Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by edmondcarson

  1. <p>I'm visiting Agra, India in December of this year, and I would love to meet up and go photo shooting with someone who is local to that area. I was wondering if there are any photo.net members who live in Agra and would be interested in getting together for a day or two of shooting the local sights. Also, I would be grateful for any suggestions concerning local guides who might be able to tailor a tour for a photographer. I want to shoot all the famous landmarks and also those which might be a little off the normal tourist radar.<br>

    Any response are appreciated.</p>

  2. Josh,


    I'm wondering if removing "originality" as one of the two rating criteria has ever been considered. Certain

    types of landscape shots, for example, are so profoundly overrepresented on photo.net that I find it impossible

    to give them higher than a 4 for originality. However, I dislike giving a low or average score to a photo that I

    really like. How about replacing "originality" with "composition". That's a quality that I can rate highly even

    though I've seen similar shots a thousand times before. Just a thought.

  3. Matt, they seemed to get progressively darker - bracketing was off. I was using a 70-300 nikon with the vr off shooting as wide open as possible for the focal length. I was not using a flash. I had the camera set to manual exposure so I don't think the differences in lighting would have affected the exposure in any way. The exif data (i checked it on the camera) said the shots were all taken at the same exposure. I think I'll take Gerald's advice and shoot a sequence in daylight and see if the same thing happens.
  4. Yesterday I went to the local fairgrounds to take some pictures of aspiring cowboys learning how to ride horses

    and rope while riding. The lighting was not great: we were in a covered aphitheater. I finally decided on ISO 2000 at

    1/160th of a second and f5.6. I took a few single shots with these settings and was very happy with the exposure. I

    then set the camera (D300 with mb-10 grip using an el-4) to continuous focus mode and the upper left dial to Ch.

    Raw recording was set to 12-bit. Auto ISO set to off. I took a series of about 15 shots and was dissapointed to find

    the exposure was much to dark - not at all like the single exposures, and the exposures seemed darker at the end of

    the shot series that at the beginning.

    I'm hoping that some D300 users who frequently shoot fast action sequences can tell me what I'm doing wrong.

    Is there something obvious that I'm missing here? I'm using a 4gb Extreme III card, in case that matters. I hope

    someone can help me with this. Thanks in advance.

  5. In 2 weeks I have been asked to take some pictures at a friend's wedding. There

    is no compensation involved; just doing this as a favor b/c they can't afford to pay

    a photographer. Although not much is expected, I still would like to do a credible

    job and could use some advice from someone with more experience. My first

    question concerns equipment. I have a Nikon D300, 14-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8, and 70-

    300 zooms as well as a 50 1.4 prime. Should I bring all these lenses? I'm

    particularly concerned to have a very fast prime for snapshots in low light, but the

    50 is a little long for this purpose. Would the Nikon 35 f2 be a good alternative?

    Secondly, other than spare batteries (a second camera isn't a possibility) is there

    anything else I should make sure I bring? Any advice would be very greatly

    appreciated. Thanks.

  6. I was wondering if anyone posting from the U.S. has a favorite time to post an

    image in the photo critique forum in order to have the maximum number of people

    view and rate/critique the photo. I have often been dissapointed with the number

    of ratings, good or bad, that a photo I've posted for critique receives. Does the

    posting time matter at all, or is it entirely a function of the quality of the photo?

    Any thoughts on this matter are appreciated.

  7. I've been using a 14-24 on my D300 for a couple of months now and I love it. It's a big lens, but it's very well balanced on the D300. I've shot for hours with it without being bothered by the weight. I think it's well worth the money.
  8. I'll be travelling in Germany, Switzerland and Austria this April. I have a

    D300 with a 14-24 and 24-70, but wondering if the 70-200 is a must lens for

    this trip. I have never been to Europe before and don't know if I will miss

    having a lens longer than the 24-70. I have found the lens in stock for $1749,

    but that's a lot of money for something that may not be absolutely necessary.

    Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

  9. I am a member of a small city photo club. The club is having some

    difficulty rewriting the print competition rules in a way which reflects the

    fact that every one of the club members now shoots digital. No club member

    uses film any more at all. The current print competition rules were last

    modified when digital cameras were still less popular that film cameras.


    We have open and theme categories which are further divided into

    unenhanced and enhanced subcategories. Unenhanced (prints which have little or

    no manipulation in photoshop) allow for some sharpening, some minor adjustments

    in color, but otherwise no manipulation that could not have been done in a "wet

    lab." The enhanced subcategories allow anything except text to be added.

    Reasoning being that this is a "photographic and not graphic arts



    I feel that the print competition rules should not reference wet

    processing in any way. There are so many things which can be done routinely in

    photoshop that cannot be done without very great trouble in a wet lab. One

    recent example is a photo I submitted taken in the evening which included the

    moon and another subject which was at least 4 stops less bright. In order to

    produce a print that looked the way the scene did to my naked eye, I masked the

    moon and lowered its brighness until the the exposure was correct. I suppose

    this could have been done with a double exposure, but it was much easier to do

    it in photoshop. I think the entire process took around 5 minutes. Prints

    with very routine manipulation in photoshop are being shoehorned into

    categories to which they don't belong. Another example which came up recently

    was a print that was created by merging two photos in photoshop. The

    photographer had no choice because the composition he wanted to capture was

    wider than his widest lens. Because of the "wet lab" clause in the rules, this

    print was forced into the enhanced category. I could list endless examples

    like these two.


    The print competion rules, while being based on the antiquated "wet lab"

    standard are also sufficiently vague to be easily taken advantage of. Let me

    give one example of what I mean. Only six prints may be entered per member per

    competition with a max of 2 prints per category. Therefore, if you want to get

    an extra print in the competition, all you have to do is put your print in the

    enhanced category even it isn't enhanced. If the judges question you about

    what exactly was enhanced, you simply answer that you did an unusual amount of

    sharpening or adjusting of levels and you are taken at your word. No proof



    In a small town club with less than 30 members who regularly show prints

    in the monthly competitions, the competition guidelines are becoming more and

    more a point of contention. I'm hoping that some who regularly browse this

    forum and have faced similar problems will share what their photo clubs have

    done to address competition guidelines that are more suited to digital

    postprocessing. I'm sorry for the length of this post, but I appreciate anyone

    with the energy to read it and provide comments.



  • Create New...