![](http://content.invisioncic.com/l323473/set_resources_2/84c1e40ea0e759e3f1505eb1788ddf3c_pattern.png)
edmondcarson
-
Posts
215 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by edmondcarson
-
-
<p>Thanks Neville, I'll look forward to your comments.</p>
-
<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>
-
I'll be in Carlsbad, NM for the first time in November. I'm hoping someone familiar with that area can suggest
some interesting photo ops in or around (withing a 1 hr drive) Carlsbad. Thanks.
-
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.
-
-
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.
-
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.
-
Thanks for all the advice. It's been very helpful.
Ed
-
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.
-
Can some one please give me a definative answer to the following question: If I
am shooting with my D300 and SB-800 and my lens focal length is 24mm, does
the SB-800 account for the DX crop factor or do I need to set my flash to 36mm? I
hope someone can clear this up for me. Thanks.
-
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.
-
Did you happen to have the focus mode set to continuous. The focus points only light up in single shot mode.
-
where did you get them?
-
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.
-
This is an advertisement. Please take a look at it.
-
Just wondering if anyone has posted some pics taken with the 18-200 vr at focal
lengths between 100 and 200mm. I'm considering buying this lens for a European
vacation and haven't seen any examples of pictures taken with this lens in that
focal range. Thanks, Edmond.
-
Cameralabs.com has some excellent reviews, including video reviews of many compact cameras.
-
Thanks for all the great feedback. Looks like I'll bring the 18-200 vr as my walk-around lens. Jim, thanks for the link to Bill Hockers India gallery. G.V., thanks for the Rick Steve's recommendation. I've already picked up a copy and it's a great resource.
Regards, Edmond
-
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.
-
Really nice pics Phillip. I have been to Sri Lanka once and south India 3 times and really love it there. I have a few pics from India on my gallery here. Looking forward to seeing the rest of your shots when you post them. Regards, Edmond.
-
Thanks for the responses. Roger, I appreciate the link for the discount.
-
I want to purchase HDR software, and I was wondering what the general opinion
was on Photomatix. Is this software the gold standard or is there something
better. Thanks for any feedback.
-
Hunt's Photo has a flagship store in Melrose, MA. Fairly easy to get to from the subway and a short walk.
-
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
competition."
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
required.
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.
Thanks
Visiting Agra in December
in Travel
Posted