amol

<p>Bob, that's impressive. Dedicate or Integrated graphics card? (Desktop or Laptop?) And also, what size graphics card?<br>

I use a Canon HD camcorder (Canon HF20) at medium-high setting the bit rate is something like 7Mbps, can go high as 12Mbps. (I think a 30min recording, is about 8GB). Also, the native file format on a Canon HD camcorder is ".MTS". VLC does not handle this format well. I've noticed that VLC handles MPEG4/.MOV better (the native file format for 5DII).... Apparently very well....</p>

<p> </p>

<p>John,</p>

<p>VLC is a very reputable video player. (It is my default player... however I have not used the newest release yet). Having said that; it might NOT only be a software problem. What kind of hardware are you running. When playing back Hi-Def video (720/1080), you need to have a decent processor and about 4-6gb of RAM. Even then, you might drop frames.</p>

<p>Besides VLC for general playback. You might also want to consider investing in some video-editing software. (Pinnacle Studio, Adobe Premiere , Sony Vegas). ... Once again, you'll need a good processor and 4-6gb RAM.</p>

<p>Eric,<br /> <em>"A manual twist of the focusing ring seems to kick the auto-focus back into life"</em> <br /> <em><br /> </em></p>

<p>Sounds like a lens issue. But you mention several lenses, so probably a body issue. What lenses are you using?</p>

<p>Not right away. After I download to the computer, I have to back up to another external harddrive. Then I reformat the card. So, if for some reason my computer crashed an hour later, I would still have a back-up of photos.<br>

Eventually, I back-up to another external harddrive. (so it's backed up to 2 external HD's, and my computer). After a year or 2, I'll erase them from the computer to make space, but still have a 2 external hard-drives with duplicate photos on each. The chances of both crashing at the same time is low... some people have 3-4 external hardrives with duplicates. There is also a RAID set-up which can help with a more secure back-up.</p>

<p>But to answer your question after I shoot, I do my back-up thing to at least the computer and external HD. And then I format the entire card.</p>

<p>Keith,</p>

<p>I would skip the Lowepro Sling-shot if your shoulder and back hurts. Instead, I would recommend the Lowepro Fastpack 250, they have smaller and larger models: 150, 200, 350. You might even want the Fastpack 200, if you don't want a laptop slot (the 250 and 350 will hold laptops).</p>

<p>First, you need to be sure they are your photos.</p>

<p>Secondly, in order to <strong>make profit</strong> on smugmug, she has to have the highest-tier membership (then, you can mark-up the print orders); currently that membership is $150/yr. The middle ($60) and lower ($40) tier memberships only allow prints to be ordered, "at-cost". Unless she is already a pro-photog, do you think she is going to pay $150 for the year, so that she can sell your prints at mark-up? It's possible, but doesn't make much sense.</p>

<p>I think, at most, she is allowing people to print from her smugmug at cost (similiar to shutterfly). Unless she has a pro-account (which is unlikely...) she is not making money selling your prints. If she is not making a profit, then I don't see any problems. All she is basically doing, is taking what she paid-for (CD/DVD) and allowing people to make prints (at cost). That is not too far from her just taking the DVD to Walgreens, and getting prints made for other family members. I think, that is to be expected when you sell-package the DVD of high-res images in the deal.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If I didn't know any better I'd say the flash didn't fire at all. But EXIF info reports that it did fire, and it does <strong>not </strong> show any minus FEC as Harrington suggests. (Though, I think you can't even control FEC on "Portrait mode")</p>

<p>I have two guesses: 1) Possible bad connections between the flash and 40D. Double check for loose connection on both hot-shoe connections. check the 40D hotshoe for loose connection and crud build up on the metal. And the pins on the 550EX.</p>

<p>2) You have a bad capicator or flash bulb, maybe a loose wire in the flash itself. The Canon 550EX is an older flash it might need to be sent in for servicing. Something maybe broken or loose.</p>

<p>Joe,</p>

<p>What flash model are you using? (Brand and model). Also, posting a sample image would be helpful. That way we can take a look at the scene/image.</p>

<p>Are you familiar with how the camera's metering system works? (The difficulties involved when shooting a primarily white or black scence, and how that can fool the metering?)</p>

<p>I agree with Nadine and Richard.</p>

<p>You should get good "sharpness" at f/8 on that lens; unless you are referring to keeping more things within the focus range. But this will depend on focal length, and distance of subjects etc.<br>

*( f/22 is probably not a good idea, you will probably start to get diffraction.)</p>

<p>Secondly, sometimes around Christmas time, my wife and I take "family pictures" to send out as cards. Even with the best composition, tripod, remote, the images still don't have the same "feel" that my pictures normally have when I take portraits of other people.</p>

<p>That is to say, I have rarely (actually never) come across a picture that looked classy, that was taken by a person in the image. Sure, large group shots, and self-portraits (where there is one subject in the image) are exceptions, but to capture 2-4 people, in a nice composed image, that takes an eye behind the camera... and/or really good cropping after the fact (which should be avoided). You will miss the emotion and non-verbal communication. Some of my best friends, are photographers too, and I can usually tell when they took a picture of themselves (and family) using a remote/tripod. It just doesn't have the same look or feel. Not sure how else to describe it, but you can kinda tell it was taken with tripod/remote and one quick compositional view (no one behind the camera).</p>

<p>I'm sure there are some skilled photogs that are able to pull off remote/tripod shots of posed self/family portraits, without making it look like it was.... (I'm still working on it) ...but a wedding... forget it. Have someone else do photo, you need to focus on other things... like your wedding. It's gonna suck, if the only mental memories you have of your wedding are stressful/photography memories. That is exactly what you will have.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>No one above is saying it can't it can't be done. Everyone above has suggested a different method that Christin can use to <em>"see and photograph the world". </em> Most every suggestion above, is telling the Christin to go out and give it a shot. <strong>No one is saying don't do it, stay home.</strong></p>

<p>The only negativity I see, is the point that it is difficult making a living (earning money) as a traveling photographer. I don't see fearmongering in any of the above, truth is, it is difficult to make money as a traveling photographer. However, if the goal is to travel and enjoy photography along the way, without the expectation of making money, then it is easier. (you just have to pay your own way).</p>

<p>As an aside: You can call it negativity or fearmongering, but some advice even it is not what you want to "hear" (or is discouraging), doesn't make it less true. And yes, I am familiar with failure, and have also received advice that is discouraging. But that is what it makes you a better photographer... You either take the advice/failure and use it to grow, or you can just focus on the "negative aspects".</p>

<p>Failure is not a "negative" thing. If you are not familiar with failure, don't worry it will find you.... or you are in denial.</p>

<p>As most have mentioned, I think, it's pretty difficult to be a "paid to travel and photograph things". It may depend on where you might want to travel... There might be some magazines that wants photos of less traveled areas of the world.</p>

<p>If money is not an issue, and you are not expecting to "make money with Travel Photography". Then it is ultimately something you will have to plan and set-up on your own. You will probably have to save up, and plan some trips.</p>

<p>So, I'm guessing you already like to travel? internationally? There are different perspectives, for example: I love to travel, but my primary purpose is the "experience and people", and photography is secondary. (But still a big deal... I travel with DSLR and 2-3 lenses). If my camera broke, I would be very upset, but would still enjoy the experience, regardless. Then there are people that travel, for the sole reason to photograph. They plan their schedule (day itinerary) <em>around </em> the photography. They wake up at 5am and walk or camp out to a "perfect spot" to compose a shot. They take 2-3 DSLR and 5-6 lenses, a tripod (I take a small table-top tripod). If their camera broke... well, they would pull out their back-up. Now, there are people that are somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. And some that only travel with P&S. You might want to decide what is the purpose of your "travel"?</p>

<p>You can always come back and sell prints (as either Fine-art/landscape, stock, or some gallery showing).</p>

<p>Safe travels,<br>

Amol</p>

<p>Hey Jim,</p>

<p>You mentioned travel. Not EOS related, but you might want to have a look at the new Canon S90... (and/or G11).</p>

<p>Other than that, your lens arsenal looks pretty sweet.<br>

Any reason you want the 70-200 F4 IS, since you already have the non-IS? For about $100-200 more, you might want to get the 70-200 f/2.8 (non-IS), it's in a similar price range. Then you can stick your 1.4 TC on it, giving you f/4 along with the extended range... And you have a f/2.8 tele-zoom...if you ever need it.</p>

<p>Good to see you back.</p>

<p>Good advice so far, especially about 'blurring the background'.</p>

<p>One thing that stands out in the above pics. You need to work on placement/positioning people, this is hard and takes some patience and learning. My tips: On the bridge, you have too much dead space. On the bridge, there should be a taller person on each side of the little girl in pink. This does two things, fills the dead space, and creates an upside down triangle.</p>

<p>For the moment, I would crop the bridge image, make it a "half-body shot", the bottom of the image should be right near the little girl's feet (in pink).</p>

<div></div>

<p>Luke,</p>

<p>I have a Tamron 17-50, and also (sometimes) have issues at f/3.5 or f/2.8. I think, its partly my fault (user error), and that USM would definitely help.</p>

<p>One thought, I assume (due to reference of the 50 f/1.4) that you were using the Tammy at 50mm f/3.5? I'm guessing, you probably won't be able to get f/3.5 on the 15-85 at 50mm. The 17-55 IS USM is the way to go, especially for portraits.</p>

<p>Overall, I'm pretty happy with my Tamrom, just wanted a little more range... but not for $800.</p>

<p>Leasa,</p>

<p>You will still need your 17-85 and your 430EX, even if you upgrade. If you really going to take money for wedding photography.</p>

<p>If some is paying you for a wedding, then you definately need to have back-up equip. (Back-up: Body, Lens and Flash). If your camera, lens, or flash breaks, this <strong>isn't</strong> a portrait session, that you can reschedule. It's a wedding that will keep moving regardless of whether you are ready or not. Then you will have to explain to the bride and groom, why you can't deliver what you were paid to do. Have a back-up of everything.</p>

<p>I've used this program. It appears to be correct.</p>

<p>http://astrojargon.net/EOSInfo.aspx</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I heard this too. However, I think, it depends on your camera. I believe the more recent models (40D/50D etc.) this is not an issue. To avoid using these, there is a Custom-Funtion setting in the menu, that allows only whole step ISO, not the 2/3 ISO. But, once again, it depends on your camera model.</p>

<p>Here is a reference, from a knowledgeable member (quote below): http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00UQf9</p>

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=166736">Puppy Face</a> Sep 08, 2009; 03:39 a.m.</p>

<p>Yep, but this what known as a factoid: something that appears to be a fact but isn't. It depends on the individual camera. In the case of the 40D, ISO 320 is cleaner than 400; 640 is cleaner than 800 and 1250 is better than 1600. I figured this out my accident and then found good tests to back up my observations. Now my 5D was cleaner at the full stops so I never used the 2/3 stop settings. The test chart by AdamJ shows that the 40D, unlike the 5D, has better noise performance at the 2/3 stop iSO settings:<br /> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://forums.canonphotogroup.com/showthread.php?t=958" target="_blank">http://forums.canonphotogroup.com/showthread.php?t=958</a> <br /> No biggie from ISO 100-400. But at ISO 1600, in a dark church full of shadows and low mids, you'll really want to use ISO 1250 or 640 if you can. They're clearer than ISO 800 and 1600.</p>

<p>Fred, yes a smaller aperture and tripod would be the ideal setup. However, I've shot a couple church interiors with f/2.8 at 17mm (using at Tamron 17-50).</p>

<p>Basically, the wider angle-of-view, means less DOF issues. (I'm sure someone with the lens-lingo will be able to explain the science/optics of it). I have rarely been disappointed, you also have to kinda know where to pre-focus. I'm guessing that owners of the Tokina 11-16 that shoot at f/2.8 have very few complaints about DOF. Just have to know a little about focusing, and hyperfocal distance of the lens:</p>

<p>Ex: 17mm @ f2.8 focus at say 30 feet, something like 18ft to infinite will be in focus... in theory... I'm guessing. This is not the case at 35mm or 50mm @f2.8.</p>

<p>I used the Tamron 17-50 @f/2.8 and f/3.5. Most the shots out pretty good. But with IS or VC, you'll probably get more keepers.</p>

<p>Hey Puppy, quick question. I had read somewhere, ISO 640 vs. 800 (or any 1/3 ISO step) was going to have more noise when compared to full stop ISOs. So, the idea was something like this: If you pick ISO 640 the camera "really" picks ISO 800 and applies some processing. Well, something like that. Same thing with ISO 320; it has more noise (or some kinda IQ problem) when compared to true ISO 400.<br>

Is that true? Have you heard that before?</p>

<p>Actually, I think this program does work for the 40D and 50D. I tested it, and it appears to be correct.</p>

<p>http://astrojargon.net/EOSInfo.aspx</p>

<p>Sorry, I didn't clarify the reasoning:</p>

<p>The 70-300 is a f/4-5.6 IS, the IS will not stop people in movement, and the f/4-5.6 is too slow. That is why I would recommend a f/2.8 or faster (f/1.8 or f/1.2). This allows for faster shutter speeds needed to stop motion.</p>

<p>I'm sure there are others who can explain the difference between IS vs. f/2.8. If you get both the 70-200 f/2.8 with IS, even better. (Canon also makes a 70-200 f/2.8 without IS)</p>

<p>"night shots, kids in motion,sporting events indoor"</p>

<p>In this case, the 70-300 would <strong>not </strong> be a good option, nor would the 70-200 f/4. <br>

Instead, the "70-200 IS f/2.8" is probably a best option for a zoom, or/and add some primes such as the 85mmf/1.2L or 85mm f/1.8.<br>

You could get the 100mm f/2.8, if you didn't get a 70-200 f/2.8, but I wouldn't get both.</p>