tudor_apmadoc

<p>Antonio<br> Whenever Adobe ever did a new version of Photoshop the upgrade would cost between $140-$160.</p> <p>Those upgrades happened every year.</p> <p>So for me the $9.95 per month charge is still cheaper than the former yearly upgrade charge</p>

<p>I agree, plus Adobe has now permanently dropped the subscription price to $9.95 per month. Roughly $120 / year. This is about what they were charging for the version upgrades?</p>

I have well over 200,000 photos in Lightroom. I have my pics organized in folders as well, however over time I need to locate pics that are sitting in several folders. By using lightrooms key wording capability, it's easy to locate all photos of lighthouses for example. If you publish pics to sites like Flickr, those keywords go along as well. Example of a keyword search on Flickr: Lightroom makes it easy to assign keywords to hundreds of photos at a time, or assign keywords on import into lightroom In addition the star ratings allow you to chose which are your best photos, the colors allow you to flag conditions (I use red for photos where I don't have a model release for example)

I tend to be on the way more spontaneous side. The only real planning that I will do will be to check the weather the night before, and if I'm going to take sunrise/sunset shots, depending on the location, I will use "the photographers Ephemeris" application to check lines To create really good photos, isn't a matter of pre planning, it's about capturing the scene as you see it, on the day you shoot it, with the conditions you have at the time you take the pic. If you plan too much, you will only end up disappointed and that will affect how you shoot. I do a lot of URBEX work in Detroit, temps range from -10 to 90, bright sun, clouds, rain. I love it all, the same location, same shot can provide wildly different textures, moods, etc. Two of the huge benefits of digital over film..... 1. Taking extra shots, experimenting, trying new things doesn't cost a dime. When we shot film, the cost of the film, developing, prints, was always whispering in your ear. 2. Instant feedback. Look at the shot, love it, hate it, take another shot, repeat My advice, go out and shoot, ALOT, you will find your style, your viewpoint, your message

<p>I would agree $250 deductible is low. </p> <p>Whatever policy you get, make sure you read it first, especially the sections on what's not covered. </p> <p>Photo.net used to, may still offer insurance on here - however, in order to file a claim, you have to have a police report and there has to be signs of a physical break in in order to file a claim. That means if your gear is stolen at gun point on the street, you're out of luck. If a housekeeper at a hotel steals your gear, you're out of luck. If a thief using a slim jim gets into your car without breaking a window and steals your gear, you're out of luck.</p> <p> </p>

<p>I agree with the response by Ellis. </p> <p>I always sharpen during the raw processing, not a lot, more around clarity controls</p> <p>My workflow starts with figuring out the size, material i'm printing on, the distance it will be viewed from. While that sounds daunting, photoshop plugins like Nik Sharpener Pro has a lot of presets that can take alot of the guess work out of it. It's a great starting point and learning tool. It also has some great tools for selective sharpening</p> <p>My recommendation for workflow:</p> <ul> <li>Pre-sharpen within the raw processing step</li> <li>Crop the image based on output desired</li> <li>Resize to match desired output size - don't rely on Photoshop, use better 3rd party tools</li> <li>Sharpen as needed - again, I recommend Nik Sharpen Pro to get you close</li> <li>Save this out as a seperate file with print size as part of the file name</li> </ul>

<p>Andrew - interesting point! What do you use to achieve accurate color when shooting raw?</p>

Ok, I think I get what's going on.... The proper use of the grey card is NOT for exposure, it's for achieving proper white balance. Spot metering is extremely useful in situations where you truly need it, backlight situations is an example. However I would never use it as a default. What I have started doing is this: In a given light and location intake one shot with a grey card for color balance accuracy. Depending on the light I will take bracketed shots. Normally 3, but can range up to 10. Some times I just pick the best exposure, other times I use HDR, but with a natural setting . I'm not looking for that HDR extreme look

<p>Actually - ND is needed for long exposures. Yes, you can stop down the lens to f22, however that's done at the cost of resolution, especially around the edges.</p> <p>So, even at ISO 100, f4 can net you a 1/4000 exposure on a very bright day</p> <p>I have used ND4, ND8, ND16. Important - depending on the lens, you often can't stack them because you'll end up with vignetting. Experiment before you head out.</p>

<p>How much of the frame did your grey card fill up? How do you have the metering set up on the camera? This will affect exposure.</p> <p>The percent isn't the important thing to look for, what you want is matching RGB values. </p> <p>Once you get the RGB values to match, rather than focusing on the percentages of RGB values, I would recommend that you start using the histogram, you can make adjustments from there. You can find several good videos on YouTube = search for histogram adobe</p> <p> </p>

<p>1. Sounds like there's a disconnect between the cancellation terms of the contract you have with your second shooter and the contract with your client. I would get all future contracts aligned so you avoid this. The agreement with the secondary shooter should give you an escape clause that allows you to cancel the 2nd shooter if your agreement with client is canceled and there should be no cost for you to cancel.</p> <p>2. Most wedding photo contracts include a cancellation window, often sliding. Cancelling with 90 days notice - zero charge, 60 days notice - loss of deposit, 30 days notice - 50% of the contracted fee kind of thing</p> <p>3. I agree with previous comments, you need to spend the money on getting an experienced contract attorney write up both client and secondary shooter contracts. Put in spots for the customer to initial the cancellation terms to remove any chance of "I didn't read the contract" nonsense.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Canon has a repair facility in NJ</p>

<p>I think what you're looking for is Lightroom. It will allow you to make adjustments to your raw files, but it doesn't modify the actual raw file, it logs the changes you make to a sidecar file.<br> Things like exif info, captions, keywords are all written the any .tif, .jpg files you create.</p>

<p>I've been using lynda.com training for some time now.</p> <p>They have great instructors doing everything on DSLR basics, advanced topics, how to use various modes. On camera flash, off camera flash, how to work in various lighting sitautions</p> <p>They also have training on lightroom, photoshop, etc. Each course is broken down into topics, so you can skip to the parts that are of most interest to you very quickly.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Some things I've seen on the internet peg the human eye as having a range of 14. Most digital SLR's are way less than that. Net result is you end up with blown highlights or shadow are with no detail - not what you saw in your mind when you took the photo.</p> <p>HDR has come about as a 'fix' for the shortcomings of the sensors within cameras. You take multiple exposures then blend them together to have a photo with a higher dynamic range than your camera can produce on it's own.</p> <p>Rather than spend money on books, get a software package like Nik HDR EFEX Pro and play with with the wide set of presets that it gives you.</p> <p>By playing around, you will get a better feel of the aesthetics HDR can produce. There is indeed a lot of effects you can produce. My personal preference is not for the "HDR look" which is very exaggerated. I prefer a much more natural look. You'll find presets on HDR EFEX Pro for all the various looks, then you can tweak from there.</p> <p>You can find my HDR work atr <a href="

<p>For interior real estate shots - I would thing that a lens with a 90 degree coverage would be sufficient. That translates to a 16mm lens</p> <p>If you stand in a corner, voila, 90 degrees will give you full coverage of a room. </p> <p>Some examples;<br /><br /><br> https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/14349283983/</p> <p>https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/14082205907/</p> <p>https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/14081388640/</p> <p>https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/14104224121/</p> <p>https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/14051764574/</p> <p>https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/14048048902/</p> <p>In addition, you can stitch photos together easily Here are some examples of that:</p> <p>https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/14122966107/</p> <p>a 360 degree pano : https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/13338795834</p>

I find that the super wide lenses introduce distortion and have edge sharpmness issues. It becomes very apparent when you try and do a poster sized print. I have found myself moving away from super wides and towards taking multiple shots then stitching them together (my current fave is Auto Pano Giga) Examples https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/sets/72157632968218563/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/tudorapmadoc/sets/72157637062448065/

<p>Rather than buying a book on this - I would highly recommend the online training classes at lynda.com</p> <p>They have hundreds of training classes that go from DSLR basics to lighting, to advanced DSLR classes. Each class is broken into individual modules so you can get to the specific area you want to learn or revisit.</p> <p>They have classes on software too like Lightroom, Photoshop, etc.</p> <p>I used to read the books, started using lynda.com about two years ago, way better, because they are going through the process step by step. </p>

<p>With the latest version of Lightroom they have some pretty good perspective correction stuff, I took a picture during an URBEX trip to Detroit:</p> <p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17726853-lg.jpg" alt="" width="1500" height="1000" /></p> <p>Obviousl the perspective is way off. So I tried lightroom - "Auto"</p> <p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17726855-lg.jpg" alt="" width="1500" height="1000" /></p> <p>Somewhat better, but still not there. So I tried Lightroom "Full"</p> <p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17726854-lg.jpg" alt="" width="1500" height="782" /></p> <p>But notice, the correction went too far. Not sure, but I'm guessing the fact that there are bits that have fallen off the building might have thrown Lightroom off. However there's no manual adjustments I could make.</p> <p>Finally, I decided to use Dxo ViewPoint</p> <p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17726856-lg.jpg" alt="" width="1500" height="807" /></p> <p>For this one, I used the 3x3 set of windows as reference points and got much closer to what I really wanted.</p> <p>I'm interested in hearing your thoughts and feedback</p> <p> </p>