bob_bill

Just did a shoot with a 69 yr old lady. Had the eliminated wrinkles on a layer and started pulling back the opacity slider and she did not want it a zero, but she didnt want it at 100% either. Eliminating the wrinkles makes the shot not resemble the subject for folks who know them. Reducing them and leaving at least some vestige is preferable for me.

And her description of working with cloudy days then adding studio strobe one stop under ambient to give direction to the soft light, something I hadn't done with studio gear, only as fill flash on camera. I had to think about how to get the strobe 1 stop under ambient out doors, I can't turn off the sun. Sekonic meters give the percentage of flash contribution to the reading. If my math is right, one stop under means there is twice as much ambient, so 2 units of ambient and 1 unit of strobe, or 1 of 3, 33 %. When I take a reading of the subject with flash, I adjust strobe power til it adds 20-30% to the exposure. I can't think of any other way of doing that with a meter outdoors. Anyone have any metering suggestions?

The sound of the shutter being cocked on a Mamiya rb67 is mechanical music as Mark mentions. The sound of medium format film being advanced, wonderful. The quality of the resulting images, magical. The connection with the photographers and technology that came before digital, priceless. And the cost of 3 or 4 lenses, a couple of backs and an excellent body, less than the cost of a good digital lens.

You are doing custom work as well. It is why I like to tear down the set up, most lights remain on stands at all times, between clients in studio and start from scratch to prevent not customizing the shoot from the start.

The only time I have had a shipping problem with UPS was a few years ago during the week or 2 before Christmas. A 9 foot long box was actually broken open and a part missing. I phoned B&H and they had to pull the part off another item because it doesn't strike me as one that is sold separately, and they had it to me in one or 2 days. A couple days later, the end of another 9'box with seamless was also damaged. I stopped purchasing items the last 2 weeks before Christmas if I could avoid it. Not only is there a rush at that time of year, but I believe they hire part time workers. I'm sure B&H doesn't abuse their boxed items before handing them to UPS.

I use a meter with digital whenever I have the time. The sekonic meter is calibrated to the camera's sensor and i know precisely where the clipping points are. With MF film, even with the latitude, at $2 a click, i am precise on each exposure placing shadows or tonal values using a meter. I use the meter when using strobes with film the same as I would with digital. When shooting a client, I don't want to have to call and tell them I blew the exposure on the film. With b&w film's latitude, you have a good chance of having a workable exposure. The best exposure for the shot, not so much. That's where a meter and the zone system comes into play.

Matt, thanks for the info and the photo set up. They had to love those shots. Got to love that Buff gear. Have you ever tried the Buff strip that has a silver lining without a diffuser as the body light? I find the scales on each hair really reflect the specularity of that modifier giving the coat a luxurious sheen. I too use a kicker but a separate light, a gridded 22" beauty dish on the head to pull the eye there and create the catch light or just do it in post either brightening that area or vignetting.

Matt, nicely done, great expressions. Looks like your lighting is a near horizontal strip box R, a fill LF low and a kicker high rear? Do you use anything like mink oil on their coats? I like the texture of your sweep as well. Had the pleasure to meet the Buff folks that have been so helpful over the years at PPA in Nashville and since they had a vendor exhibit, I didn't have to leave and go to the factory there.

Shun, exactly. As Ansel used to say,( a few hours south of SF or Sac in Yosemite where his piano resides at the Awahanee- he was a pianist working in sound energy before a photographer working in light energy), the most important part of the camera is the 12 inches behind it.

People are like snowflakes, everyone is different. My degrees are in Literature/creative writing and psychology so the human condition intrigues me. That background is reflected in my photo work which includes much portraiture. One of my favorite quotes is that every person has an incredible story to tell... if you are willing to find it. It is the same in the photograph of people, it has the capability to tell something about the subject.

Sanford, a couple of folks did. Nikon guys. Fuji gave their shoots Fuji lanyards. No big, just apparently Nikon doesn't think Nikon pros are worth marketing.

JD, the Hemingway shot is the inspiration for my selfie , white beard emulated by kickers a tad hot, trade mark shirt. An homage to both Hem and Karsh. When I look at Karsh's shot of Churchill with missing cigar, I can't help but think of how Karsh got that belligerent expression, grabbing Churchill's cigar at the last moment.

Dieter, slow with updating? Absolutely. The 135 dc hasn't been updated since 1994. 24 years. Illka, I agree on the vertical grip. 8 hrs with a flying elbow? Plus it isn't as stable for me if I am shooting at lower shutter speeds. In studio, no big deal, I use a rolling camera stand to store between shots and shoot but hand holding, the vertical grip is something I appreciate as well. Thanks for the info on the 105, I will take a look at it's images and if I like it will consider the 135 when it is updated if it produces similar results, I will be curious to see how the old 135 resolves on the d850.

Ilkka, I too am waiting on the up date to the Nikon 135. I am not so concerned about the weight, but the size of some lenses because they limit what fits in a bag that is the largest I like to carry for long periods or crowded areas. I like the Einsteins for specific reasons as well. Popping 6-10 times per second, flat line color, 250 watt modeling lamps, fully controllable from camera, on/off, brightness of modeling light for pupil size control, power including for groups like pairs of bg lights, 1/13,500 sec. fastest duration. Down side is 5lb weight. But since usually adding a box, that isn't necessarily as meaningful. I use heavy rolling stands so it takes care of the issues and for hair light have heavy boom arm and stand. They don't have something to allow attaching a 7' octa direct to a stand then hang the light off it so have rigged my own using a steel, not brass, stud threaded to fit the speed ring. That way, can leave it always up rolled against a wall taking little space.

Dieter, you are right, 1.4. After 4 days of classes and shooting running from 8 am to 10 pm, and little sleep, still recovering. Mixing Sigma's 135 1.8 with Nikons 105 1.4. No failures? Tell that to folks that had issues with newly released bodies over the last half dozen years that Sandy enumerated. Or the folks that have had repair delays. There were thousands of photographers and I would expect at least 1/4 are nikon shooters who purchase from the upper part of Nikon's entire product line. Shouldn't a manufacturer at least show up so those folks can inspect the new products? Sandy nailed it, With the disappearance of brick and mortar camera stores, having an opportunity to physically hold and test a new product is a wonderful part of a trade show. How many other $4000 products other than photo gear do you buy without seeing and trying it? It has nothing to do with getting an ego stroked, it has to do with customer service. Besides, with a photo ego the size of mine, I don't need any stroking. I think most folks on this forum think of them as supplying great products. I agree, I buy them on how they perform, but quality of a product is only part of a great company, service is also important. Hence my example of Paul C Buff and their einsteins level of service. Would you find it ok going to a restaurant that charges $150 for dinner for two to tell you to stand in line to place your order from a menu on the wall, put it on a tray and let you find a seat on some plastic chairs at a plastic table in a stark room acceptable? We do at McDonalds. I like my Nikon cameras but they are just a tool to me, part of my overhead. I am starting to feel that providing me good service is not a high priority. Now I could be wrong, but it seems like a developing pattern. I am one of those that believes the most important part of the camera is the 12 inches behind it and I can put mine easily behind a Canon.

I agree Nikon is providing great products. Cutting back on presence at a professional convention? How many $800 d850 vertical grips and batteries or $3000 bodies that they can't make fast enough to keep up with demand does it take to send a couple of folks to a convention and fund a booth? Canon was a huge presence. Even to just cater to their current users, we are not important enough? Sigma was there in force as was Fuji. I am used to the bodies layout, and love the 135 2.0 dc, but the Canon 135 not to mention the Sigma are pretty spectacular. I haven' t reached the point of bailing, am buying a d850 soon, but it would have been nice to get my hands on the new 105 1.8 and shoot it with my camera so I could see the bokeh for myself. Same with handling an 850, but then someone about to drop 4k on body and vertical grip isn't worth having a booth not to mention a couple thousand other pro nikon shooters in one spot for days.

I attended Professional Photographers of America's annual convention in Nashville this week. When I picked up the required large badge hung from a lanyard, it was a CANON lanyard. Had to wear it for 4 days. Nikon was not represented in the trade show. Was constantly reminded of their absence by that lanyard. Canon reps led numerous shooting classes. Canon had a huge booth. Sigma was there, Fuji was there (with a $6k MF 50 mp digital camera not much bigger than a d850). Nikon, Bueller, Bueller? Now we have to wait months to get a d850. Charging $800 for a vertical grip and battery for the d850. The fact Nikon doesn't support gear including lenses over 10 years old doesn't sit well with me either. This convention is for pros. It felt like Nikon pros were being ignored, disrespected. Keep it up and there will be more white lenses floating about instead of the Nikon black. Want to contrast that with Paul C Buff, ie, Einsteins/ Alien Bees. They were there. When you phone them, you get an english is their first language speaker answering who in turn transfers you with minimal if any wait to someone who is helpful answering your questions. Anyone else getting irritated with Nikon?

Gerry, as Jelly said in Analyze This, some roughage should help with that. In the days when we had paper clip holders on our desks, I would turn over the clear plastic bottom one to divine the future whenever asked a question that required clairvoyance. You know, like, how long will this take. Count me in with the old geezers, I remember paper clips and 3 colored memo forms. Have one on my wall, the forerunner of email. Nick, add a 35 2 and you have my favorite things. I don't think Ed is saying there isn't a correlation between wide aperture lenses and good oof, I think he is saying a wide aperture isn't necessarily a guarantee of soft bokeh. Timo shot at 1,8 wider than mine at 2.0. Since I am usually shooting 4.0 and below, I shoot differently than architecture or landscape folks who want everything in focus. I hadn't had my sensor cleaned in a couple of year and then tested all my jells from f4 to f16 and when I put them on the screen, there was tons of dust on the sensor. How much, the guy cleaning it said it would take longer because he had to bring in a backhoe.

Fred, when I saw Timos image, I thought I couldn't have had a more different oof quality. I see it as painterly but in a more geometric manner. Totally different feel. Each appropriate for certain images. However, my subjects and style of shooting lean to the softer oof. For a baby or woman, in most cases, i would lean towards a softer oof. For harder light, more contrasty and perhaps a face with character, the harsher oof. Neither is perfect for all. As I mention, the oof occupies more than half of my image and is certainly an important part of the image. Now, If I desired to show the double arched bridge at the end of the pond, I could have stopped down a bit and pulled in more detail in trees and bridge. But this was a test shot to see how much I could throw the bg oof. I matched the aperture with the dc ring at 2.0. It's an extra ring on this lens that you will only see on one other lens I know of, the 105 2.0 dc.

Here's an example with soft bokeh. Compare it with the trees in Timo's shot. Neither right, but different. 135 2.0 shot at 2.0 with no CA correction. Those are trees down both sides of the pond and behind him. It's what I saw as potential shots the first time I saw the backyard. I still intend to keep my resolution to hand paint a canvas background.

Joe, exactly, in my case, I shot a boat race and wanted the turn where the boats were crowded together and opening the throttles. However that is where exhaust and spray in the air was concentrated. Not nearly as sharp as down the straight. Not enough wind that day to disperse it. Dennis I guess the focal length remaining the same on a crop and only the angle of view changing explains why there is a difference in the dof of a 135 equivalent and actual 135. I had noticed that on the d500 for portraits using an 85 1.4 and got the same compression shooting from same distance but the oof appeared different. I like the 10 fps of the d500 but don't like the way my lenses behave so will get in line for an 850. The extreme is my circular fisheye isn't circular.

Thanks Dieter, haven't ordered one yet. Looks like still a delay on delivery. Andrew, I was thinking of using it to get a 4 "zoom" settings on a 400 2.8. 400 on ff, 600 as crop, 680 with ff and 1.7 tc, crop plus 1.7 1020.

Is it possible to set up a button to change from FF to crop without going into the menu on the d850?

Simple, terrible portrait photographers.

Fred, thanks for the benefit of the doubt but admitting my addiction is the first step. My name is Bob and I am a bokeholic. It is a disease so it's not my fault so no on has a right to criticize my behavior. I once woke up after an all night bokeh bender in a run down hotel smoking cheap cigarettes and drinking aqua velva. It was a cold and rainy night. I had hit bokeh bottom. Bokeh will do that to you. It can be a monkey on your back. Walk down many streets in Manhattan, especially around B&H and and you will hear, psst buddy, I 've got some killer creamy bokeh. Want some? A grand for a hit. I am also bokehphobic, terrified of bad bokeh. I wake up in the middle of the night screaming, bad bokeh, bad bokeh. It really upsets my dog, bokeh who thinks he is being chastised when he hasn't done anything wrong. Well, got to pick up some bokeh crap, or is it crappy bokeh? Absurd enough? To me, all the bokehphobia, hatred of bokeh, is amusing bordering on the absurd. It is merely one element in an image. I don't hear anyone railing against the mirrorless worshipers-except me mocking them saying I have gone sensorless, ie to film. It's no holy grail, it is a valuable tool. It can be over emphasized, like tilting, blurring, fading, saturating. Remember HDR? My eyes are still bleeding. For those that shoot stopped down, I understand them not appreciating it's value. But for those that strive for perfection in their images, it is just another element to maximize. If it seems unimportant to some folks, that's fine. I strive to create the best image possible. I don't spend money on gear to collect it, I make a purchase on the results it will produce. I don't think anyone demanding a high standard including bokeh is any different than someone wanting sharpness, high resolution or accurate color. I have yet to meet someone that worships bokeh like some camera or lens brand. . You know, pray in the direction of Germany. Ernst Hass didn't say bokeh smokeh, he said Leika smeika, the camera doesn't matter. As for the revulsion to a word, what really grates on me is folks who condescendingly correct me for pronouncing ISO not spelling it. Same folks who pronounce RAW, TIFF and JPEG. I just find the whole debate amusing since it appears a group apparently really likes a lens quality and another group is put off by it so they ridicule it. Fortunately, I am down with the flu so have time to waste on such a silly debate. Always looking for the silver lining.