frank_dzambic

<p>If you want to shoot kids, is there a community center in the poor part of town where kids hang out after school? Like where they have programs for kids to go and do stuff rather than hang out on the streets and get in trouble? The parents of those kids probably have neither the time (working multiple jobs) nor the money to haul their kids to a portrait studio. Why not see if you can practice there? Talk to whomever is in charge of the center, have some parental consent forms made up, and find an assistant (a witness for your protection against any accusations of impropriety) and you're good to go. You'll be doing a kind and charitable thing for the kids and their families by giving them a free print, and gaining experience for yourself at the same time. Can't beat that.</p>

<p>Good question Kira. See my reply in this thread.<br>

http://www.photo.net/beginner-photography-questions-forum/00SDrS</p>

<p>If you're missing shots by shooting in Manual mode then why are you shooting in Manual mode?</p>

<p>I don't know anything about those vendors but I can almost guarantee you're not buying genuine Canon batteries from canada-battery.ca when they clearly state 1) 100% OEM <em>compatible, </em> and 2) Manufactured By High-Capacity power products. 3) the price!</p>

<p>If it was a genuine Canon battery then it would go without saying that it's 100% OEM compatible. It would also be manufactured by Canon and cost way more.</p>

<p>Not to say there's anything wrong with them because I don't know. But I doubt they're genuine Canon.</p>

<p>Try using light pressure first instead of brute force. It seems counterintuitive, but it's worked for me a few times. </p>

<p>Take the lens off the camera so you have a nice cylindrical object that you can hold and turn in one hand. </p>

<p>Gently take hold of the filter with your entire other hand, meaning the pad at the base of your thumb flattened along the edge of the filter as well as all your fingers spread over the rest of the filter edge. You really shouldn't be worried about fingerprints or handprints on the filter at this point.</p>

<p>Give it a gentle counter-clockwise twist. </p>

<p>Then release the filter and spin the lens a bit in your hand so you won't grab the filter in the same spot and try again. </p>

<p>After a dozen repeats you may be pleasantly surprised when the filter just suddenly comes loose. </p>

<p>If it still didn't come loose, then repeat the procedure another dozen or so times, but this time give the filter a slight clockwise and then a slight counterclockwise twist before turning the lens.</p>

<p>It works pretty well while you're watching tv as you can do it absentmindedly and you won't get bored. If it doesn't work at least it didn't cost you anything to try it. Do report back if it worked though. </p>

<p>I think you're on to something with the Cyan cartridge replacement. A couple of months ago I made a print on an R800 and it matched what I saw on the monitor beautifully. It was also the last print I made before the Cyan cartridge needed replacement. After replacing it with a fresh genuine Epson one that wasn't remotely close to expired I decided I'd try a cropped version of the image I'd just printed. No other changes to the image besides a crop, and a new Cyan cartridge in the printer. The resulting print had a horrible magenta cast to it. It wasn't remotely close to what I saw on the monitor, or even the uncropped print I had just made prior. I also did a reprint of the original uncropped version with the same results--a very obvious magenta cast.</p>

<p>Maybe quality control is lacking in the R800 Cyan ink factory, and there's too much variation in the pigment going into the cartridges. Strangely when printing a test pattern they Cyan ink looks identical in hue to previous test patterns though maybe a spectrophotometer would see a difference that my eyes can't. Nozzles are also all unclogged and everything appears in order. Also the Cyan I put in had the same expiration date as the one that had just emptied, and I gave them both the same amount of light shaking before installing them into the printer.</p>

<p>I'm sorry I don't have any advice for you, but maybe you'll feel better knowing you're not the only one it happens to.</p>

<p>Point the camera at a clear blue sky, or a plain light coloured wall. Focus your eye on whatever markings are in your viewfinder (I think you mentioned focus brackets?), and turn the diopter wheel until the viewfinder marks are as sharp as they can be. There will probably be 2 or 3 clicks where they look pretty much the same and you'll have to look really really closely to tell the difference. When you're setting it, what counts is that the viewfinder marks are sharp, not that what the lens is pointed at is sharp. As a matter of fact, have your lens defocused as much as possible when you're pointed at whatever you're pointing at to make the viewfinder marks really stand out. </p>

<p>Using Ralphs method, there's an outside chance that the AF could be off slightly, and if you're looking at the brick wall trying to make it sharp with the diopter control you'll compensate for the AF error and then all your manually focused shots will be mis-focused. The goal is to get the viewfinder marks as sharp as possible. If you shoot with contacts sometimes, and other times without, you'll probably have to adjust the diopter for each situation. But it's not a big deal to do. Oh, like the manual says, don't poke your eye out! Can't be too careful you know.</p>

<p>Just for fun, take a picture right now in Auto mode, and note the aperture and shutter speed. </p>

<p>Now switch to Manual mode and set those same settings and take the same picture. Looks the same doesn't it? </p>

<p>Now switch over to Av mode and set the same aperture and take the same picture again. The camera probably chose the same shutter speed and the picture still looks the same doesn't it? </p>

<p>Now go to Tv mode and set the same shutter speed and take the same picture again. The camera probably chose the same aperture and the picture still looks the same, doesn't it?</p>

<p>So now you've shot in a few of the different modes, all the way from Auto to full Manual, and gotten good results from each one. That wasn't so hard was it? If it makes you feel better, only show people the one you took in Manual mode.</p>

<p>This seems to be a recurring theme here in the Beginner Forum. That because of its inherent difficulty, shooting in Manual mode is somehow the pinnacle of achievement for a photographer. It's not. It's meaningless.</p>

<p>What separates a good photographer from the herd is knowing which is the appropriate mode based on shooting conditions and the results they want. That could be any one of the creative modes (Av, Tv, P, or M) or even Auto if it gives you the results you're looking for. If people are complimenting you and you're happy with your shots, then there's nothing wrong with shooting in Auto. It's the right mode for you. They must like your compositions, or your subjects or your style enough that they don't worry about which mode you shot in.</p>

<p>Of course you should still learn how to work in the other modes to help you grow and be a more well rounded photographer. But when you think about it, what exactly is the challenge of working in "M" that inspires such awe in beginners? If you use an external light meter you simply plug the aperture and shutter speed numbers into the camera and shoot. If you're using the meter inside the camera then you simply spin the dials until the little arrow is centered under the "0" (if that's where you want it). Now if somebody could work without any sort of a light meter whatsoever and get good exposures that might be a bit impressive, though still completely unnecessary as every modern camera has a light meter built into it anyway. To me that would be shooting in Manual mode. No light meter of any kind, and you set your shutter speed and aperture every time. I guess that would be impressive.</p>

<p>So since Manual mode is just another mode to work in and not the pinnacle of photographic achievement, when should you use it? You should use it for example if you have a single subject that's staying in relatively unchanging light but the light on the background is changing wildly throwing off your camera's meter. Since the light on the subject itself isn't changing and if you're not really concerned with the background then you could find the settings that work to expose your subject properly (even taken from Auto mode) and then switch to Manual and plug in those same settings. That way you'll consistently expose your subject the way you want to frame after frame.</p>

<p>If you're mainly concerned with how sharp or blurred your background is, then work in Av mode so you can set your aperture and let the camera figure out the shutter speed for the correct exposure. If you're mainly concerned with sharpness or freezing motion or trying to get motion blur then work in Tv mode so you can set your shutter speed and let the camera figure out the correct aperture for the exposure. If your shots are coming out just fine in Auto mode, then shoot in Auto mode. Manual mode forces you to set two settings instead of one like in the other modes, and those settings were determined with a light meter anyway so what's the big deal? Don't forget that all the modes allow you to tweak the cameras settings by adding or subtracting exposure compensation. That's a manual adjustment too. So what I'm saying is that the other modes allow you to only set one setting and take a picture vs the two you have to set in Manual, and all the modes allow you to manually override the settings by adding or subtracting exposure.</p>

<p>A good photographer knows when and why to select a particular shooting mode, which metering pattern to use (spot or evaluative for example), when to add or subtract exposure compensation, etc. Shooting in Manual just for the sake of shooting in Manual is pointless and can work against you by slowing you down if Av or Tv or Auto would have been a better choice.</p>

<p>The 75-300 is a very inexpensive lens, and one of the tradeoffs that makes it affordable is uncorrected purple fringing. It's a well known issue with this lens. If there were no trade-offs they couldn't justify charging many many times more for "L" lenses that don't exhibit purple fringing because of all the exotic glass used in their construction. As you've already noticed, it shows up brilliantly when you have a darker subject against a white/bright background. There's really nothing you can do to avoid it while shooting aside from trying to compose to not have very bright/white backgrounds. I don't know Corel software so I don't have any suggestions for eliminating it in post processing, but I'm sure it's more noticeable at 100% on your monitor than it will be in a print.<br>

<br /> On a happy note, even an image with purple fringing is better than no image at all.</p>

<p>That 2nd last sentence could have been clearer. What I tried to say was that at distances of roughly 12'-50' I never have a problem with red-eye or steel-eye. Unfortunately I didn't catch it before my 10 minute edit window closed.</p>

<p>Well, I'll take a stab at it. The 580EXII has a guide number of 138' at the 50mm zoom setting. I'll assume that rating was achieved using ISO 100. The Better Beamer is also suggested to be used with the flash zoomed to 50mm.</p>

<p>I generally shoot at ISO 800 when doing bird photography, so that guide number would then translate into 380' at ISO 800 (3 stops=138'x1.4x1.4x1.4). I also generally stay around f/8, so the effective range of the flash would then be 48' at ISO 800 at f/8. However, that's at full power. I only use my flash as fill. So if I dial the flash down 1 stop, the effective flash range would then become 67' (48x1.4). If I dial down 2 stops the effective range would then become 94'. That's without the flash extender.</p>

<p>Using the last example of an effective range of 94' at ISO800 at f/8 with -2 stops compensation applied to the flash, and then adding a Better Beamer which claims at least a 2 stop improvement, that 94' figure would then double to an effective 188' range. -2 stops is pretty weak though, so the effective range would be a bit less but maybe not since the Better Beamer actually claims an improvement of 2-3 stops. But I can easily see the results in pictures shooting a bird well over 100' away, so even if my math isn't 100% accurate, it's in the ballpark.</p>

<p>With 188' of reach, even flying birds are in range of your flash, especially when flying directly overhead.</p>

<p>Unfortunately at great distances red-eye and steel-eye are almost guaranteed as even placing the flash on a bracket well away from the lens axis doesn't create enough of an angle to avoid it at those distances. Fortunately, at those distances most bird shots aren't really worth taking anyway unless you enjoy pictures of teeny-tiny little birds comprising a small fraction of your frame. (Again, referring to small songbirds, not larger birds like herons and such). At distances of roughly 50' or less, I never have a problem with red-eye or steel-eye on birds. Not even geriatric birds with cataracts, heh.</p>

<p>Like Bruce said though, get your long lens first and get proficient at using it. It's difficult enough to quickly find small birds with a long lens, and use proper technique to avoid lens shake and make pleasing compositions all at the same time. There's no substitute for a lot of practice. Once you've mastered that, then go ahead and add a flash and take your pictures to the next level.</p>

<p>Yes, a flash is absolutely essential for bird photography in my opinion. Your pictures will take a huge leap forward in quality once you start using one, with a proper exteneder on it like a Better Beamer. That applies to pretty much any species, in any condition and in any setting. In any burst I fire where the flash can't quite recycle quickly enough the frames where the flash fired are always by far the best as far as rendering of colour, taming of contrast, freezing of motion, catchlight in the eye, etc. For what it's worth I'm mainly referring to shooting songbirds, but as I said earlier this applies to any situation including birds in flight. You'll be amazed at how much reach a Better Beamer will give you. If you find a situation where the flash isn't helping at all you can always turn it off.<br>

The downside is that it takes a lot of practice to learn to set your flash to give you natural looking results. In addition to making exposure compensation adjustments on camera for varying conditions/subjects/light you'll also frequently have to make additional exposure compensation adjustments to your flash unit as well to keep it balanced with the ambient light for natural looking results. E-TTL won't do all the work for you. Knowing how much, and in which direction and being able to do it very quickly takes practice. Lots and lots of practice. Oh, and lots of practice too. You don't want shots of birds that look like they're being lit by a nuclear blast. That's worse than no flash at all.<br>

Also $200 seems a little cheap for a good flash, but maybe not since I don't know the specs of which one you're looking at. A powerful flash with a fast recycle time will be your friend, and even still you'd want to strongly consider adding an external battery pack to it for lasting power and much faster recycle times. Canon has one for their flash system, not sure about other manufacturers. If you mount your flash off camera then you'll also have the expense of an off-shoe cord and a flash bracket. So after adding up the costs of a good flash, a flash bracket, an off-shoe camera cord, an external battery pack, a couple of sets of rechargeable batteries and a battery charger you're not talking about an insignificant amount of money. But the results are absolutely worth it.</p>

<p>I always calibrate my CE240W by plugging the spider in the back of the monitor, but I do have a downstream USB connection from the monitor to the PC.</p>

<p>There is one small glitch though. For some reason the monitors downstream USB connection seems to just go dead over the course of time and if I plug the Spider into the monitor I get nothing. The solution is to unplug the downstream USB connector from the back of the monitor and then plug it back in after a couple of seconds which seems to re-initialize it or at least causes the PC to start paying attention to it again. Then I can plug the Spider back into the monitor and it will be seen and recognized by the calibration software. I'm not sure if the glitch is monitor related, motherboard related, or OS related but since the workaround is so easy I don't worry too much about it.</p>

<p>It may not be the best time of day for landscape photography, but you can experiment with other types and make the best of the situation while you learn. How about trying your hand at photo impressionism where you shoot with a long shutter speed (set your lowest ISO and smallest aperture) while you simultaneously zoom your lens in/out, or rotate the camera, or jiggle it during the exposure? </p>

<p>Or you can buy a very affordable collapsible white translucent reflector, and use it to soften and diffuse harsh sunlight while you take macro photos of flowers. (Hold the diffuser as close as possible to whatever it is you're shooting for the softest possible light). Or try and use the harsh sunlight to your advantage and get down low and try and shoot backlit flowers with the blue sky and a starburst sun as the background. (Stop the lens down all the way to help get the sunburst effect with the sun in the frame).</p>

<p>If you have a longer lens, take it to the ocean and try and take pictures of crests of big waves experimenting with both slow and fast shutter speeds for different effects.</p>

<p>Polarizers can be particularly effective with the sun high in the sky as everything you're shooting will be at a right angle to it giving you the greatest effect. This means you can get some super saturated colours out of whatever you're shooting.</p>

<p>Wherever you end up, take mental notes as to what time of day would be good to come back and shoot again, and then go back on the weekend if you can get someone else to watch the kid. In other words, consider your outings as scouting expeditions.</p>

<p>Even if you're not getting the best light, you're still gaining experience with composition, familiarizing yourself with all the modes and controls on your camera and experimenting and growing so it's not a total write-off.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"But golf is just a game like any other. No better and no worse."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's only a game until your livelihood depends on it. A matter of perspective I would say.</p>

<p>What Patrick said.</p>

<p>Honestly though, if I was looking at the left image by itself, I don't think I would even notice the slight yellow cast in the sidewalk, much less find it objectionable enough to remove.</p>

 

<p>Since you're posting in a newb forum, I just wanted to point out what people mean when they say that your picture is losing information and your highlights are blown.<br>

<br /> If you take a picture of a white towel or a white sweater, then ideally the towel or sweater will be bright enough to be white in the picture but not quite so bright that you can't see the texture of the towel, or the weave of the sweater.<br>

<br /> If you overexposed, the towel or sweater would still appear white in the picture, but white without any detail (like texture or weave) visible. At that point your preview image would be blinking and telling you that you've blown the highlights and lost information that pretty much can't be brought back.<br>

<br /> In that example if seeing the texture or weave is important to you, you could make a choice to slightly underexpose your picture so that whites stay white AND retain their detail. However, by doing that you may also run the risk of underexposing dark areas in the frame so that they go to total black without any detail, and those won't blink. Think black tuxedo next to a white wedding dress outdoors in brilliant sunshine.</p>

<p>That's why blown highlights blink, because sometimes you have to make a choice what's most important in your picture, and what you want to preserve detail in the most and increase or decrease your exposure accordingly.</p>

<p>Boy I got a chuckle out of reading this thread, and the OP's enthusiastic reaction to seeing his first snow. It reminded me of this (fictitious?) diary someone wrote out about their first snow experience. It's definitely a must read.</p>

<p>http://www.highdesertas.com/pdf_files/My_Move_to_Bend.pdf</p>

If it doesn't have to absolutely be in Denver, FinePrint Imaging in Fort Collins Colorado is an awesome pro lab to deal with. Prints, customer service, shipping and everything else they do is all first rate.

 

http://www.fineprintimaging.com/

Yes to both questions. The little button you depress on the camera when you're removing a lens causes a little pin on the lens mount to depress which will allow you to be able to turn the lens to remove it. On the lens, the lensmount has a little round hole drilled in it to accept that pin, preventing it from turning itself loose. On my 70-200 that little round hole is slightly elongated (not round anymore) which allows for a slight amount of play when the lens is mounted. I don't remember anymore if it was always that shape, or if it gradually went out of round over the years, but it's nothing to worry about.

The software you're looking for is the File Viewer Utility.

 

If you want to be able to zoom into the preview image on the camera, you'll need to set that up via the Canon software (P.Fn.30). I never did understand not having that option programmed by default on the camera. Also you can add your name to the camera (or remove the previous owners name) via the software. Other than that, there are various other personal functions that you may or may not find useful.

I think it's an excellent idea as well. Often times I wish I could see how a completed work started out. Matt, that is a stunning example!

If you're using the same paper profile, and the same paper, on the same printer, and if you haven't made any editing changes to the image you're printing, then the image should have printed correctly. Not only correctly, but identically to the last one you printed on the last system. I'd be inclined to check all the settings you're using to print. Photoshop has a few things that need to be checked off and selected for best results, as does the Epson printer driver itself. Things like colour intent (relative/perceptual), turning ICM off in the driver, etc. It might be possible that you've not set everything up identically there.

 

If that all checks out, and your main complaint is that the print doesn't match the new screen as well as the print matched your last screen, then maybe look into re-calibrating the new screen again, and re-profiling it. Those are my guesses anyway.

If you go with the first option, depending on the thickness of your polarizer and the thickness of the adapter, vignetting will be a very real possibility even at focal lengths approaching 50mm in length. Almost a certainty with anything much wider. Worst case scenario would be a non-slim polarizer with one of those 3-slot Cokin adapters where the two outermost slots haven't been filed off. With practice you can learn to just handhold your ND grad using a slim polarizer. (This is another example of why whoever put the DOF preview button on the left side of the 40D should be shot!)