jnicholson

It's a great lens but do yourself a favor and join a gym at the same time. It is one heavy bugger. When birding, I use it on one body and the 400mm f5.6L on another body. Never used it with a 1.4X extender but I have used it with a 2X and, as would be expected, there's noticeable softness compared to the 400. The IS seems faster to me than that of the non-L lenses and the pan feature of the IS is nice.

 

All in all, it's an awesome, heavy lens.

First, for those of you reading this thread there's nothing new regarding PN that follows.

 

Hi James, thanks for your toughtful contribution. I don't really disagree with anything you say.

 

Let me just first say that I don't think my daughter and I could have a closer relationship. We have open and honest discussions on any topic she chooses. As an example, when she began her menstrual cycle she was as comfortable talking to me about it as she was with her mother or step-mother. She still is. When my daughter was five I'd have had exactly the same opinion as the one you express: No big deal in the circumstance as described. You'll find though that over the next seven plus years the father-daughter relationship evolves. And, I guess, it will evolve in many positive ways and some negative ways. What is no big deal to a five-year-old will be an earth shattering deal to a twelve-year-old. She was embarrassed, I was embarrassed. Unfortunately, I expressed my opinion on this site without being clear enough about what I was really looking for.

 

So, bottom line, all I was saying was how about a view by category.

 

Enjoy that five-year-old. As I said to Brian, don't blink. All the best, and again, thanks for the thoughtful response.

Brad, I attached a picture of the back end of a Bee for you. I have three Alien Bees and I've had good results with them. I don't work them hard. From what I've read before, if you're going to work them hard then go with the White Lightnings. The AB customer support has been very good. They answer question quickly. For me, the biggest rub with the ABs is the modelling light: Not too good. Regards.

Way late joining the party but I was surprised by the responses in this thread so I wanted to add my two cents.

 

Innovation is never achieved by listing all the reasons something can't be done. It is achieved by knowing the current limits of technology and the laws of science and working with them. In this thread there were very good explanations given as to why a sensor can only reach a certain density and lenses can only resolve finite detail. But what surprised me was that the original question stated "gigapixel cameras" and that was all. No one said it had to be a single sensor or a single lens for that matter. I don't know what the ultimate solution may be but I'll bet it's out there.

 

For me, the bottom line is that if a Sony-sized organization sees the cost/benefit numbers fall in their favor then bingo there'll be an effort to sell everyone a gigapixel camera and we'll all find a million reasons why we need one.

 

So, I'm throwing my hat into the never-say-never pile. Regards.

Kevin, Tom, Edward and Scott, thanks very much for the advice. I plan on trying each suggestion. I'm still trying to find my way in the portrait world but I'm having a good time along the way.

 

Edward, I'm strictly digital at this point so it would be PS. I know my way around PS pretty well so I was certain I could take care of it that way. It's just that I like to try to get things right in the camera first and foremost. I don't want my skills to ultimately be PS based.

 

Thanks again for all the help. It really is appreciated. Regards.

I'm looking for help on how I avoid a double catchlight in a subjects

eyes. I just finished some portrait work with my nephews.

Hopefully, an example is attached. I'm aware there's plenty of work

needed on the example.

 

First, I had a softbox located camera left at a 45 degree angle to

the subject and probably six feet from the subject. Second, I had a

shoot through umbrella at 1/2 the power of the softbox located camera

right as close to the camera as possible and about five feet from the

subject. Third, I also had a hair light (set too bright I might

add).

 

How do I avoid the double catchlight in each of the subjects eyes? I

really don't like it but I'm not quite sure how to fix it in the

studio (my living room minus all the furniture). Is it simply a case

of moving the main light up higher?

 

Any help is very much appreciated.<div></div>

Brian, since you took the time to respond to me, I'd like to do the same. First, thank you. I have no idea how you put up with the constant stream of issues from users. I do know and appreciate what it's like to work your tail off on a system such as this just to be told what you should have done.

 

I read what I wrote yesterday and I was angry enough to not be clear. I'd like to make my suggestion a little more clear so if you'd just take a couple of seconds to read the rest of this I'll leave it alone. I think there is some middle ground on this issue.

 

The Photo.Net database includes a Category field. Granted, that field may not cover all photos in the database but for every photo that's updated today there is an opportunity for it to be categorized. It is my experience that most users read and abide by the admonishment given regarding nudes when submitting a photo for critique. But let's not make this about nudes. Let's just say that, with respect to new photographs, many are categorized. Photo.Net might simply offer to view Rate Recent, and TRP for that matter, based on those categories. Maybe "filter" is the wrong choice of words. Maybe "view by category" is a better term. I'd suggest that if there's legal hot water to be standing in by offering a view by category then Photo.Net is already standing in that water. The categories are used elsewhere. Photo.Net makes no claim that the categories are 100% accurate. It's simply another tool to pare down the results when querying a database.

 

I can't emphasize this enough: I did not say there should be any form of censorship. I have absolutely no problem with any of the images presented on this web site. Maybe a few too many birds. Those bird people are insane (kidding, look at my folder).

 

I know that changes to the system don't come for free. I know there is a cost in both time and money to do what I'm suggesting. But, it does seem like a middle ground that's worth considering.

 

Brian, you mention you have a five-year-old daughter so I'll offer you some parenting advice: Enjoy the years to come. They have been the best of my life and hopefully there's even better to come. Oh, and don't blink, she'll be twelve before you know it.

 

All the very best and thank you for what you do for all of us for a measly $25 a year.

Howard, sorry to answer a question with a question but what light sources do you have available?

Jerry, I had this problem with a 20D and 1GB card I bought on the same day. I got home with my new stuff and quickly found out that the 20D shutter release wasn't working properly. It would take about five seconds of holding down the shutter butter before the camera would fire. I took the 20D back and got a new one. While returning the 20D I picked up the 1GB card only to get it home and run into the problem you described. The card seemed fine in my 300D. I took the card back and they replaced that too. The new card seems fine. My guess is there may be some very close timing somewhere in the card interface. Still, once you get a combo that works I think you'll be fine. Couldn't be happier with the 20D now.

John,

 

The legal issues you present make some sense. I am not an "...attorney and one with a legal degree..." but it seems to me that's what disclaimers are for. Again, it's a step in the right direction to say that pictures categorized a certain way can be filtered out by the user. That is something that Photo.net can gaurantee. Granted, some may choose not to categorize pictures and those pictures would be displayed. It is simple for Photo.Net to allow filtering by category.

 

Regarding my parenting skills. You know nothing about me yet you felt perfectly comfortable dishing out advice. I gave feedback about this web site. From my comments specific to this web site YOU decided to personally attack me. That is something for which you owe me an apology. One I doubt I'll get.

 

I'm done. So, if you're the type who needs the last word, knock yourself out.

 

Sorry to those of you who are tired of this subject. I would like to reiterate that I did not object to the picture being on this site and I never would. I'm just asking for a little more control.

John,

 

(1) When I want parenting advice from you I'll ask.

 

(2) I don't care how many degrees you have. I never said Photo.Net should indiscrimately filter anything. I said I want the option to filter. It's a big step in the right direction to be able to filter by category.

 

(3) I never said ANYTHING derogatory about the photograph. I can appreciate it for what it is. I simply said I'd like the option to filter it out.

Tell me to shut up and go away if you choose. I am mad as hell right

now so I really don't care. I was just going through Rate Recent

trying to support and rate other user's work. My 12-year-old

daughter came strolling into my office to see what her dad was up

to. All of a sudden we are both staring at <A

href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3261651">this

guy's</A> pecker. Now, I like rating and offering critiques on nudes

where I can and when I want to as much as the next person. However,

I'd appreciate a way to filter out such content when I don't want it

showing up. I understand some people feel as strongly about birds

and other topics which is fine but please, please, please provide a

way to filter the rate recent.

Jim, interesting article. Thanks for pointing it out. It makes sense to me. Although, I do wonder how practical it is to be selecting AF points when shooting available light candid shots. It might be more practical to move your body, and thus the camera, up and down in the same plane between focus and recompose?

 

Pradeep, you may want to practice some of the suggestions above with an inanimate object in the available light you are most likely to use. Get a better feel for what combination works for you then bring in the kids.

 

All the best.

Jay, sorry again. I didn't see your two postings above before I chimed in. I had been pondering it for a while.

Guy, thanks and apology accepted. My faith is restored in the other comments I have read of yours. Sometimes the written word reads more barbed than it is intended. Thanks again.

Jay, first sorry for not sticking to the subject.

 

Annabeth, I find it interesting that in your first paragraph you chose not to admire (shall we say judge) photographers based on their work. However, in your second paragraph you are willing to judge people as mate raters based on their average score. The fact that any given individual's average given ratings are 6.14A and 5.82O tells you one thing. It tells you that that person, on average, has given ratings of 6.14A and 5.82O. It could just as easily point to someone who prefers to rate and or comment on pictures to which he or she is drawn. I don't, now, want to have to start worrying about keeping my A/O averages in line for fear of being judged. Also, my guess is that people who waste their time mate rating also waste their time making certain their averages don't look suspicious.

Jay, regarding your suggestion, it sounds like it would be a great feature but I think it's one of those bring the server to its knees issues. If the server has to generate different reports for each user the work load would be too much.

 

Regarding the fun side of the question, PN photographers I admire, the list would be long and tough to come up with off the top of my head. However, the ones that come to mind immediately are as follows:

 

Dave Nitsche for his flawless studio work. So far, his work is the single biggest inspiration to me to want to improve my small studio work. The comments I have seen from him to others seem honest and to the point.

 

Wilson Tsoi and Biliana Rakocevic have been able to get more out of a Canon G3 than I thought possible. I always admire people who can do that.

 

For a little controversy I enjoy walking through David McCracken's portfolio. I enjoy his work and his committment to it.

 

Christopher Appoldt has given me some honest feedback on my recent avian adventures. I have enjoyed his work more recently.

 

Other's I've run across whose work I enjoy would include Duane Horne, Larry McGarity, and Mark Grant.

 

Having said all that I must say that I think I've only scratched the surface of the talent on this site.

 

Cool question and interesting suggestion.

Jessica, thanks. Your comment prompted me to go back to the Critique Forum. I do almost all of my rating through the forum but I never noticed the "Browse" option by "Rate Recent". So, part two of my original statement is already possible. I should have followed Bob Atkins' advice in that most things are there if you look hard enough. Still though, I'd really like to be able to view TRP by category.

 

Interesting question about whether or not ratings count toward TRP if they are given through the Rate Recent option in the Critique Forum.

Yongbo, I agree that allowing more specific queries would be a significant burden for the servers handle. However, simply allowing a category filter really wouldn't. The categorized TRP pages would simply be generated on the same interval as the TRP. Granted it's twenty or thirty more reports to generate but that doesn't seem like a big burden for this system.

 

Keith, time for you bastards to use the categories :o) Seriously though, your images would still show up in the uncategorized pages and I'm not saying there shouldn't be an "All" selection. Actually, "All" would be the default.

I'm interested to know if anyone else thinks it would be useful to be

able to filter the TRP by category? The same categories used for RFC

could be presented in a list box along with the current "Period"

and "By" options. I enjoy looking at the diversity of the TRP,

especially now, but sometimes I'd just like to see pictures more

related to my specific interests.

 

While I'm on the category subject, it would also be nice to be able

to specify a category in "Rate Recent". I believe that would help do

away with low ratings simply because an individual doesn't like a

certain genre of images.

 

I'm a relative newbie to the forums so forgive me if this has been

discussed before. Thanks for taking the time to consider my

question. Regards.

Nicholas, thanks.

 

Guy, I don't know whether you mean to or not but you come across as a condescending, sexist, ass. I understand the concept of copy and paste. You clearly don't understand the concept of ease of use. I'm not going to waste my time helping you out.

First let me say I love this site. I spend way too much time here.

I'm an embedded systems developer so I know that no matter how

perfect you may think a system is there is always a long list of

things to do if only there were more hours in the day.

 

That said I do have a quick minor suggestion. Adding the

photographer's name to the "Contribute a Critique" form would be oh

so very helpful. I can't tell you how many times I have to go back a

page to remind myself of the photographer's name or how to spell it.

 

Thanks for all the effort.

Kevbo, Charles' response is right on the money. I have a Lexar/20D combination and doing a lot of bird-in-flight shooting lately I've never had major complaints (about the equipment anyway). Unlike the 300D which I wanted to throw off a bridge on more than one occasion. Peter is right in that the numbers do tell you what you need to know. What they tell me is that for all practical purposes the fastest cards don't give a big enough payoff. All the best.

I'd second the Scott Kelby comment. If you want books that teach you technique without pages and pages of theory then Kelby's books are the way to go. Good luck!