bob_bill

I can tell you that in a 110 degree garage in central CA with 3 hot lights and a fog machine going, it will produce an hour of cloning out sweat beads. But I just had to align chins then chins to bg slash, then chest and collar then hand and slash they eye slightly above power point, then fine tune angle of main and barn doors, then fire fog machine and get the billowing fog just right-now that the humidity was near 100% then take a shot. Hey, it's more fun when it is darn near impossible. Making it look easy is the real trick. With my prior bbq, if I preheated with all burners full blast, my phone would ring...Nuclear regulatory commission checking on a possible nuclear explosion. Can't be too rich, too skinny or have too many btu's. My subjects act as I direct them, they just don't know it. It's like a wife, always let them think it's their idea. Just kiddin?

As someone used to say here, horses for courses.

Bubu, I currently shoot a 400 2.8 on a crop d500 so start with 600 mm 2.8 equivalent. Shot I posted on both nature and jokingly in casual conversation bokeh post was just that but at f/8. Having enough dof when 2 subjects within 50 feet means stopping down. Mine doesn't have VR, but even training for a body buiilding competition, I can't comfortably hand hold that 10 lb lens so it lives on a gimbal head. With an old 1.7 tc I am at 1020 equiv with some image degradation and down to f/4.8 minimum. I understand the new 1.4 tc has virtually no image degradation and 840 mm equiv. and f/4. With a d850 I will have the megapixels to shoot either FF or crop if needed. With the 1.7 a 680 mm. FF. In crop will have about the same resolution as the d500. So can go from 400 mm to 1020 with several lengths in between giving me the flexibility of a zoom with the IQ and aperture of a fixed. So the zoom stops would be 400 600 680 840 and 1020. Having more dof at an equivalent length on the crop is desirable to me for nature and not so much for portraiture where I like the softest bg possible. At these lengths, I am finding the bg is plenty soft even at f/8. Would be nice if the d850 allows assigning an exterior button to switch between FF and crop. One resolution this year the subject of another post, is to hand paint a canvas background. I hope I can achieve something close to what this lens renders outdoors.

Gary, I really like your comment about pushing a piece of gear to find the limits you find acceptable. When you know that, you will get great shots or learn that something has to change. Some of my favorite shots involved pushing camera, lens, grip and lighting gear to their limits in combination. The trick is making it look easy.

I posted this earlier in Nature of Walter and his new girl friend but no one caught what I like about the 400mm 2.8 at f/8, the heart shaped bokeh. I always love heart shaped bokeh on a romantic shot. Ever hear of heart shaped bokeh before? It's pretty new with the 400 2.8

I had named my resident wood stork "Walter" after Jeff Dunham's bald, grumpy old man. Now, Walter has a girl friend.

A 20k Hasselblad? Try 40k. I have resisted the mirrorless fad. I have taken it a step further, I have gone sensorless. I have also been shooting film.

How does the old joke go, my wife told me she would leave me if i didn't stop (fill in the blank, here photographing), I'm sure gonna miss her. Yes, I try to carry a camera with me most of the time, but even if you do, will you have the right lens? I probably wouldn't carry a camera bag to a friends for dinner and I expect it is so cold, you wouldn't want to leave it in your vehicle. At least the image is burned in your mind.

It looks like the site is for lighting diagrams and technique and wants to keep it restricted to that. They are concentrating on the mechanics and that is helpful, especially for beginners who don't yet know how to reverse engineer. If resulting photos are posted with diagram, it really helps learning what lighting will do or how to produce the look you prefer. That allows someone to master the mechanics then incorporate it into their artistic expression. A caustic critique could stifle newbies submitting their diagrams and photos. I think it makes sense. Thanks for the diagram program. Will have to try that. When I stumble onto a set up that is unique or cool, I take a photo of the set up. I can figure out the ratios looking at the resulting photos. When I decide to try it a few years later, I can view the set up and quickly reproduce it.

Jerry, I think My Cousin Vinny described it well: do you like it creamy or al dente? But then he was talking about grits. My degree is is Literature and creative writing so I enjoy words like magical, and my personal favorite, like budda for the 135 dc. Yum, grits with budda.

BeBu, shooting after dark or not, if I have a busy or distracting background and want to emphasize or isolate my subject I don't shoot at f/8 just because i can, I open up. Actually, when I shot all my gels over a range of f/4 to f/16 for a chromazome chart enabling me to instantly create a shade from my gels, I realized, I had sensor dust for the first time in a while because at 1.4-3.2 if is just part of the blur (english for bokeh). I don't shoot at the wide end only because I have to, I shoot there to match the rest of the image. Same as metering my background to have it 1 stop darker. It's not a fad, it's done to make the viewers eye be driven to the subject. Of course unless I am shooting a bright background and my subject is darker then I want the bg brighter. It's all part of maximizing the controls we have on our cameras and lighting. It's why I sometimes find myself struggling to get my subject far enough from the bg so I can control them independently, or in gelling, keeping spill of the bg. Heard a neat description how shutter speed allows independent bg control. Once the subject is lit, adjusting shutter speed is like venetian blinds making the bg lighter or darker. As a location shooter, it isn't unusual for me to add lights to the bg for accents, or the cliched shooting in tungsten white balance making the outdoors have a blue night effect and knocking down ambient to shoot day as night then cto gel my lights to get proper wb of subject. It's all just part of crafting the image.

Fred, was just showing a lady friend a book of Ritts work as well as karsh and am designing a photo similar to the Fred shot. You are right, all those images reside somewhere in the back of our heads. Gerry, you have to be enjoying some of the only warm weather in the US. Had to wear long pants here in FL the last week or so. I guess I have had blur in my entire life, my vision is 20/1200 and without glasses or contacts, everything is a soft blur. Just checked my eye bokeh, soft. I have wondered if the first 7 years of my life with vision uncorrected gave me an attachment to it and it is still what I see if I take off the glasses. I agree on the word bokeh. I guess it is easier to say than quality of out of focus areas particularly highlights. It's like "defocus control" on a 135 2.0 DC. Not and accurate description and bokeh? I don't speak japanese but I understand it translates as blur. So why don't we just say blur??? Same reason as saying full cut cto, it sounds cool and only those knowing the jargon share it. I am looking down a 200 yd pond in my back yard and with a portrait at say 11 feet,1.4 to 2.8 turns it into a gorgeous wash better than a painted background especially when the clouds add pink reflections on the water and the white arched bridge at the end is oof. I have been putting off hand painting a canvas background because I find so many in nature that are stunning when so rendered. I liked a quote I just heard from Joe McNally's studio manager who when asked where his studio is located says, the world is his studio. Happy New Year to all.

Fred, you are absolutely right about Michelangelo. He spent many hours studying the anatomy of cadavers to be able to have a deeper understanding of the human form for his sculpture. They look alive. Mine work is inspired and given to specific people who I educate on what is in their image. Much of it they wouldn't have understood without the explanation. In one of your shots you posted showing how you display photos, I notice one with a guy in coveralls or jeans shirtless that could have been inspired by Herb Ritts' "Fred with Tires." I had meant to ask if that was the inspiration and if it was, many folks would miss that connection to a fantastic portraitist and photographer of the human form and an iconic image. Most folks miss my profile photo being an homage to Karsh and Hemingway, among my favorite photographers and writers inspired by the photo on Hem's wall in his Key West home. Photographers have criticized the kickers as being to hot, to bright. Right, rule violated til I explain they represent Hem's white beard and Karsh's kickers on them. Exactly as you describe, Fred, carefully fine tuned in post. Most folks have seen Karsh's photo of Churchill with the lit wood paneled wall behind him. In the new Churchill movie they actually have a tobacco warning at the end because, true to life Churchill always had a cigar in his hand or mouth. Notice in the photo how Churchill's left hand is somewhat ackwardly posed on his left hip and there is no cigar in the photo. Because to get the belligerent expression, Karsh grabbed the cigar and when Churchill reacted with a belligerent look, click. He captured the guy who just kicked Hitler's ass in the air battle of Britain. Most folks have seen that image but never wondered where the cigar is. If they read this, from now on, they will always see it.

Jerry, although the subject is the star player, it helps the image if everything in the image supports the mood, tone, feel of it. Bokeh is just one of those elements. It does not have to be at the exclusion of the subject in any way. I'm not sure how it would. It isn't the most important element but I want it appropriate to the image. Like I said I consider the catch light as well. Sure a rectangular soft box can look like a window and some folks even apply black tape to look like frames within the window, Some prefer it giving motivation to the catch light, explaining it. I also don't want ninety degree corners in the catch light nor 8 points in the bokeh or a harsh feel. It's why I never understood the rectangular opening that was created by 4 florescent banks and the strange rectangular line around the eye for one famous headshot guy. That's just critical to me to nail an image. Some folks don't care. Nothing wrong with that. No rules, just guidelines. But, I want everything in the frame to support the concept of the shot and if it is softness, harsh bokeh does not. Sure, most folks won't notice, but I do. Critical to the shot? not as much as as expression, lighting, pose, environment, but, none the less an element. It is why Ansel said we are lucky if we produce 12 outstanding images a year. I suggest anyone who doesn't think bokeh is important google 135 dc photos and look at them. Then take a look shots from a lens with harsh bokeh. I don't have to go to 100% to see the difference. It has nothing to do with being a king or queen, it has to do with maximizing image quality. Sorry, but to me, harsh bokeh is not appropriate for a shot calling for soft lighting, a gentle mood any more than would a high contrast ratio on a baby. It has nothing to do with snobbery as is often implied, and certainly goes more to the artistic intent of the image than the usual pixel peeping complaints often founded on some numerical criteria that folks wring their hands over. When an out of focus background forms a large part of the image, is it less important than some sensor dust remaining in the image? Most folks won't accept a few dust specks so why accept a third of the image out of step with the concept of the shot? I heard McNally tell a story about him relating to an art director the joke of how many photographers did it take to change a light bulb. Like we all probably know, the joke is 100, 1 to change the bulb and 99 to tell him how they would do it. This is how I would do it. But I like the art directors response. He asked how many art directors it took to replace a light bulb. None, we are art directors, we don't have to replace light bulbs.

Light is light but when it is modified, with a diffuser, a lens, a gel, it looks different. Having a light source and some modifiers is like having the ingredients for a dish, how you use them can vary from a McDonalds burger to Beef Wellington.

Wood duck

I waited 8 years with the d700 can wait a few more months. In the mean time, a d500 has been an eye opener from the d700. I haven't bothered to calibrate it to my sekonic meter, but I am constantly surprised about being able to keep everything in the histogram that I know would require some blocking or poor blacks on the d700. The 24 mp is plenty for portraits but for birds I expect nearly doubling the pixels will be visible. I doubled from d700 to d500 and it was significant. Can anyone comment on how the tonal transitions compare to say MF black and white film?

I thought bokeh was named for "bokeh harum" and their song whiter shade of pale. Bad bokeh makes me seasick. It's why on my medium format I shoot f/45 , no bokeh with everything in focus. That's forty-five, not four point five. The background is none the less in the frame and the photographer is responsible for it. If he likes harsh, 8 pointed octogonal out of focus shapes, it may be appropriate for the image. Since I am usually looking for softness throughout the image, no sharp edges in the eye catch light like a rectangle or square soft box and same for the oof in the background. And do folks "feel" good bokeh just can't put their finger on why? That is the response I get to the images taken with a Nikon 135 2.0 dc with bokeh ring matching the aperture setting. You can picked up a used copy for about 800. If you are shooting crop, you now have a 2.0 200mm and have been really liking used at that distance. Once I get a FF d850 may shoot it at that distance and crop or shoot it in crop mode. I don't find that bokeh usually makes or breaks an image, it takes it to another level. Google photos for nikon 135 2.0 dc. If you can't tell the difference, you don't need it.

Fred, nicely done. Tasteful arrangement and lighting. Like the carpenter who needs carpentry work at home I have little of my work on the walls, I will turn Pro Select on my own home to design some wall groupings and prints.

Michael, I'm not surprised you were one of the folks interested based on your work. Yes, Annie got hammered with taxes when she inherited Susan Sontag's estate. The preview gave me hope that someone else sees photography that way. It gives me another lighting style in my quiver since I tend to over power ambient or eliminate it entirely rather than nudge it as she likes. Experimenting with it the last couple of days.

Since you asked, what's soft proofing and color management have to do with CC storage, my original post? Sounds like you have an issue with Scott since you injected color management into the discussion when it was not there. Not to mention the snarky comment he doesn't bother because doesn't have any thing to sell. Like you selling color management training? I find Kelby's training classes to be right up there with a nifty 50 lens as one of the best buys in photography. $150 for a year subscription will do more for most people's photography than any of the latest and greatest widgets that people chase thinking they will transform their work. Yeah, we need more hamburgers running around taking 46 mp detailed crap. As for the implication the he is always hocking something, in the dozen years subscribing with him, I have not bought a single thing from them directly. Now gear I have seen him use but purchased elsewhere, I wouldn't trade my rolling light stands, rolling ladder/hand truck period. I have adapted his approach of keeping laptop and camera on ball head on same tripod to camera on ball head on a rolling stand and lap top on a rolling cart. It gives me a chance to have eye contact with my subject rather then them trying to relate to a black box with a big glass eye. In his defense on the not going to the extent to use soft proofing which your video indicate it still not being dead on, you have to remember his audience isn't only folks who are willing to go to great lengths to improve their photography. They want a quick fix. It is a diverse audience from folks just learning to turn on their cameras to people who have been shooting for 60 years and who strive to eke out the absolute best image or print.

In the Kelby classes and an Epson promotion, Dano is discussing papers and indicates he was involved in the development of exhibition fiber. He sure seemed to be selling paper and only Epson. I found him to be incredibly knowledgeable on more than just printing. He made a great statement on sharpness. Use a tripod. Has me using a rolling light stand in studio.

Will you be teaching next month in Nashville? I am a sceptical guy by nature and when a guy selling paper tells me to make test prints, I always wonder if there is another reason. If he is in favor of soft proofing that negates paper sales, then I definitely will listen. I went through your video and tomorrow will run one print using the method previously, numbers in the LR adjustment and fine tune with test prints, then try your approach. I would love to cut down on the number of test prints.

Dog, thanks for all the above. Just viewed them and Will try it tomorrow. Dan "Dano" Steinhardt is a rep for Epson and has appeared in a couple of Kelby's classes and I have seen him in the videos for Epson papers.

thanks on how to turn off light room sync. What would you do with soft proofing to make it accurate to the print? Would love to save on test prints. Seems he, Dan from Epson and RC don't think much of soft proofing.