jon_robert

June 1, 2011

I have seen Elements 5.0 on eBay for TEN dollars with free shipping so there is little reason not to get it. It is what I use. The elements version must have camera lens distortion correction which I think 5.0 was the first release that did. I have looked at lightroom and every time I do I get the impression that it is not what I am looking for. I have little need to organize and I don't like underpowered anything. I'd much rather have a 6 cylinder than an under powered 4. That being said I don't need a massive 8 cylinder muscle car being the full Photoshop version . I like the power and simplicity of Elelments.

"...Elements 8 (and its predecessors) is still primarily a space in which to perform complex, pixel-level adjustments to individual images. Although significantly less bloated than the full version of Photoshop, Elements still offers more functionality than a lot of photographers - and ironically many professionals ever really need. And this is where Photoshop Lightroom comes in. Adobe Photoshop Lightroom first <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0601/06010901adobelightroom.asp" target="_blank">saw the light of day</a> in January 2006, as a publicly available beta. Its intended audience, then as now, was professional and enthusiast photographers who want to organize and edit images - primarily RAW files - quickly and simply. For this reason, it doesn't offer layers, or any of Photoshop CS5's various graphic design-oriented features, and originally it offered very little in the way of pixel-level adjustments either. In its original incarnation, Photoshop Lightroom was little more than a sophisticated file organizer attached to an image manipulation and RAW conversion engine. Four years on, and Lightroom 3 remains primarily a workflow tool, but what sets it apart from other, purely organizational software (and increasingly its predecessors) is its impressive image manipulation capabilities. Its increased functionality is reflected in its relatively high cost, $99 to upgrade from an earlier version, or $299 full price."

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/AdobeLightroom3/

May 31, 2011

The kit 18-105 is very good. Some if not many turn up their nose at kit lenses just because they don't know better. Think about it. Nikon makes and stakes their reputation on a $1000.00 camera and then puts a lousy defective lens on it? I don't think so. I keep it as a back up to my D90 every day lens and maybe for weddings. It might be a tad better than the 18-200mm in quality result. 18-105 vs 18-200 http://dslr-video.com/blogmag/?p=592

I bought the Nikon 18-200mm VR as a all purpose/travel lens. It is the only lens most people will ever really need. If it is not long enough the real issue is that the photographer would be better served to get closer. Longer than 200mm results in needing steadiness skills. I rely on cropping to simulate a longer lens. You will be very surprised on how small of a chunk can be cropped and yet still make great 4x6 prints. http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/guides/resolution_and_prints/resolution_and_print_size_2.html note The D7000 and its greater mega pixels (or D5100) is something that I am considering over my D90 because or my shoot wide and get the perfect crop later technique. I can crop even smaller chunks and still have plenty for 4x6 prints. I paid $550.00 ish used. It is wide enough for general purpose use.

The Tokina 12-24mm is a much loved lens. I did practically an entire wedding with this lens. It is great for my technique. Shoot wider than all the text books teach and then get the perfect crop later. I would be very unhappy if I could not have this lens. 30 years ago I though tele was the cats meow. Now I realize that many of my best shots were close or wide. http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wide-zooms/comparison.htm I paid about $450.00 used

I don't think the sensor is a Nikon lens performance issue as much as your technique is a sensor issue. (shoot wide and crop) I had some Sigma lenses when I first went digital with a D50. When I got my first Nikon lens it was bye bye Sigma. Be very careful with third party unless certain they are equal quality.

May 27, 2011

You have presented your case and here is the answer. You can confidently hire out your services for anything that you can freely back up or get closer anytime you want. This in effect simulates any focal length you need or want. If you cannot freely move closer or farther away then you better think twice about taking the job. A wedding with only a 50mm (75mm) is probably not a good idea unless the customer is desperate to save money and will be happy just to have photos for a small fee.

May 27, 2011

I hate these kinds of posts. It's like asking a bunch of strangers which girl in school that I should ask to marry me.

At any rate forget the D7000 and build from there. By the time you figure out what it is that YOU want and need the D7000 will have a better replacement.

Forget the lights. You would know if you need lights and apparently you don't NEED them

Forget the faster lens they cost a fortune especially for someone who buys it based on the knee jerk repetition of the "it's better" advise from strangers on a forum.

Rather what you need to do is do some soul searching and ask yourself what is it I really photograph, what is it that I really will likely photograph and then arm yourself from that realistic analysis. For example there is no need to arm yourself to start a photography business that will take years to get profitable - if you are already 70 years old. Be realistic in your analysis. What exactly is the realistic detailed and painstaking result of dissecting "I think I'm ready to branch out into doing some..." Only you know.

May 26, 2011

IS IT ME/ OR ARE MOST FAILING TO SEE THE "i have to take a series of pictures"

May 26, 2011

Perhaps a series of: a perplexed youth, alone at a lake shore looking at, college brochures, military brochures, come work for us company brochures, maybe holding a photo of a love interest and wedding brochures. etc etc.

Present each piece of the puzzle/brochure with a new pose that suggests uneasiness and turmoil (not an at ease peaceful pose) Laying on back reading the military recruiting brochure, head in hands staring down at wedding brochures, a my head hurts pose looking at college brochures.

May 25, 2011

Just another head or body close up is boring boring boring. Resist the temptation to take close ups of everything that has feathers and quickly move on to get the next photo of something with feathers.

It is much better to identify an individual that looks like it is up to something and then painstakingly focus on that one. Then you can get a photo of nest building, food robbing or catching etc. Ignore the stagnant individuals. I employ the same approach for weddings. I ignore those that are belly up to the bar or standing doing nothing. I look for anyone laughing, crying, sneezing, burping, falling, dancing. Anything but just standing there doing nothing. Do the same with the birds.

Animals do the same thing. A lion for example will lie in wait while an entire herd of food passes by. When they see the one that is different they spring into action. Likewise act like a predator in wait and spring on the tender bird morsel, not everything that you encounter. Trying to get everything causes you to get nothing. All you end up with is boring boring boring. In the case of the lion all he ends up with is hunger, hunger, hunger.

May 24, 2011

First of all you can take their photo in your own back yard. Birds found in Canada can have their photo (same exact individual bird) taken again in the far south of south America. The moral of my story is that if you perfect your bird photo skills at home you will need nothing new when you get to the South Pacific. You are not likely to run into the very same bird you found at home because in summer they have flown north. But you get the point. Learn how at home and you are set. One thing I can point out is a lesson learned from scuba diving. The fish are much less alarmed when scuba diving compared to snorkeling. Likewise make yourself look less human like and the birds will be less afraid. For example don't stand upright and look like a dangerous human to take photos of vultures. Lay down and look like a dead and harmless human.

18-200 lens is good enough. Try this at home. Crop out a tiny section of a photo simulating a small bird (or actual bird photo) and compare it to a chart on the net telling you what size can make a 4x6 print. Cropping can simulate a longer lens. You will be surprised at how small of a chunk can still make a great 4x6 print.

May 22, 2011

50mm is 50mm so they are the same. The real question is are the 2 going to produce the same quality and the same Bokeh. Primes tend to be better quality due to a compromise inherent in zoom construction. But will anyone notice except the fanatical tester. Testing will reveal your answer. In the mean time reading will gear you up to recognize the answer Nikon 50mm Lens Comparison http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/bokeh.htm Bokeh http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/bokeh.htm

May 21, 2011

Here is a link to a few samples of the 2500 or so Film photos I took in Canada using nothing but Kodak Max 800asa

http://family.webshots.com/album/546485075xudjwu

Since you said "i'm not asking for like professional level, but decent like quality (if type of film makes a difference)"

800 asa will allow you greater flexibility for all around use and a great result for 4x6 prints. Like I said I shot over 2500 on one trip with only 800asa and had no complaints at all with the 800asa.

Before I went digital in 2005 I settled on Kodak Max 800asa as the only film I needed. I had no need for anything other than it so I quit getting/playing* with others. I would buy the best price/bulk buy I could find on eBay and keep it in my freezer.

(*I can't stand B&W film. My wife got some free and stuck it in my pouch. I mindlessly installed it - took photos of the beautiful flower gardens - got them from processing - and was very angry at my wife!)

THIS IS IMPORTANT AND CRITICAL:

Regardless ALWAYS over expose print film for brighter colors and whiter whites. Actually you are not technically "over exposing" per the film needs, rather you are properly exposing. What you are "over exposing" is the meter which assumes white is gray. This is why you are taught to over expose the scenes of snow. If you dont the snow will come out gray.

A fool proof method is to set the camera asa dial to one film speed slower than what you are using and leave it. For example when I use 800asa I set the asa dial to 400 and leave it until I choose another film.

May 4, 2011

I have a Nikon D90 DSLR and would not recommend that you get a DSLR. Rather get an advanced consumer model of your choice that resembles the feel of a vintage SLR.

The reason I say this is that over sharpening is a very bad thing in the pro photo circles. Consequently the higher level and costlier cameras do not apply much sharpening and require computer post processing. The consumer models on the other hand, do apply enough sharpeneing to get the JPEG to look more like a sharp film result from the get go.

I see the key issue that you what is a consumer model that looks and feels like a SLR of old.

"Prosumer Digital Cameras Although they sometimes look similar to consumer cameras, prosumer (professional-consumer) equipment is packed full of features that serious photographers will love. Prosumer cameras usually have better lenses, higher detail, and much more control over exposure than their cheaper consumer cousins.

Medium to high price range From $500 to over $1000 USD

Compact It's amazing how much technology is in a prosumer camera. The fact that the camera is totally self-contained (lens, flash, etc) is a big selling point.

High Quality/Resolution Both the lenses and the digital CCD offer sharp images with great quality. Newer cameras can easily shoot for print publication.

Feature Packed If anything, there are too many features crammed into the average prosumer camera. For the enthusiast photographer, this kind of camera is deal because it allows much room to grow.

Full Control Above all, the prosumer camera gives the digital photographer complete control over the picture taking process.

http://www.photonhead.com/digitalcameras/cameratypes.php

April 30, 2011

I have 30 plus years of SLR's under my belt and here is what I have learned as far as answers to your questions.

------------------------ "I have a 6 year old Nikon D50. The D50 is only a 6.1 mega pixel, so I don't know if that makes a difference in the image quality. From what I understand it only makes a difference when printing."

It makes a difference when cropping otherwise don't worry about it. You are unlikely to make huge prints but are likely to crop out tiny sections of a photo. Get an internet chart for crop size -Image Size in pixels/print capability and then you know just how small of a section you can crop and still make great 4x6 prints. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/FrameWork/charts/resolutionChartPopup.html I had a D50 and ungraded to a D90 because my technique is to shoot wide and get several crops out of the one original. If you try to get the one perfect framing from the start then the D50 is fine. ----------------------------------------- "is it the lens, or the imaging <a id="itxthook0" rel="nofollow" href="../beginner-photography-questions-forum/00YeUo">software</a>? I have the original kit lens that is a Quantaray 18-50mm lens that I use most of the time. The photos come out ok, but not as clear as I would like. I also use a 2 year old Nikor 50mm 1.8 lens, which takes awesome pictures. I was wanting to figure out if I should pay the money to update to a newer more professional camera or get a new lens, or upgrade to a better editing software program. I currently use photoshop elements 8."

8 is fine all I use is Elements 5.0 and I have the full version but don't use it. Get rid of the Quantaray. It was not the kit lens. Get a Nikon glass unless certain the quality is equal.

--------------------------------------------

"I want to take professional portrait looking photos of my children. I also have a friend who wants me to take some practice pics of her in her wedding dress. Great practice for me, but I don't want to waste her time, if the pics aren't clear looking or professional...I was wondering if I gave my Nikon D50 to a professional photographer, if they could create more sharper, clear, magazine looking pictures"

Every DSLR needs sharpening. Point and shoots don't. Pro's feel over sharpening is a sin so the high end cameras do not risk doing so. Point and shoots sharpen a great deal in the camera. Therefore you must post process a DSLR to get the photos to be the best they can be. For the wedding dress make certain it is white with no color cast, the skin color is right and the sharpening is just right. Almost never sharpen a woman's skin unless you want to make her look worse. I photographed a wedding with a D50 and they looked great after post processing. ------------------------------------

"do you have any suggestions of some online courses that could help improve my photography skills?"

Simply type photography tutorial on the web video tab http://www.google.com/search?q=photography+tutorial&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=photography+tutorial&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=vid:1&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wv&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=efd55752a4aea6a6

----------------------

In summary your cropping activity will answer if you need a higher megapixel camera You need great glass, not cheap glass Always post process. Just the handful of basic tasks nothing fancy is required.

April 22, 2011

If you want the model to look full size then duplicate natural lighting angles. If not then shadows can be useful to accentuate the model details. Lighting is an issue to examine and control before pressing the shutter release.

I would avoid a tele lens as it compresses the subject. A wide angle gives a more spacious look. A wide angle lens gives a greater depth of field - or what is in focus.

You could be able to pick up a prime 28mm (becomes a 28x1.6 or 44.8mm lens) However 44mm is not that great of a choice. I recommend a lens that I love, the 12-24mm Tokina. You are in a studio and a zoom is probably not needed but the 12mm -24mm (19.2mm - 38.4mm) is a much better range. And cheaper than a prime in this range. I bought mine for $450.00 used on eBay Tokina review http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/272-tokina-af-12-24mm-f4-at-x-pro-dx-canon-lens-test-report--review

To make any corrections for lens distortion I use Photoshop Elements 5.0 I have seen it on eBay for $10.00 (Ten) with free shipping

April 22, 2011

"I've already damaged one lens due to humidity."

Put the lens in a heavy plastic wrap or bag. Insert the hose from a vacuum pump and suck the moisture out. The water will boil at room temp and be sucked out as vapor. I do it all the time for watches, cell phones etc.

April 22, 2011

Another topic to explore is ND filters. ND filters will reduce the brightness of the entire scene or a portion. This brings the brightness under control for a more manageable phototaking effort.

In addition you can use a cameras setting for night time portrait or what ever it is called. This will expose for the back ground and then deploy the flash. In this case a very fast exposure, where a dark back ground would have a longer exposure and then deploy the flash.

In addition you can use a rear curtain flash setting. Again causing an exposure independent of the added flash.

April 22, 2011

I also have the Nikon D90 - 50mm f/1.4 Keep because it is worth more than the f1.8 And lets more light in if taking a photo in the dark. - 50mm f/1.8 Sell unless the bokeh is just unbelievably better than the 1.4 - 85mm f/1.8 Sell unless you actually do portraits if not sell it.

- 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S ED VR II Keep it is my favorite lens and stays on all the time - 80-200 f/2.8 AF (no VR) IF IT IS 2.8 through out the range then keep otherwise you can likely sell it unless you are loaded with money and don't care if it sits unused. 80mm is a lousy focal length to be caught with as your widest available on the camera.

Definitely add the Tokina 12-24mm. I did most of a wedding of 2500 shots with just this lens. It is awesome and I never leave home without it. It is great for indoor family gatherings etc. I Just love this lens.

April 22, 2011

First of all your polarizer filter will yield stunningly better photos than with out it if the light is polarized.

Secondly the ploarizer filter needs to be rotated when in use and a lens hood prevents that. I have a bag of lens hoods for each of my lenses and seldom if ever use them. Instead I use the polarizer - look through the viewfider for flare - use my hand as a shade if flare is present. Then I can readily spin my polarizer with out a lens hood in the way. Out of 2000 plus photos at a wedding maybe 2 will have a flare sneak in when I was not paying attention. But the rest are stunningly beautiful from the polarizer effect. I just use my hand.

Some people treat the lens hood as the all mighty ingredient required for lens protection ( laugh my head off) and for photo quality (ugh light is supposed to enter the camera duh) You can easily toss the lens hood and never use one. I know I will probably have started a war for saying that.

For vignetting use a very large filter (mine is 82mm) and inexpensive step up rings for each lens. The 82mm and rings fits perfectly in a quality electrical tape round plastic holder.

April 17, 2011

Chances are you are likely to go broke. Either do your subject as a hobby and count it lucky if you sell one or sell what is selling. It is better to identify what is selling and choose your gear accordingly

It is like fishing for fish on lake Michigan Look at all the glorious wonderful photos of fish caught (wonderful photos to be seen) http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.wcba.info/Pics%2520BONSHELL%2520Capts%2520Pg%25202007/LAKE%2520MICHIGAN%2520SALMON%2520%2520IMG_1138.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.wcba.info/captains/Capt%2520Ron%2520Mihevc%2520%2520Bonshell.htm&usg=__Csvjk3xLrRTUNje1bnY-tlu1SOQ=&h=754&w=1200&sz=125&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=NdO1yfA-shPDNM:&tbnh=142&tbnw=209&ei=t1irTY3aLOi20QGP9Kz5CA&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlake%2Bmichigan%2Bsalmon%2Bcharter%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1366%26bih%3D575%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=830&oei=t1irTY3aLOi20QGP9Kz5CA&page=1&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:0&tx=129&ty=72

All the tackle and gear is easily aquired all you have to do is buy it just like camera gear. http://www.lakemichiganangler.com/store/store.htm

The truth of the matter is that very fish are actually caught. 1.4 to 36.2 fish caught per 100 hours of fishing. Pretty poor rate of return. http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-Charter_Operators_Report_2009.pdf

You could fish for the 1.4/100 hr rate fish species (Lake trout) or for the 36.2 fish/100 hr fish species (Coho)

You could offer what is not selling or you could offer what is selling

I read somewhere that a stock photographer posting good stuff can expect $1.00 (one) dollar per photo per year. Pretty poor rate of return.

Therefore increase your odds and identify what is selling and choose your gear accordingly to do that.

http://www.infostockphoto.com/business-of-photography/4-articles/71-stock-photography-what-sells.html

http://www.google.com/search?q=what+wells+in+photography&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#sclient=psy&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Snu&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&source=hp&q=what+sells+in+photography&aq=&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=c3bb86640ae08969

April 17, 2011

Buy an inexpensive vintage Spiratone off ebay

he Spiratone 400mm f/6.3 lens was most probably made for them by Tamron. There were several labels of this particular 400mm f6.3 lens, all identical, which implies they came from the same production line. They were branded as Spiratone, Tamron, Tele-Astranar, Cambron, Howard Sterling and probably a few others. I guess Tamron was trying to break into the US market back then, and didn’t mind having their brand diluted by all the other 3rd party names. This lens has an aperture range from f/6.3 to f/32, and is pretty sharp stopped down to f/11 or smaller. Of course, for smaller apertures, the exposure would make a sturdy tripod a necessity. On a bright sunny day, a hand held shot at 1/500 and f11 using 400 ASA or faster film is a distinct possibility.

There’s <a href="http://olympuszuiko.wordpress.com/non-zuiko/">more pictures of the Spiratone 400mm f/6.3</a> along and the 60mm close-focusing extension tube here. Scroll down to the bottom of the page.

<a href="http://olympuszuiko.wordpress.com/2007/04/08/roaming-the-maryland-countryside-with-a-spiratone-400mm-f63/">Here are some examples with the 400mm Spiratone </a>

http://olympuszuiko.wordpress.com/2007/03/27/cheap-super-telephoto-lenses-t-mount-spiratone-vivitar-etc/

Elk sample: http://pawildlifephotographer.blogspot.com/2008_01_27_archive.html

IF YOU ARE NERVOUS ABOUT OLD LENS QUALITY THEN TREAD THIS http://kurtmunger.com/dirty_lens_articleid35.html

April 17, 2011

From Rockwell:

Introduction

Teleconverters were popular gimmicks in the 1970s when everyone shot fixed prime lenses. Even the cheapest SLR came with a 50mm f/2 lens, and the cheapest telephoto was a 135mm f/2.8. Lenses got faster from there.

With a 2x teleconverter your 50mm became a quite usable 100mm f/4 and your 135 became a useful 270mm f/5.6.

Unfortunately teleconverters are almost useless for practical photography with today's zoom lenses.

Popular zoom lenses are too slow.

Teleconverters are most useful if you already have a fast (f/2.8) lens to begin with.

When you put a 2x teleconverter on a fast, constant aperture <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70210f4.htm">f/4 70-210</a> zoom you wind up with a useless f/8 lens. The f/8 equivalent is useless for two reasons: 1.) The f/8 is too slow to allow autofocus to work correctly, and 2.) f/8 requires long exposure times. Longer exposures with longer doubled focal lengths almost always gives images blurred by camera shake.

In order to use a 2x teleconverter you need to start off with a lens of at least f/2.8, and with a 1.4x teleconverter you need a lens of at least f/4.

Avoid 3x teleconverters. They almost assure a dark, blurry image every time.

Nikon realizes this, and therefore does not offer teleconverters for their AF lenses except for the fast, expensive f/2.8 AFS lenses.

If you are silly enough to insist on using a TC with most of the Nikon system you'll have to use an off-brand <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/kenko.htm">here</a>.

Recommendations

For fast lenses of f/2.8 and faster by all means try one.

If your AF lens is f/2.8 lens or faster consider it. The <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/40028afsII.htm">400/2.8</a> works great with the <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/tc14e.htm">TC-14E</a> or <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/tc20e.htm">TC-20E</a>. Even the <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/300f4afs.htm">300/4</a> works swell with the <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/tc14e.htm">TC-14E</a>.

Forget it with slower zooms like the <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80400vr.htm">80-400 VR</a>. I also got poor results (unsharp) with the <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80200afs.htm">80-200 f/2.8 AFS</a> and <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/tc20e.htm">TC-20E</a>. I have not tried the $8,000 200 - 400 f/4 AFS with the <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/tc14e.htm">TC-14E</a>; it might work well.

The <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/tc20e.htm">TC-20E</a> extends into the rear of the lens fitted to it. F/2.8 pro telephotos have room for it. Mid range zooms like the <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm">18 - 200 VR</a>, <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1870.htm">18 - 70</a>, <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1855.htm">18 - 55</a> and <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1755.htm">17 - 55</a> have too much junk in the trunk to allow the TC-20E to fit, even if they were fast enough for it to make sense.

Generally I only suggest teleconverters for fixed lenses. Zooms, great for use by themselves, are usually unsharp or just too slow when paired with a teleconverter .

etc etc

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/tc.htm

February 5, 2011

Use it to hold the camera high over head after setting the camera timer like at a parade.

Use it to hold the camera low over a barrier after setting the camera timer like at a sporting event in the stands for a low angle shot.

February 5, 2011

Photoshop Elements 5.0 I have seen it on eBay for TEN dollars with free shipping. It is all you will likely EVER need.

I think you might mean DSLR camera. Yes?

Any way, I see photographers with very expensive equipment produce lousy photos so do not think that you need expensive equipment. The often recommended 2.8 or fast lenses are not needed. I think these people just like recommending them to help convince their own mind that the thousands they spent on these lenses was "required". Ignore those that recommend that a beginner buy a Corvette to take the kids to school because it's "better" Expensive equipment with crooked and converging lines = lousy photo. Cheap equipment and lines straightened in software = 10x better photos than those produced by people that think they can buy a good photo with money. This similar thinking results in recommendations that a beginner shoot in RAW. Don't http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm

You said any advice...

I have 30 years of SLR under my belt and have learned that people either see the photo in the scene or they don't. And they cannot be taught to see it either. If you can't see the photo in a scene then you will be better off hiring someone who can if this event is that critical. If not that critical then do the best you can. If you think you can pick out what it is that you should be capturing within the confines of a photo's border then read on.

Here is what I do at weddings with out all the filler details that you should already know. (will learn in 2 years)

1) I treat it as a one time deal no second chances. I must be on my A game and I must be on a roll. No lack of sleep, no lens change fiddling around, no excessive posing of guests, It is a now or never mentality. If I snooze I lose. Shoot first ask questions later (see #3) I shoot 2-3 thousand photos.

2) No excess of equipment to distract and foil point #1 . I use a Nikon D90, and the Kit 18-105mm lens Tokina 12-24mm (LOVE IT) SB-400 Flash and of course extra batteries cards etc.

3) This is my greatest asset= point #3. I err on shooting too wide of an angle framing. It is too hard at a wedding pace to get the textbook framing/compositions. Much better to crop the perfect framing later. Besides it allows for trimming after correcting crooked and converging lines with software. I hold the camera high, low, middle. I shoot when the quests are posing for others to get different angles. I shoot 2-3 thousand photos. If I snooze I lose. Shoot first ask questions later

4) I edit every photo. I delete duds. I correct crooked and converging lines and tilted framings. I remove color casts to make sure the dress is in fact white. I correct color for skin tone. I CORRECT SKIN BLEMISHES, which brings me to the point of never sharpening a woman's skin unless needed. I sharpen other stuff do the degree needed- which is always some. I get the perfect crop out of my wide angle shot. It will almost always still have enough resolution for 4x6 prints. I can get 1,2,3 or 4 crops out of 1 wide photo. the couple in the middle, the middle couple with the brother on the left, the middle with the mom on the right etc. I take a wide shot and may then zoom in for what I "think" is the best framing. Often later it proves to not have been the best framing. At my leisure I crop the best framing with software.

5) Out of say 2500 photos 6-8 hundred will make the final cut. Like I said, Shoot first ask questions later.

6) I upload them to a web site like Walgreens and email the link to any and all of the quests that gave me their email. They can choose and order whatever prints they want from that site. They love that idea! They get family photos as well as the wedding etc. It is great for advertisement as well. One nurse was looking at my photos slide show on that site while at work and another nurse asked for my card.

Good luck.

January 22, 2011

Read this before getting overly concerned. http://kurtmunger.com/dirty_lens_articleid35.html

January 17, 2011

In a way there is such a means to avoid motion of trigger finger induced camera shake. Setting the timer and holding the camera still is a work around if finger movement is a concern.

January 11, 2011

<a href="../photodb/user?user_id=4303235">Andrew Garrard</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, -"that's a bit opinionated", And then you proceed to give a very long opinionated opinion. (Jan 08, 2011; 09:56 a.m.) What is it with you people that can't handle opposing opinions that you must make accusations of being opinionated? Just my opinion of course( for those that get all testy about opinions.)

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by jon_robert