jmarshall

Thanks for all the suggestions, guys. I feel kind of silly asking a question like this, but this is one I really want to get right.

 

I didn't know what Rock Center's rules were on tripods, so thanks for the heads up on those. There actually a really good Chinese restaurant we'll probably go to that's nearby, so I can get some shots before it's totally dark, and then more later when the lights will be more visible.

 

I wouldn't have thought to use burst mode, but that's genius and I'll definitely try that technique out. Lightroom has made dealing with lots of multiple shots a lot easier. Since we're only going to be printing on a greeting card size, I can probably get away with a bit more in terms of ISO and even sharpness than if I were making poster-sized prints.

 

The shortest prime I have is a 50mm, so I asked in part because if there was a feeling that a wide prime stopped down would give me a lot of benefit over the 17-40 or 24-105 at the same stop, I might consider getting one as an early Christmas present. Any excuse to buy a new lens is always welcome, and my husband will think that $300 is a bargain compared to the $1,000 for the 70-200 f/4 IS I've been jonesing for. But it sounds like one of the lenses I've got will work well; I'm hoping I don't have to go much below f/5.6 or 8 to get the right DOF, but at that point, there probably wouldn't be a lot of difference. And given the crowds (which might make zooming by foot a challenge), a zoom is probably the better option.

 

Again, thanks for all of the suggestions!

OK, so in a bit of exciting news in my town today: the 2008 Rockefeller Center Christmas Tree is a local!

 

I'm planning to go into the city to get a shot of the tree to use for our Christmas cards. I've taken plenty of pictures of

the tree in the past, but usually with a point & shoot while visiting the city with kids when I don't want to deal with an

SLR. But this calls for bringing out the big guns.

 

I've got a 5D and a 40D. I have the 17-40 lens. I'm thinking about trying to photograph around dusk, so I can catch

the lights on the tree better, but while there's still some ambient light. The best shots are generally taken from the

opposite side of the skating rink, maybe from about 50 yards or so away.

 

I think the 17-40 will give me the right options in terms of focal length and I'm assuming I'll want to stop down a bit,

so I don't think that the f/4 will be a huge issue. BUT ... if I were to shoot at f/4 or 5.6, would I be better off with

something like a 28 or 35mm f1.8 or 2 prime, or will the 17-40 be OK? Also, do you think the 5D (for full frame) or

the 40D (which might allow me to push the ISO a bit more) would be better? The crowds around the tree are usually

pretty tight, so switching lenses/cameras might be a bit tricky; I'd like to be there with the best available gear ready-

to-go. And chances are that I'll only be able to get into the city once in time to take a photo for cards.

 

I apologize in advance for the question, but having the RC tree come from your home town is a once-in-a-lifetime kind

of event, and I really want to make sure I've thought through all of the options to pick the best one.

 

Thanks!

Your US auto insurance is not valid in Mexico. You'll need to have a policy issued by a Mexican insurance

company; liability at a minimum and, if your car is leased or financed, physical damage coverage that at least covers

your lienholder. They're relatively easy to get -- Google "mexico auto insurance" and you'll get a bunch of places to

check for coverage. Have fun!

My brother, who's never used an SLR, just went through the same decision about a camera to photograph his

daughter's outdoor soccer games; he bought the camera last Monday.

 

He ended up with the Canon 50D and a 55-250mm IS digital only lens. He's thrilled to pieces with it. I know it cost

more than your friend wants to spend, but the point is that -- to someone who's used to a point and shoot -- just

about any pictures they take with a consumer or midrange prosumer DSLR and a consumer grade VR/IS type lens

are going to seem amazing. FWIW, my brother was initially looking at the Nikon D90 and the 50D. He ended up

picking the Canon because it had more fps, which he finds to be a big deal ("I can just push the button and it will

take three or four shots and one of them is usually really good.").

 

When your friend starts looking to isolate her kids, take the super-sharp close-ups of grimacing faces, etc. ... that

will always be time to get a new lens. For now, it's more likely that she'd find the big 2.8 zooms to be too heavy; I

certainly wouldn't want to lug one around for 2 days at a soccer tournament.

Maurycy -- I live about 15 minutes from Princeton.

 

This Saturday is the annual football game with Harvard. Might make for some interesting people photography in town.

 

If you're looking for nature photos, Carnegie Lake and the Delaware-Raritan Canal towpath might be interesting

subjects. The leaves in the area don't seem that great to me, but maybe there will be more color by the weekend.

 

There's a lot of interesting architecture on-campus, but the area along Library Place has some attractive older homes

and mansions. Also, if you're into that kind of thing, the Princeton Cemetery on Witherspoon Street dates back to

the mid-1700s and might have some interesting photo ops. Aaron Burr is buried there, for example.

 

If you have a car and can venture a bit further afield, the Delaware River isn't far. Grounds for Sculpture in Hamilton

Township is also nearby. It's mostly outdoors, with a lot of interesting modern sculpture. Commercial photography

is prohibited there, but no one's ever given me any problems with using my DSLR there.

 

FYI, if you have a choice, the weather is expected to be nicer on Sunday than Saturday.

 

If you have any specific questions about the area or if there are specific subjects you're looking for, please let me

know.

Canon's fall "instant rebates" in the US apparently start today. I've been in the market for a 70-200 f/4 IS lens, and found out about the

rebate on KEH to check their used prices.<p>Here's a <a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?

act=PromotionsAct#Lenses">link</a> to the Canon rebate info. Runs through January.<p>Incidentally, I was disappointed to see that the

price of the lens on Amazon with the rebate is only $30 less than the price it was listed for a couple of days ago without it. I usually like to

buy from Amazon to take advantage of my Amazon Prime membership, but the lens is $50 cheaper new at KEH.

I was in Antarctica this past February.

 

It's really not as cold as you might think. Most days, it was hovering right around the freezing mark, so I never really had any issues with battery life. I typically carried one battery in an inside pocket in addition to the one that was in the camera, and never ran into a problem. Of course, we had really excellent weather; if it's ovecast and the wind blows, you might have a different experience. There are a couple of pictures in my portfolio from the trip, but they're really big and suffer from the compression. I'll try to post some more over the weekend.

 

Where in Antarctica are you going? Will you be on a big cruise ship, and mostly have "sail bys" or a smaller ship where you'll have the chance to actually do some landings? We were on a small ship (about 80 passengers), so we made 8 or 9 landings over the course of the 5 days that we were along the peninsula.

 

I took two bodies, but mostly ended up just bringing the 40D, and saved the 5D for shots from the ship. My most used lens on shore landings was the Canon 24-105; from the ship, I rented a 100-400, which was great for whales and birds. I occassionally used the 17-40 (on the 5D), but it the least used lens for me.

 

In terms of exposures, standard advice for shooting in snow (i.e., over-expose to keep the whites white) applies. The penguins are unbelievably tame. I found that if I just sat down on a rock, within a few minutes, they'd be coming over to investigate me. This is OK -- you can't approach the wildlife, but if it comes up to you ... no problem. Keep a safe distance from seals, though. They can be mean.

 

After the first few landings, I tempted fate by not carrying my waterproof backpack with me. Again, YMMV as we had relatively calm seas ... so calm that we were actually able to cruise far enough south to actually pass the Antarctic Circle, even though we weren't supposed to on my trip.

 

One of the expedition members has a website with his photos. I'll post it later tonight. You might also want to take a look at some of the advice I got when I asked a similar question last year.

 

Have a wonderful trip!

Trying the attachment again.<div></div>

Punit -- FYI, this was taken in October of 2006 from the steps of the Art Museum.

Andrew, I'm glad you were able to make a decision about what to do, and also that you've taken this as a positive

learning experience.<p>One other thing occurred to me last night that might help you. There's an organization called

SCORE that works in conjunction with the US Small Business Administration to help new small business owners by

providing mentoring services, seminars, etc. Most (if not all) of the services are free. It's a volunteer group staffed

mostly by retired business executives. If you connect with someone in your area, he or she might be able to provide

some sources for insurance or other services.<p>Here's a <a href="http://www.score.org">link</a> to SCORE's

website.<p>Hope this helps.

You could try sending an e-mail to Josh Root re: name/phone number.

 

One thing I'd say from my experience (as a non-lawyer) dealing with contracts is that before you start making

changes to the contract, it helps to have everyone on the same page conceptually. I'd start by responding to the first

e-mail, picking up on her comment that what you intend is to give them rights to reproduce the images, not

ownership of the copyright (which you will retain). Then look at the other issues, decide what you want to do, and let

her know if you are OK with making a change or not. My experience was that if you could explain why you wouldn't

agree to something, it sometimes helped get through the negotiation. Remember: the contract should reflect your

agreement, rather than the document driving the business terms.

 

Once everyone has agreed what the contract SHOULD say, you could either draft an amendment, referencing the

specific sections that are being changed and how they are changed, or you could simply retype the entire contract,

incorporating all of the changes. It was easier for me to use amendments, so that I could see what changes had

been made for specific licensees, but it may be simpler for you to just have one completed contract without any

amendments.

 

Andrew -- I know you don't have lots of money and that the chances that there will be a problem with this client are

slim. But really, unless you are personally comfortable with and understand the implications of making changes to

your contract, you should be talking to a lawyer about this. If you can't talk to a lawyer for whatever reason, you

might want to think about whether this particular client is worth taking a chance with.

 

And yes -- the thread is on the home page.

Seems to me that the first request is already covered by the Section 22 you posted in an earlier e-mail, with the removal of the word "similar" describing the fee. Sometimes, pointing that out will be suffiicient. They might want clarification that Section 22 will supercede section 2 in the event you can't make it.

 

There is ABSOLUTELY a difference between giving them the copyright (which means they own the images and decide who can do what with them) and giving them the right to make copies (in which case YOU own the rights to the images, and have granted them permission to make copies). If they own the copyright, they own the images and you must get their permission to use them. If what you mean is that they're allowed to make copies, you should IMMEDIATELY change the package description to indicate that you will grant "reproduction rights" or something like that.

 

As for the "hold harmless" -- you've got to decide what you want to do. You absolutely SHOULD have insurance to cover your equipment, but perhaps if you explain the reason for having this language in the contract (I'm assuming that you or someone you know had a bad experience with an out-of-control guest who caused a lot of damage), that might help come up with some compromise language.

 

Certainly, you should be clear on the videographer/photographer issue.

 

Again, I'm not a lawyer ... although I did spend 10 years negotiating intellectual property license agreements and reviewing M&A contracts. It's not uncommon for contracts to be drafted to favor the company that drafted them, but you should understand what items you are and are not willing to compromise on to close a sale.

 

PS -- you might want to ask one of the editors to edit your post to block out your client's name ... and cell phone number.

From an insurance perspective, I think it's entirely reasonable to expect the host of a party to bear some

responsibility for the misconduct of his guests. Even a policy covering Andrew for damage to his equipment (not a

CGL policy, which would apply if Andrew caused damage to a third party's property and not cover damage a

third party causes to Andrew's equipment) may have a deductible and filing a claim (particularly a large one) might

bring

your policy up for underwriting review at renewal, possibly resulting in higher rates or a cancellation. There are costs

Andrew would bear (even if he had insurance, which he doesn't). Whether it makes sense to try to hold the host

liable, whether the language in his contract is sufficient/appropriate, I'll leave to the lawyers. But I can understand

wanting someone else to bear those costs.

 

Andrew -- you need at least TWO different insurance policies. A general liability policy, which provides coverage in

the event that you cause injury to another person or damage to another person's property in the course of your

business. A guest carrying a drink in one hand and a lit cigarette in the other trips over a light cord, breaking her leg

and starting a fire. You've got her injury, the injuries anyone else sustains and the damage to the location ... all of

which you could be held legally liable for. Many catering halls won't allow you to work unless you can provide proof

of this coverage. Call your insurance agent to inquire about it. If you're a paid subscriber to pnet, you can buy

insurance through a policy it has for its subscribers. PPA also has a program.

 

Second, you need a policy that protects you against damage to your equipment. Your homeowners policy MAY

provide this coverage, but again, you should check with your agent. My HO policy does not cover photographic

equipment used to generate income. Even policies that do provide coverage often have a relatively low limit (maybe

$1,000) for photo equipment, and your deductible will apply. So a commercial policy may make more sense.

 

Good luck!

Difficulty with autofocus is an issue. To me, the storage of the video in a compressed format on SD cards is also a concern. I'd just rather have the uncompressed video on a mini-DV tape. However, I'm also the person who went on a once-in-a-lifetime trip ... and left the charger for the camcorder battery at home. So, I can also see that the compressed video would be better than nothing.

 

As long as what's needed to take stills isn't compromised in any way to make the video functions available, I don't have a problem with it. I might not plan to use the video capability ... but you never know.

Grounds for Sculpture is gorgeous, but it's about an hour from Linden, if there's not much traffic. Also, you won't get the urban look, there.<p>Here's a link to an article about green space in JC; I think I used to drive past Hamilton Park on my way to work; it's small, but there are certainly trees. Hope it helps.<a href="http://www.hudsonreporter.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14587546&BRD=1291&PAG=461&dept_id=523595&rfi=6">link</a>

What about the cameras in cell phones? Seems to me that 99% of the "non-press" footage I see on news reports is shot with a camera in a cell phone ...

1. If you want a lot of responses to a post on a photography website, include the phrase "digital versus film" in the

title

 

2. Every image shot before the advent of accessible digital photography was good, because without Photoshop to

process the image, what you're seeing is exactly what was shot, totally in-focus and with perfect exposure.

 

3. Every image shot since the advent of accessible digital photography is good, because Photoshop can make out-

of-focus images sharp, restore highlights that have gone completely white, add details in shadows that have gone

completely black, improve any composition and pretty much do anything short of bringing the dead back to life, no

matter how little attention is paid to any of those details during the actual taking of the picture.

 

4. Anyone who believes #3 has probably never shot film and/or was never subjected to a slideshow of all 437

slides "snapped" during Uncle Bob and Aunt Mary's latest trip to Nowheresville. Anyone who believes #4 has

probably never used Photoshop, either because they think that any image that began life as a digital file is

just "graphic art" not "photography" or because they've never actually tried to use Photoshop to correct an ill-

composed, out-of-focus, badly over and/or under exposed image.

 

5. There's no crying in photography ... unless you've had a flying box-cutter damage the screen of your 5D as you're

removing it from the packaging for the first time, had the camera with irreplaceable images fall into salt water ... oh,

wait a minute: there IS crying in photography.

 

6. No matter how long you've been taking pictures, there's always something new to learn ... and this is a great

place to learn it.

Speaking of Bigfoot ...<p><a href="http://www.searchingforbigfoot.com/">Link</a><p>Looks like Friday's the day the world learns the "truth" ...

No one's mentioned the Canon 70-300, which is a newer version of the 75-300. Faster AF and newer IS might make it a more reasonably priced option for you now (it sells for about $550 on Amazon). If you could rent one to try before making a decision, that would give you a sense of the improvement over the 75-300. You might have some money to save toward that 70-200 and still get better photos now.

 

The other thing to consider is how often you use the 200-300 focal lengths. Sure, you can always crop in post, but I like to use as many pixels as I can on the part of a scene I really want to capture.

In case anyone else stumbles across this page: there's a 2007 edition of PhotoSecrets San Diego:<p>

Updated Amazon Link <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1930495110/photosecretspubl">here</a>

Has anyone actually found an in-stock 55-250 in the US recently? I've been looking for one for the past few days as a gift for my mom, but I can't seem to find one, even on eBay.

 

Isabel, FWIW, I often find myself shooting my nieces' soccer games with a 50mm/1.4. I like the wider shots of the field, and when I want a closer view, I crop in photoshop. Time is probably an issue for you, so having to crop individual photos might not be very appealing. But it might be a good temporary fix if money is tight until you can swing one of the zooms.

B&H is closed for Passover; won't reopen until next Monday (4/28). Your best bet is probably to call UPS to see what's going on.

The Cloisters is gorgeous, but I'd only recommend it as a "must do" if you're into medieval religious art ... because that's basically all that's there. The views of the Palisades are nice, but in August, the only color will be green and in the afternoon, you'll be shooting into the sun. It would likely take about an hour each way to do the traveling; I just don't think you'd have enough time in 5 hours to do the Met and the Cloisters justice.

 

The best view of the Statue of Liberty is actually from Liberty State Park in New Jersey. But since you're going to be in Manhattan, go down to Battery Park -- you can see it from there and take a boat trip. The views are the best from the water, anyway. I'm a native NYC'er, but never actually got to the Statue of Liberty until I was in my late 30s. Unless you're really into the history of either the immigrant experience or the sculpting/construction of the statue, you can probably skip the actual islands themselves.

 

Even five hours at the Met is only enough to get either a quick run-through or to focus on a few highlights. My husband and I go a few times a year, usually just to see a couple of displays in the collection, although we always stop at the Temple of Dendur. Architecturally, the Guggenheim might be worth a stop. If you're into Impressionist art, the Frick Museum on 5th is beautiful and relatively small. It's in an old mansion and much more intimate than the Met. The Museum of Modern Art is great if you're into 20th century art, and the restaurant is very good.

 

From Brooklym, you can get a view from the Promenade of lower Manhattan. If you want to see the city illuminated by the setting sun, Jersey's the ticket. Take the PATH train from 33rd St (6th Ave) and go to the Pavonia/Newport stop or Hoboken OR you can go from the World Trade Center stop to either Hoboken or Exchange Place in Jersey City.

 

Have fun!

Brittany --

 

What size are the images that come out of your camera?

 

If the images that come out of your camera are in 2x3 dimensions (to make 4x6 prints), there's no way for the images to be printed in 8x10 size without the image being cropped. You could print an 8x12 without cropping; but not 8x10. The relative dimensions of the original would have to be 4x5 to make an uncropped 8x10, and I'm not aware of any DSLRs or point and shoots that are in 4x5 format.

 

It's been a while since I used Shutterfly or Snapfish, so I can't remember if they allow you to select the crop. When you upload the photos and select 8x10 pictures, you may see a red outline over the image, which shows you how the image will be cropped. If you do, you may be able to move the rectangle around the image, so that you can tell them where to crop. That may help avoid some of the problems you've run into.

 

The problem with relying just on the cropping is that sometimes you have to crop out elements you want to keep ... feet in a full-length shot, for example. A good way to prevent this is to make sure that you leave some "cropping room" around the edges when you take the photo to begin with. It takes a little time to get used to shooting wider than you want, but eventually you'll get a feel it.

 

Good luck.

I'd second Lensrentals.com

 

I've rented from them several times; always got the equipment on time, it's in good shape and communication with the staff is always very friendly.