re_photography
-
Posts
239 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by re_photography
-
-
As to my above post, this is an incredibly different subject matter, but the model was lit solely with the described method of bouncing hotshoe-mounted flash off of a reflector. The amount of ambient light present was generally from behind the model, so really didn't contribute to the lighting of her much at all, so the difuse quality of the lighting is due to the reflector use, not because shadows were negated by the ambient light.<div>
</div>
-
Provided you can't arrange shots so that they can be naturally window-lit and look good, I would bounce the 430Ex off of a sheet of white something. If you don't have a formal reflector a large sheet of white cardboard will work. By bouncing the flash off of this surface you can get a difuse light source as you consider the entire area of the white surface to be the light source, rather than the small front of the flash unit. If you position the angle correctly, you will also get enough periferal light to bounce around and provide some fill. Either lens should work, but if you are doing a family together in a small group, you will likely want to use the 17-85 as you'd have to be quite far back to get in more than a couple of people with the 50mm which on the 30D has the FOV of a 80mm on a full-fram camera. I've bounced hotshoe-mounted flash off of a reflector many times. I've also lit a couple portraits by bouncing one of those cheap work lights off of a piece of white board, that warks as well, though probably not very well if all you have access to only common houshold wattage bulbs. Perhaps somewhere around someone has a shoplight you could borrow? At any rate, the hotshoe flash will work fine if bounced, just play around with positioning beforehand.
-
If you are just looking for percentage of full-frame sensors rather than specifically the 5D, I have a 1DsMII, but my backup is a 20D, so I guess mine also nulify each other.......
-
I use <a href="http://www.bigblackbag.com">www.bigblackbag.com</a>. The name refers to the large, flat portfolio bags artists use to transport work.
<BR><BR>
I was introduced to them by another professional photographer who I went to school with. Fairly reasonably priced, good mix of preset options and custom design abilities, easily modifiable, avaible (additional cost) options of adding capacity and expanding with event proof hosting and web-store for handling orders/invoices.
<BR><BR>
My site is <a href="http://www.ryanephotography.com">www.ryanephotography.com</a> if you want to take a look, though admittedly there are probably better examples of what is capable if you spend more time customizing things. Examples of sample site designs people have created are linked to from the home page.
-
The "easy answer" for the 3D effect on the border is "Layer Style;" on the border layer. I forget 6.0, but I know it can be done in CS2.
-
Just adding an example, because I had fun, but didn't have any on-hand when posting earlier.....<div></div>
-
(disregard that last comment, I can now see that it is perfectly
readable and obvious.....)
-
I don't think you can read it very well at this resolution, but the
sign to the left of the photo actually reads "One Way," which I
found especially humorous, considering I've been to this location a
number of time and never seen a single car driving on this road in
either direction.....<div>
</div> -
<div></div>
-
<div></div>
-
-
-
-
-
Shooting in low light conditions with flash, and trying to avoid shadows, you have a few options. Given your constraints, the best one may be as follows:
If there is any usable ambient light at all, you might be able to take a longer exposure so that you have enough ambient light to light the background and use the flash to stop the dog in motion. Ideally, you set the flash to the end-curtain sync of the shutter so that if there is any ambient light exposure trail on moving objects it will "trail behind" the object/subject. (The same technique can also be used to show an object in multiple positions of motion in the same long exposure by using multiple flash bursts, however, this will only work correctly if you can pretty much isolate the flash so that it is not hitting anything but the moving object.) You will need to have the camera on a tripod to keep it steady throughout the log exposure.
-
I've never had any trouble with my Tiffen ND filters, but to the best of my knowledge I've mainly used them for digital photos which are custom RAW processed image by image or B&W negative film on a medium format, not positive or negative color film.
-
My $0.02 is that it looks to a be caused by a generally OK exposure of the subject against an overexposed background. Initially I would chalk this up to a sensor issue, especially if you are shooting at a higher ISO. I would check to see if you get similar results shooting against a darker or detailed background.
-
Having shot in a helicoptor (in Kuaii, HI) and a small airplane (Western MA, not quite the same I know.....) before, although my personal style of shooting would tell me to bring all the lenses and only put them on the 30D; my slight experience has taught me a few things to consider.
<BR><BR>
1) You will have a minimum amount of time to shoot and it is not particularly convenient to change lenses in a helicopter. - I would consider mounting two of the lenses, likely the 17-85mm and the 100-400mm, letting which one you will likely use more on the 30D. If you really think you need to cover the range between 85-100mm for some reason and have the time/ability to switch lenses, take it in a belt pack and make sure it is secure and can fit the lens that is coming off the camera.
<BR><BR>
2) You will be shooting from a confined space with plastic/glass. - If you are chartering the helicopter and can open a window to shoot out of and direct the pilot which way to turn the helicopter, wonderful. I was not so lucky as I wasn't the only person shooting. If you are shooting through the glass/plexiglass of the windows (as unfortunately many turist sightseeing helicofters require) make sure you are using a polarising filter, and plan on turning it minimize inside reflections each time you change your angle of view.
<BR><BR>
3)You will be in a moving, vibrating vehicle. - No matter how good your pilot is, the craft is going to move, shift, vibrate, etc. Be careful to keep a good natural view of your subject and then try shooting by framing it wide then zooming in rather than trying to lacate it will zoomed in. Good luck to you locking onto a subject at 400mm which will have the FOV of a 640mm lens with your cameras; don't make yourself sick. Also, shoot at a reasonably fast shutter speed to compensate for vibration and rotational movement of the helicopter; the actual lateral movement of the helicopter in relation to the subject should not be too much of an issue unless you are very low/close to what you are shooting and moving quite fast.
<BR><BR>
4)You are in a vehical that is both very hard and high above ground which is very hard and said vehicles has doors. - This may seam like an obvious and somewhat trivial thing, but, wear your cameras around your neck, and if you take any accessories, wear them in some way as well. While you may realize the inportance of having your camera around your neck if shooting out an open window, I found out the hard way that small aircraft doors do not always lock completely. No I didn't fall out, not did any of my equipment, but I nearly had a heart attack when the pilot of the 4-seat plane I was in did a turn which tipped the plane slightly and my door swung open giving me a very clear view of the ground 3,000+ feet below. I had a lap-belt on, but I had two cameras with me, and my feet very tightly clamped down on the $3,000+ Mamiya 645AFD & Lens combination I had resting between them while I shot with a fixed lens digital.
Any questions, let me know. Again, somewhat limitted experience.
-
I have the convenience of having only two filter sizes among my several cameras and lenses. I do not use filters as protection unless I know that I am going to be shooting somewear that will specificaly need protection such as the beach where even the salt in the mist in the air can pose a problem. I instead use the hoods included with all of my lenses. If you are purely using an essentially clear or plain UV block filter strictly for protection of the lens and are concerned about both price and image degredation, I might boldly suggest either just using the lens hood in most cases. For any lens that did not include a hood, there is normally one available specifically for the lens or at least appropriate for the zoom range. These are generally much less expensive than a good filter. That said: I own 2 sets of the same 4 filters (one set for each thread size of 58mm and 77mm). I own Tiffen UV (0), Circular Polarizer, ND x4, and NDx8. I use these on lenses out to 16mm, so I had to go with the thin fram models which cost a little more. I don't know how the standard frame models would work out to 24mm (in the case that you are using a 1.6x faxtor digital sensor camera, this point is irrelevent), but they are generally thin enough for UV and clear filters as there is no added depth of a rotating element, such as is the case with a polarising filter. I got "coated" filters, but not the ultimate for the brand. I believe you could obtain good UV or absolutely clear filter for around $50. Are the better then a filter you can get for $35, maybe, maybe not. In cases like these, my opinion is the same as it was for buying strobes, when there are conflicting opinions and no clearcut/proven data as to to the advantages/disadvantages of each option, find the best option in your price range based on what information is availble and also the fact that whenever possible it is hardly ever advisable to purchase the cheepest item in any given category. My reasoning for this is that the cheepest available item, when there are other options readily available, is usually sold because it is the cheapest; there is no concievable advantage for the company to produce a better product at a lower price; companies are seldome generous and will seldome give you more for less if they can give you less for less (or more for more of course).
-
I was preparing a severe, albeit informative, rant on this, but pretty much everything regarding native resolution and interlacing issues has been fairly thoroughly covered. This being the case, I'll just add that your intention of making "really big prints" from captures of the movie is also quite ILLEGAL.
-
As to the update of the situation in question: got ya. You might try buying used LCD or CRT screens, especially as lots of people in the industry who have been working on VGA connect CRT and LCD screens may be selling them in favor of digital connections either for actual better quality or for the perception of better quality. What you will be garanteed though is that a couple hundred dollar couple year old VGA display (in great condition) which originally sold for many hundreds of dollars is certainly a better option than a new display priced at a couple hundred dollars. FOr example, one of the best CRT monitors to my knowledge is the LaCie Electron Blue which came in both 19" (17" viewable) and 22" (20" viewable) versions. The school I weant to in 2004-2006 had two digital postprocessing labs, one with about 40 19" versions and the other with about 50 22" versions. The monitors are no longer produced, but you can find them on Ebay. There is currently one with a minimum bid of $125 and a "Buy it Now" of $200. This is a monitor which listed new at well over $750 as far as I know.
http://search.ebay.com/lacie-22-crt_W0QQfkrZ1QQfromZR8QQsatitleZlacieQ2022Q22Q20crt
I don't know that your graphics card could handle the maximum resolution of 2048x1536, but it should work OK at least at lower resolutions.
-
I use ALien Bees strobes currently; I own four of them and although gthey are less expensive than the systems out there that many pro photographers consider"high-end" systems. Besides the general affordability, they have a wide range of accessories available including remote opperating systems for controlling multiple units from a central source and portable power-pack systems to run units on-location. The lights are relatively small and portable. I shoot freelance and studio work and have never had any problems with them, but I was even more convinced of their abilities when I recently interviewed to work with an advertising photographer with national contracts and he asked me if I knew anything about ALien Bees monolights; slightly surprised I told him I owned 4 of them and he replied that he owned six, and that it was all he ever used and had gotten rid of his last set from a more "traditional" maker of photography lighting equipment. Best of luck with your choices.
-
I guess my question is, what is it that you are using said screen for that you are able to do this efficiently on a 2000 G3......I'm not trying to be argumentative, just understand what your needs are.
It is not likely that either Walmart or OfficeMax will ever carry a display of any sort that is intended for graphics editing; it isn't in their best interest to do so since their average customer buying computer equipment is either using it for business applications or as an affordable home-computer for general use. You are not likely to find new LCD screens meant for graphics work running on VGA connections mainly because manufacturers asume that anyone who would be interested in purchasing a monitor meant for graphics work would not be working on a machine which could not connect to a digital input monitor. This said, to the best of my knowledge, there are some very good LCD screens in existance which run on VGA connections made by Viewsonic, since you mentioned them, and other companies who traditionally made CRT monitors meant for editing. I have also used a few Sony LCD monitors, though it is my understanding that Sony has dropped their entire desktop computing (and monitor) line in favor of profits from laptop computers. I've used a number of displays, but I believe it or not my personal preference is still for my 17" widescreen on my Sony VAIO laptop, good color acuracy, auto-dims/brightens to the ambient light, and it squishes in 1920x1200 pixels.
-
I'm a little confused as to why you would want to put a telecoverter on a lens that costs less than it does. Even if possible, it would be impractical to use a teleconverter with either the 18-55mm F4-5.6 or the 55-105mm F3.5-5.6 as even zoomed out on the larger of the 2 with a 2x extender, the equivalent would be only 210mm at F11......That said, officially:
Quoted from:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=41922
"Canon Makes two T-cons.
Extender EF 1.4x II
This tele extender can be used with fixed focal length lenses 135mm and longer (except the 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus lens), and the EF 70-200 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 70-200 f/4.0L, and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS zoom lenses. It multiplies its focal length 1.4x. Effective aperture is reduced by one f-stop; autofocus is possible on any EOS camera when combined with a lens having an f/4 or faster maximum aperture.
Extender EF 2x II
This tele extender can be used with fixed focal length lenses 135mm and longer (except the 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus lens), and the EF 70-200 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 70-200 f/4.0L, and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS zoom lenses.
The EF 2x II doubles the focal length of any lens it's mounted to, and reduces its effective aperture by two stops. With the EF 2x II, AF is possible with any EOS body if the lens has an f/2.8 or faster maximum aperture, and compatible Image Stabilization lenses maintain the IS feature when used with any current EOS camera."
There may be other lenses not listed which will fit on the teleconverter, but the autofocuss will either not work, or work only intermittently with lenses over F4 for the 1.4x and F2.8 for the 2x.
Studio monolight strobes in cary-on luggage?
in Travel
Posted