dan_south

<p>I had reliability problems using the built-in flash as a commander. It worked sometimes, but if the lights weren't in front of the camera, the didn't fire a lot of the time. The SU-800, by comparison, is amazing. Indoors, outdoors, flashes behind umbrellas and soft boxes, the little round sensor on the flash pointed in the wrong direction - no problem! Consistent flash every time.</p> <p>I use my CLS system in manual mode most of the time. I trust TTL metering even less than I trust auto-exposure modes. I used the system frequently, and I can dial in what I want quickly in manual mode - I rarely need more than two test shots to fine tune everything.</p> <p>CLS features that I like - <br> - Portability<br> - Reliability (with the SU-800)<br> - Power controlled from the camera position<br> - No cords, EVER!<br> - Radio triggers requre extra hardware and batteries<br> - No radio interference hassles<br> - No international communications restrictions<br> - Native high-speed sync<br> - Each SB-910 comes with a full CTO gel (plus the green one that I don't use), a diffusion dome, and a handy tabletop stand<br> - SB-910s never shut down into a power saving state when they are in Remote mode. They are always on and ready.<br> - The manual zoom feature is like having a built-in grid<br> - Easy to mount one or multiple flashes on a light stand (or even a tripod)<br> - Easy to use with modifiers (umbrellas, smalls to moderate-sized soft boxes) using inexpensive adapters<br> - SB-910s use inexpensive rechargeable AA batteries</p> <p>One comment I noticed: Some people tried CLS once or for a short while and then gave up on it. That's like trying a camera once and giving up on photography if the pictures didn't turn out well. I made a point to drag the system out and use it as often as I could, even it it was only the SU-800 with a single handheld SB-910. Over time, I gained familiarity with the system. I can set up a complex four-light system anywhere in about ten minutes and tear it down just as quickly. Everything works, and except for stands and modifiers, it all fits in my camera bag.</p> <p>Of course, I enjoy using mono-lights when possible. I appreciate their superior power. But four mono-lights are not nearly as portable as four SB-910s, they don't support native high-speed sync (High FP in Nikon terms), they require wires or radio triggers, most of them don't support TTL metering, and if you need to change the output power of a light, you'll need to walk over to it and change it physically.</p>

<p>One stop more open than Sunny f/16 does a good job. I you know your camera well and know how much raw dynamic range it has, you might be able to expose a bit more open.</p> <p>Sunny f/16 at ISO 100 = 1/100s @ f/16</p> <p>One stop faster = 1/100s @ f/11</p> <p>The moon moves, so you might want to shoot a faster equivalent exposure:</p> <p>1/400s @ f/5.6</p> <p>or</p> <p>1/800s @ f/4</p> <p>That should be a good starting point.</p> <p>Keep in mind that brightness varies with atmospheric clarity and where the moon is in the sky (it's more dim near the horizon), so be flexible, bracket, and check your histogram to spot exposure problems.</p>

<p>No question, today, just a comment about CLS - the Nikon Creative Lighting System (speed lights like the SB-910 and SB-800 triggered via a master controller in Commander Mode).</p> <p>I have been dabbling with CLS for years, but I put more emphasis on using it in the past year or so. I purchased the SU-800 earlier this year after being disappointed with the reliability of flash heads in Commander Mode. I'm very impressed with the performance of the SU-800 and the reliability of its communication with the flash units. The more I use the CLS system, the more I like it. Lots of possibilities and lots of fun! Keep up the good work, Nikon!</p>

<blockquote> <p>While having to explain the joke is not funny, the fact that you have to is not necessarily the joke's fault.</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> It could indicate a mismatch between the joke and the audience. A joke about a plunger means nothing to someone who has never seen a toilet.</p>

<p>By the way, it's not Zeisss</p> <p>It's Zei$$$</p> <p> </p>

<p>If you have to explain the joke, it wasn't funny.</p>

<p>An essay is about making a statement and supporting it.</p> <p>Start by having something to say, e.g. "The flowers in Colorado are beautiful in the spring."</p> <p>Say it clearly as clearly as you can, and ensure that the photos support what you are trying to communicate.</p>

<blockquote> <p>Statutory damages that may be collected range from $200 for an unintended or unknowing infringement, on up to $150,000 if a court finds the infringement willful.<br />They can pile on a lot more statutory and treble damages for adding fraudulent copyright notices, removing existing notices and watermarks, and more.</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> Good luck getting $150,000 out of a copyright settlement.</p>

<p>I don't use UV filters unless a lot of dirt, dust, or liquid is flying through the air. In those cases, a quality, multi-coated glass filter is the only optically sound choice. </p>

<p>Does having the photo displayed on Pinterest deprive you of money that you would have earned if it had NOT been posted there? You can claim copyright infringement, but probably you won't be compensated for what you haven't lost - or what you cannot demonstrate that you have lost.</p> <p>If you post a photo online, that's where it will live from now on.</p>

<p>My two cents:</p> <p>1 - In most cases, there isn't one correct exposure. There may be more than one useful exposure.</p> <p>Perhaps you normally try to avoid blowing out highlights. But what if the photo contains lightbulbs or specular highlights on metal. Or you're shooting a high key portrait. You can make one exposure that preserves the highlights, but the rest of your image might be underexposed enough where noise becomes a problem. So you take another image and willfully blow those highlights a bit. But by how much? And do you care as long as most of the photo is exposed in a relatively noise-free range?</p> <p>2 - Whether or not you believe in a correct exposure, consider how difficult it is to determine that you have achieved that exposure, even when referring to histograms and blinking highlights displays. Histograms are based on JPEG previews, not raw files. You can use a flat preview setting and run a bunch of tests to get a feel for how much you need to push each channel of the histogram, but the final result is going to vary depending on lighting, composition, and the colors, texture, and surfaces that you are shooting. Even if you're in a studio using strobes, the strobes don't fire with exactly the same power on each shot.</p> <p>3 - At the moment of exposure, I would rather worry about composition, accurate focus, facial expressions, camera stability, and capturing the mood of the moment rather than fretting over an exposure value that I can adjust within reason. With today's sensors, a one-stop over or under exposure will not ruin most shots. I try to get reasonably close or bracket if I want options (or insurance), and focus my attention on seeing and capturing photographs.</p>

<p>I can't speak to topic 1 (critiques), but on topic 2 (gear and training), here are my opinions.</p> <p><strong>Training</strong></p> <p>I commend you for taking classes locally. Classroom experience will help you to build skills and should also help you to sort out your equipment questions.</p> <p>Further, if you are interested in portrait or landscape photography, look on you tube or around the web for free tutorials focusing on that type of shooting. Some of them will be better than others, but you'll gain a lot of ideas as you do your research.</p> <p>But keeping mind that most important thing is to put that knowledge to use. Try applying the techniques that you lear, even if you don't feel that you know what you're doing. The worst thing that can happen is that you'll create some bad photos. The best thing that can happen is that you create thousands of bad photos, because you're going to learn from each mistake.<br> Adopt the mindset of figuring things out rather than asking for guidance in advance. Try things first. If they don't work out, try to determine why. If you still can't figure it out, then ask your questions. You'll be in a better position to apply the advice that you receive if you have already confronted a problem and pondered a resolution. If you just ask "what gear do I need to become a portrait photographer," you won't understand why the gear that's recommended is important. Take some portraits of your friends, and then ask how to improve them. You'll learn more effectively and more quickly.</p> <p><strong>Gear</strong></p> <p>Overarching concept: You don't need something until you can demonstrate why you need it.</p> <p>Why do you need a new monitor? Maybe you'd be better off calibrating the one that you have with a Spyder or similar tool.</p> <p>Why do you need a reflector? Maybe you'd be better off figuring out how to make portrait subjects look good in available light (open shade, overcast, direct sunlight, window light, dusk) and with your speed light. Add options and modifiers later when you understand what they can add to your lighting palette.</p> <p>Why do you need a faster zoom? What benefit will that give you?</p> <p>Do you need Lightroom? I love the program, but perhaps since you already have Photoshop and you're taking a class in Photoshop, you should learn that program thoroughly before you buy more software.</p> <p>How can you get better results with the gear that you already have? How about learning to use that speed light off camera before you invest in light modifiers? Learn how to bounce it in different ways. Learn how to use different sync speeds (including high speed, i.e. faster than 1/250th of a second) and how they are useful. Learn how to use the different modes (normal, slow sync, rear curtain sync). Learn how to use your flash in manual mode in addition to TTL mode. Learn how to use the flash's zoom and multiple flash features.</p> <p>Do you need umbrellas and soft boxes and beauty dishes? These things are all useful, but until you understand what each one is going to do for you, you don't "need" them, even if they seem like useful tools to own.</p> <p>Shoot a lot and let your results guide your inquiries.</p>

<p>I've never had my 24-70 serviced, but I find that micro focus fine-tuning improves AF performance (as it does with all AF lenses).</p>

<p>I put off buying the SU-800 for a long time. I wish that I hadn't. It's a much more reliable trigger than the pop up flash.</p> <p>You can use modifiers with Nikon flashes - umbrellas, soft boxes, etc. - and you can augment that with the manual zoom feature.</p> <p>The bonus with CLS is that the flash heads are designed to work in high speed sync mode, which Nikon calls High FP (Focal Plane) sync mode. The only limiting factor is the power output, but you can group a bunch of them together for more punch.</p>

<p>A camera makes a good photograph.</p>

<p>The D800E is an amazing camera. It's been my main camera for the past year-and-a-half, and I love it. My only complaint is that the phase detection autofocus isn't reliable in low light. I can work around that for night landscape and city shots, because I tend to switch over to contrast detection autofocus in live view when I'm using a tripod. But, I find the D800E's AF a little unreliable for events.</p> <p>The D750 supposedly has better autofocus (as to the D810 and D4s), but I haven't tried any of those cameras. When I photograph an event, I still drag my Canon gear along, because the 5D Mark III is like the Superman of autofocus.</p> <p>I don't tell you this to dissuade you from considering the D800E. It may actually be better than the D7100 that you have been using. But other than the lack of lightning fast, super reliable autofocus in all conditions, the D800E is the finest camera that I have ever used, bar none.</p> <p>Good luck with your decision and your endeavors.</p>

<blockquote> <p>Faced with a subject of interest, I wish only to show it in some new or fresh manner, to make a visual statement that excites me and possibly others. I consider myself a link between it and a viewer. Even if I seek a process of communication, I am first and foremost photographing for my own pleasure and need. What do I see in the subject that is revealing of it or of something it can suggest through my image of it? Composition rules are useful at times but really of secondary importance overall.</p> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>Always leave home with a freshly charged battery.</p> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>Maybe I am blessed with little formal education; I know little rules, and out of the few I know, I reject some as being too rigid and anti-creative, and the rest are just little helpers, but not hard rules. Which helps, because while I am shooting, I want to have a clear and open mind on what I am seeing, and try to frame that in the way that seems best to me. Which often is the way "it struck me", so often those thoughts tend to be very quick too. When I'm out shooting, I want to be as free as possible to see. Not get dragged down in rules.</p> </blockquote> <p>I like each of these ideas, as well!</p>

<blockquote> <p>The rules of photography are the sound of one hand clapping.</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> I like that! <br> <br> It reminds me of the enigmatic quote: "<em>Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.</em>"<br> <br> (The quote is enigmatic because no one has been able to figure out who originally said it.)</p>

I find it difficult to reconcile "expose to the right" and "don't blow the highlights." If you are dead set on never blowing a highlight, your photos will quite often be underexposed and prone to noise. It's more practical to gain a sense for highlights that can be blown without impacting the quality of the photo - light bulbs, for instance. Who cares if you can't recover enough to see the filament? Or highlights on metallic surfaces. Backgrounds in high key shots and silhouetted shots can be blown way out without issue depending on how you want the final image to appear. There's a certain amount of "exposure intelligence" that one should develop over time. Following some simple minded rule works against that development.

Generally, I try follow Ansel Adams' advice: "There are no rules for good photographs. There are only good photographs." Practically, I follow a few guidelines: 1. Composition is the most important element to consider while shooting, because a bad composition can't be undone (as, to some degree, a bad exposure can). I try to ensure that the composition is pleasing to my eye and that clutter doesn't detract from subject. 2. I try to ensure that the camera is stable or that the shutter speed is fast enough so that camera movement won't matter. 3. I try to optimize the exposure, but I'll bracket if I feel that it would be helpful. 4. I try to ensure that the focus is on the most important visual element. Those are the key principles that I keep in mind while shooting. I want to take care of the elements that cannot be adjusted later. Everything else comes down to aesthetics.

<p>When traveling, it's better to use gear that you know and trust and understand. </p>

<p>It's fascinating to see alternate frames from a session that produced an iconic photo.</p>

<p>Have someone show you how to do it - someone who already knows the procedure. If you adjust your camera incorrectly, the results will be worse than if you had not adjusted it at all.</p> <p>The procedure isn't that difficult, but you have to do it properly. Either that, or just forget about it. It's probably not going to make a big difference on a 50D.</p>

<p>Hmm - the pumpkins look like brain-sucking pods from Planet Orangina.</p>

<p>Card readers are fast.</p>