grego1

<p>i'm with jeff regarding the distance... i watched this video about 10 times or something :)<br>

check 11s - there you can see pretty much whole setup they've used; right on the left side you can see big light stand and i'd bet that it's the very one that the key light comes from - to me it looks like it was 4 maybe even 5 meters away from the model and with this distance, judging by the angle of light it would be about 4/5 meters up, so the distance to Natasha is probably around 5/6 meters (converting to imperial = 18ft or so).<br>

on the right side you can see two lights that were used to lit the background (later on - 2m 8s - you can see the same set up on the left side) - i guess they are a few stops below the key. <br>

right beside the background lights, around 1 meter over the model there is some diffusion screen - maybe for subtle fill (it's angled towards Natasha's head)... </p>

<p>what i'm wondering about is why are there 2 power cords (?) on this light stand on the left - i can't see 2 lights used as a key even though there are some techniques where you do it....</p>

<p>my 2 cents....</p>

<p>hello everyone,</p>

<p>recently i decided to change my website... so far i had one builded with iWeb application on my mac; for last couple of months i was trying to design something new with this app, however it was always the same or very similar (build around templates) to some others that i've seen on the net. <br>

about 3/4 weeks ago i came across adobe flash catalyst on some forum; users over there claimed that it was easy to use and very effective... i decided to try it and i downloaded trial version (i'm still trying to convince myself to buy license key)... as people were saying, it is very easy to use - took me less then 3 days to learn all that i needed to build my new website... it would be impossible to do it if i had to learn flash script...:) and in 8 days that i've had it i builded my brand new website...<br>

all "design" was created using photoshop, then i converted layers into buttons, transitions, gallery and links using adobe flash catalyst...<br>

here is the link:<br>

www.gregmaszyna.com<br>

i would like to ask you to check it and tell me about your experience: what you think about design/idea and what's an overall feel of the website... is it professional enough?<br>

i hope you'll like it, but please be constructive - let me know if you think there's something that you feel could be changed ...</p>

<p>thanks for your help,<br>

greg</p>

<p>Mikael,</p>

<p>thanks for your reply... i was just wondering whether they do any marketing for you, or - as you say - you have to do it all yourself... and second thing that i thought about is the name - "zenfolio" - i thought that maybe it's fairly well known "out on the market" and you're in some data base and you can get searched from their engine by category or something...</p>

<p>you see, i'm already registered with istockphoto and after a year (well the last time i uploaded something was in nov 2009, so it might be my fault), having 65 photos in my account, i noticed that if you want to earn (proper) money you have to have hundreds of photos in your portfolio (that means a lot of time spent after post production on uploading, categorizing, keywording, etc and it's only extra income for me as i have "9-5 job", so i'd rather have less hasle)... and to be honest i'm looking for something different - as some people would say "quallity not quantity"...</p>

<p>are there any agents that deal with people like me? just thinking that if i have to do all marketing myself, i'd rather register my own domain/name and try to build brand name...</p>

<p>hi guys,</p>

<p>i have some landscape photos and every week i take some new ones. also i'm planing on starting doing some themed projects... so i would like to try to sell those photos (prints). i was looking at some websites with advice, etc. and definitelly i don't want to do it through stock agencies (you get very little money of it). some people advised me to try zenfolio - and here is my question: what do you think of it, i mean zenfolio? is it any good? would i be able to sell much through it? or maybe is there some other/better place/way that i could use...<br>

thanks in advance for all your advice...</p>

<p>regards,<br>

greg</p>

<p>well, it would be nice if they introduced something with bigger sensor (something like leica s2) + 3 nice primes to go with it - just a new line of cameras mainly for studio to compete (properly) with MF... if they used their cmos sensor in size comparable to MF - 33x44mm or around that (i'm not even sure if it's technologicaly possible, i mean cmos in this size)- and they made some good glass combined with 3 or 5 AF points and let's say 60 mpx, the image quality would be probably amazing... i would even accept price bracket that could go with it (15k €£$ for camera)... that would blow not only my, but probably other people minds... <br>

just wishful thinking :)</p>

<p>hi Mork,</p>

<p>i believe there were 2 light sources... look at the table legs and the angle of shadow over there and compare it with the angle of shadow that her leg/s throw... so my guess is it was a large softbox on her and table (look how soft the shadow is under the table) and then very close to big softbox there was another light for her face/head (shadow under nose is quite harsh) but also your burn on the wall. and i would say that could be either smaller gridded softbox or some large reflector (beauty dish or something)... my 2 cents...</p>

<p>hey Andy,</p>

<p>there is plenty of ways to get the "basic studio" with diy materials... when i started a few years ago i found this website:</p>

<p>http://www.diyphotography.net/</p>

<p>it's great for that kind of stuff. amazing ideas for pretty much everything you can think about. i think they have full section about diy studio...<br>

regarding basic studio lighitng, everything depends on how much you can spend on it - i started with Portaflash (i don't think it's exists any more), but you can get Interfit for almost the same money. Going up with your money you could get Elinchrom or AB...<br>

regards, <br>

greg</p>

<p>hey Richard, <br>

i'm interested in them too. what do you exactly mean by "It has a miniphone jack" ? is it for trigering? does it mean that you can use miniphone jack to miniphone jack cord to connect to PW?</p>

<p>regards,<br>

greg</p>

<blockquote>

<p>However, what it comes down to with me and many of my associates is that people tend to stick with whatever brand they started photography with.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>well it didn't happen to me. i started with fuji s7000, then i got my first dslr - nikon d70, unfortunatelly i didn't like the camera/lenses/flashguns etc from nikon... it all started with level of noise, but after i changed over to canon i noticed how much more i prefer their ergonomics, picture colors, etc...<br>

for last 5 years i've been using canon gear (30d, 5d, 1d 3, 5d2 and various lenses); in january this year i was shooting wedding and i decided to borrow d3s and d3x + some lenses from my friend and see how sweet it is... after all it wasn't as sweet as he was saying. i didn't like - actually i can use "hated" word - the ergonomics, menus, etc... the biggest "no no" was vertical grip on both cameras - because of the lens mount "step" my fingers couldn't rest properly on the grip and i had pain below my wrist for 3 days after wedding... for the type of shooting i do - portrait, fashion, weddings, etc. - i can't see huge difference that everyone claims to see in af operation between the systems. sure, lenses are simply stuning (i had that time 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 vr mk2) but that was the only thing i liked about nikon system. when i got pictures onto my mac i learnt how much easier is to use dpp over nikon's software - saying that, i don't do any significant adjustments in dpp. it's just basic wb adjustment and little (noramly arond 1/3 stop) exposure tweaking. that's also the reason why i don't understand people moaning about banding noise at low iso in 5d2 - get your exposure right in camera and you won't experience the banding problem. <br>

so that's my little rant about nikon. as they say "to each their own" - one will love porsche 911, the other jeep wrangler...</p>

<p>i just found it as i was browsing through a forum:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Wa6d</p>

<p>should be interesting for you :)</p>

<p>well what can i say, i'd be one of "no filter purists"... <br>

when i started playing with photography i was told to use filter as it's cheaper to replace it than front element... that time i used to shoot with - let's name it - brand "a" gear (not to start "which brand is better" argument)... 2 years after i decided to jump ship to brand "b" and i had to buy all new stuff and i decided not to buy filters and see how it is without it on the lens... <br>

to say that in the simplest way, i use 9 lenses and never got a single scratch on my front element... one day i bought wide angle zoom that cost me €1649 and i got hoya pro1 digital uv filter worth €120 for free... i decided to use it on non paid test photos with some wannabe model and i'm glad it was non paid gig. i got the worst ghosting ever and over half photos were unusable. <br>

after that i tried to replicate the situation in various conditions without filter on same lens and i never got the same horible ghosting as i got with uv on. <br>

so to answer your question i simply wouldn't use filter... as others said - and i strongly believe it also - if you take good care of your equipment, hood is all the protection that you need...</p>

<p>regards,<br>

greg</p>

<p>hi guys, </p>

<p>first i appologise if that's wrong forum for such a question, however i believe here i can find many experienced in studio (and also natural) lighting photogs... i came across this photo: </p>

<p>http://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/8621948</p>

<p>and i'm wondering (can't really figure out) what lighting was used to create it... it looks like it could be done with strong natural backlight and reflector in front, however i can see some rectangular shape in his sunglasses that gets me confused, and it looks like it could be a few big softboxes... so i would like to know what's your take on it.</p>

<p>thanks and regards,<br>

greg</p>

<p>Michael,</p>

<p>i got Ray Flash some time ago after reading some very positive opinions about it on here and a few other websites... strobist has great comparison between RayFlash unit, Orbis unit and AB, links below if you interested:</p>

<p>1st part - http://strobist.blogspot.com/2009/10/ray-flash-vs-orbis-vs-alienbees-abr800.html<br /> 2nd part - http://strobist.blogspot.com/2009/11/ray-flash-vs-orbis-vs-alienbees-abr800.html</p>

<p>what i found after i got it, is that even though i like the effect it creates, it's too limiting for me... i'm using canon gear and i wanted ring light for event photography (mostly weddings)... i've done some testing using a few lenses (that was were the problem started appearing) - 24-70mm f2.8, 35mm 1.4, and 135mm f2... all 3 lenses are pretty big and i always shoot with hood, and it was the hood that created the problem. there is nothing wrong with ring light (at least RayFlash) when you shoot without hood... with hood you have to have your camera and lens leveled parallel to the ground or you get shadow below, over or on the side of the image. i didn't have a problem when used with 50mm f1.4 or even 85mm f1.8 - but they are a lot smaller than the other lenses. so after having it for about week and half i returned it... <br /> btw on top of everything the light loss is too great to overpower the sun on bright day unless you raise your iso...</p>

<p>that's the website i buy from sometimes...</p>

<p>http://simplyelectronics.net/subcat.php</p>

<p>recently i got a 5dii from them - everything on time, no problems, no scam... they have 1dsiii for around €4800 for couple of weeks over there, while prices in camera stores in dublin are still around €6500 - €6900</p>

 

<p>hey Bryan, <br>

there is plenty of brands that offer cheap kits for begginers... my question is how much would you like to spend?<br>

you can check AB (already mentioned), Elinchrom, Interfit... i don't know about AB, in europe where i live you can get them only through the net; elinchrom is the cheapest (well interfit would be cheaper but not even near in terms of quality to elinchrom) set up you can get over here; probably there are a few others... it comes down also to what space you have - if it's tiny room you don't need that much power; probably you could get away with 2 x 250Ws and umbrellas... what you could also do is get some hot shoe flashes (like Vivitar 285) + stands + umbrellas and work with that untill you have more money saved - that's how i worked for a while; well it wasn't because of the money - i had 2 Canon 430 EX and 1 580EXII, so only them were more expensive than any "starting" studio kit, but i needed it to be as portable and light as possible; if you short on budget as you say, start with one strobe and reflector and add another one later when you have some more cash - that's another solution;<br>

definitelly i wouldn't get any "cheapo" studio lights - you will only waste your money...</p>

<p>hi Eirik,</p>

<p>i shot this one some time ago:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photo/9945631</p>

<p>sure it's not tv, but what i did was:<br>

i put canon 580EX II on the laptop, triggered with el-skyport, bounced of the screen onto models face... i had another light (also 580EX) from the top bounced into umbrella for fill... unfortunatelly i can't remember ratios - it was experiment and - as i don't use light meter - i got this by trial/error method :)</p>

<p>for your tv though, you could put gels on the flash and then shoot through gridded small softbox - it would give you some direct, yet still soft enough light - my 0.02 €£$</p>

<p>regards,<br>

greg</p>

<p>hey Brian,<br>

my take on it - the little guy was laying on mirror (reflection is very clear) and they used medium sized softbox to lit it. judging by shadows it looks like it was to the left top and slightly behind little guy... i'd say there was a lot of processing put into it also - black looks perfectly black, so i think the photog cleaned it up...</p>

 

<p>Duncan, <br>

i had 17-55 a while ago for my 30D and i tell you one thing - i only sold it because i went full frame and 1.3 and it didn't work on either of them cameras... this lens is really sharp; some people even say that it should be considered L series... comparing to 24-70 (the one that i had) it was sharper at any focal length up to f4 - 5.6; after that point they were equally sharp; i heard some good things about 18-55 IS too; people at photozone.de were surprised when testing this lens at how sharp actually it was...<br>

i'd second what was said before - the biggest difference is apperture, i'd say build quallity and of course price; there were some issues with distortions and vignetting on 18-55 comparing to 17-55... <br>

regarding 16-35 (which i also had) - it's different lens. even though i liked it (i got it mostly for 16mm- wide end, not for apperture) i wouldn't give it edge over 17-55. most of the time that i used it, it was stopped to f5.6 - so can't say anything about sharpness at higher appertures...<br>

if you use low appertures i wouldn't buy anything expensive for aps-c... you might want to go FF one day and such a lens is useless then...<br>

and the last thing just to answer your question - i don't think that if you shoot raw with f8 and tripod, convert to tiff, process in PS for colours, contrast, etc. you will see huge difference between the 2... so really if you need faster, constant apperture go for it - if you don't - save some money for some primes like the new 24mm f3.5L (tilt and shift one - it's amazing how sharp it is - some test and comparison on www.the-digital-picture.com) or 35mm L and then you'll see some difference...</p>

<p>regards,<br>

greg</p>

<p>hey guys,<br>

thanks for your time and replies... i was searching through internet for last couple of days and i found intersting option; it's Speedotron beauty dish (22in) with grid and you can replace speedotron mount with elinchrom one (norman... elinchrom speed ring)...</p>

<p>you can check this link:</p>

<p>

<p>

</p>

<p>this guy shows exactly how to do that :) if anyone is interested with BD for elinchrom, i believe that would be better option than elinchrom BD...</p>

<p>anyway once again thank you for your help,<br>

greg</p>

<p>hello everybody,<br>

i'm thinking of buying elinchrom beauty dish - the smaller one (44 cm), and i would like to use grid/honeycomb with it... here lies the problem - there's no standard grid/honeycomb to go with it... so my question is: is there any company that makes them (grids etc.) to fit elinchrom beauty dish or is there any company that makes beauty dish for elinchrom fitting (BXRi) that you can fit grid on... there is plenty of info on the net, but most of them says that you have to do some little tricky jobs on those accesories to be able to fit them to elinchrom... i'd be grateful for any info...</p>

<p>thanks,<br>

greg</p>

<p>i'm wondering how it's possible that you're using 2 CF cards in the same time? mine 1D mkIII takes CF and SD... how do you import images? do you connect your camera to PC? if yes why don't you get yourself CF (SD) card reader; when you connect camera to PC it sees everything that you have there as one memory...</p>

<p>hi,<br>

i owned 16-35mm f2.8 L II for about year and half (i sold it in april and got 35mm f1.4 L) and all i can say it's amazing lens. saying that i shot a few times with 17-40mm and that's amazing lens too :) i don't know anyone who would be able to say the difference between two of them (given that you comparing 16mm to 17mm and at f4 or over)... if you need extra speed, definitely "yes" go for it, if - as you say - you need it for landscapes i don't think you need to spend twice more money to get the same (virtually) results...</p>

<p>sorry for double post - i don't know how it happened...</p>

<p>i got this lens (35mm f1.4 L) about 2 months ago, and i didn't have to wait at all... the funny thing was that the guy that was selling it to me (he's an owner of the shop and main dealer of canon in irl) said, that i'm paying "old" price for it (€1569 - i live in dublin, ireland) as the price will be increased due to new batch coming to dealers in UK (all canon equipment coming to ireland through official channel is coming from UK) and they are changing currency they were paying with for all goods from £ to € because of crisis and £ loosing value considerably (there was a time that you could buy £1 for €1, so many folks were going for shopping to belfast or london and paying for 1DS mkIII around 5700 while in dublin price was 7499)...</p>

<p>regarding the lens, i don't really know what could you improve in this lens... optically and mechanically it's excellent and close to perfection...</p>

<p>i got this lens (35mm f1.4 L) about 2 months ago, and i didn't have to wait at all... the funny thing was that the guy that was selling it to me (he's an owner of the shop and main dealer of canon in irl) said, that i'm paying "old" price for it (€1569 - i live in dublin, ireland) as the price will be increased due to new batch coming to dealers in UK (all canon equipment coming to ireland through official channel is coming from UK) and they are changing currency they were paying with for all goods from £ to € because of crisis and £ loosing value considerably (there was a time that you could buy £1 for €1, so many folks were going for shopping to belfast or london and paying for 1DS mkIII around 5700 while in dublin price was 7499)...</p>

<p>regarding the lens, i don't really know what could you improve in this lens... optically and mechanically it's excellent and close to perfection...</p>