myself am waiting till D3's or D3X's are available for under $1500 used. It will happen. Thats what I like about DSLR's. They age very very quickly.</p>

<p>R</p>

<p>50mm is too short. You should look at the 85mm f1.4 or or the much cheaper f1.8.</p>

<p>However the 85mm's will not allow for close focus.</p>

<p>These two have been discussed about a million times on photo.net so you should have no trouble finding out about them.</p>

<p> For what its worth, I have the 50mm and 85mm and find the 85 (F1.80 to be lovely. Its a pleasure to use)</p>

<p>This is however on 35mm film not DX.</p>

<p>Anyway, look at the idea of a 85mm. Cheap & sharp.</p>

<p>R</p>

<p>Nikon F80/N80.</p>

<p>Its so quiet it sounds like its not even working right. Other than my Leica MP, I can think of no quieter 35mm.</p>

<p>R</p>

<p>Look at the EXIF data from you 70-300mm images and see whats the average focal length. And then buy the lens closest to it.</p>

<p>I am a scientist, so I would do myself an excel chart for this and do a large sample.</p>