bob_estremera

I hope what I need can be done with a Fuji X-T20. I will be shooting headshots and portraits in manual mode with monolights/speedlights. My setting are usually around 180/125th second at f4. The problem is that at those settings, in a normally lit room, the LCD/EVF are too dark to see what my subjects are doing. I tried the Preview Exposure in Screen settings but all that appears in the VF is a fleeting brighter image that only lasts for a fraction of a second. If I go to f2.8, I can see fine but I would rather shoot with a little more depth of focus. Is there a way to preview the seen as if I was shooting in Aperture mode or some Auto setting so I can see that what's going on? Thanks,

Thanks Mike. Not too abstract at all. I already Googled best laptops under $500 but wanted to get more input lest I choose one that happens to have a terrible screen and color to keep the price down. Tablets won't be a good option because the device will have to have a fair amount of storage. And yes, a viable option that could display the images from my SD card to, say an iPad or similar device would be a viable option. Failing that option, I will copy the images to a separate drive but the 'laptop' will still need enough storage for multiple sessions of 100 or so RAW and jpg files each. I will check more into tetheringtools.com. Thanks again

I posted this in 'Portraits'. Had 86 views but no replies so I'm trying it here. Hopefully I can get some guidance. I'm exploring my options for portrait sessions using tethered shooting. Never did it before. Camera is Fuji. Tethering software, unless there is a much better option, will be X Acquire so I can capture both RAW and jpgs. I might even consider installing Capture One because I know tethering is supported for both my Fuji XT-20 and backup XM-1. X Acquire does not support the XM-1. Capture One seems like an extravagance considering I would be paying $250 just to tether. My normal workflow is Lightroom/Photoshop. I would want to keep the cost of the laptop to $500 or less. I am hoping I can utilize a minimal spec'd laptop since all I want to do is use the laptop to display images as they are shot for the benefit of myself and the client to view. I think the screen colors and resolution are more important since actual photo processing will be done on another computer. This one will be just for capture and display. So there are two criteria: screen quality and the ability to capture and display the images reasonably quickly. What level of processor / laptop can I get away with? Am I thinking correctly? Any help is appreciated. Thanks

I'm exploring my options for portrait sessions using tethered shooting. Never did it before. Camera is Fuji. Tethering software, unless there is a much better option without changing from Lightroom/Photoshop, will be X Acquire. I am hoping I can utilize a minimal spec'd laptop since all I want to do is use the laptop to display images as they are shot for the benefit of myself and the client to view. Since processing is not really going to be a factor, just image display, via Lightroom, what level of processor / laptop can I get away with? Am I thinking correctly? Also, can you direct tethering software to save the images to the SD card and also a destination folder on the desktop or only the desktop? Thanks

Thanks for all the input. Wayne, I know the flash duration tends to freeze the subject. But with a limited sync speed of only 180th of a second, there could still be subject or hand movement that will be apparent in the image if I use a one handed grip on the camera. JDWvW, thanks for the link. That's a great option if it works on Fuji lenses. Sandy, funny how we miss the things right under our noses. It had not occurred to me to use the on-camera fill flash. That's the first thing I'm going to test. But I think what I'm going to use a Rogue Flashbender on the speedlight. They have a nice size that should work well for macro for only $21. Between how the Flashbender works and the tilt angles of my speedlight, I think it will be a good solution. Thanks again.

Thanks, I don’t think I’ll be able to hold the camera with one hand without risking shake so I’ll want the flash on the cam. And even though the lens might be longish, the speed light is relatively tall and shoots straight ahead. Setting it on wide angle should help. Maybe a Stofen type modifier would help too.

I have a project in mind to go to the local botanical gardens here in New York to do some semi-macro shooting with my X-T20 and 60mm 2.4. I know I'm going to need additional lighting so I can keep the ISO low and shutter speed as high as it will go. I have manual speedlights but I'm pretty sure, at least I think I'm sure, that I'll have to find a way to direct the flash from going straight forward to slightly down angle so I can put direct light on the subject. What DIY or modest modifiers have macro shooters found effective for this? Thanks

I've been using Lightroom CC for the past several years for all my color to b&w conversions. But I want to start using Photoshop a lot because of the more extensive processing options in a new imaging endeavor, black and white landscapes and nature. I'm familiar with PS and use it for very limited applications. I would like to find a good single source, perhaps a book, that teaches the use of layers, masks, smart objects, etc. I know I can find thousands of individual tutorials but I'd like to have a single source to get me up to speed from beginning to intermediate skill levels in a logical sequence. Suggestions? Thanks, Bob

Here's my question. I just ran some tests prints (12X18" portions of a 24X36" and 30X45" image files). I was pretty surprised to see the even at the larger size, there was no pixelization to be seen. I was impressed. My question is, for those of you that regularly print from both sensor, crop and FF, at base ISO, will the print details of either sensor size be equivalent, ie. indiscernible from one another? I am thinking of exploring landscape photography. I shoot with a 24 mp Fuji XT20 now. Would an equivalent 24mp FF camera, Sony, Canon or Nikon yield obviously more detail or would I need to move up the ladder to the 46-50mp sensor to make the noticeable jump in print quality. Remember, I'm thinking about base ISO only shot from a tripod. Thanks,

I am looking for a way to darken blue skies without introducing artifacts around clouds and other details that extend into the sky. I would love to find a way that yields the kind of results that the old red filters did on black and white film. Working by dropping the blue values in any software darkens the skies but leaves a lot of junk in the process. Thanks, Bob

Hey guys, This has been unusually informative. I completely agree and have experience to back up that if I was going to use a high-end printer for the larger prints, I know to just hand over a high-res TIF of whatever my camera yields and let them handle it. Back in 2012, I produced a variety of black and white images of New York City architectural details that were used extensively in a marketing campaign for a real estate company. The cameras I used were a 12mp XSi and an 18mp 60D. I nearly fell over to see how great the prints looked when printed with dimensions measuring in FEET, not inches. When I spoke to the printer, my first question was what method did he use to uprez the images. He said he did not uprez. Just printed at the size the client wanted. I will assume that he had the front end RIP software that managed the quality of the output. But in this case, I'm just using the online Adorama print department to get an idea of how the details of larger prints will look. I also did crunch the numbers and see, as Rodeo Joe said, that natively, the Fuji would yield around 133 dpi at 30X45 which should be 'doable'. Rodeo even inspired me to change my username to Cowboy Bob. Thanks all, You guys have been great. Cowboy Bob

Just got home and checked what steps I took and the results of each step. First, I took my native RAW file and resized it using the image size window options. I resized one to 24X36, maintaining 300 ppi and the 'Resample' box was CHECKED. I did the same for the 30X45 size. Then, I did in fact use the Marquee tool with rulers to make a crop of 12X18 inches on each of the larger image files. I didn't see that I could select the Marquee size, I just set the top left corner and moved the opposite corner until the Width and Height measurements were 12X18. Then I positioned the Marquee over the area I wanted to analyze on each print. I had to use the arrow keys to position it because I don't know yet how to just grab the selection and move it around. Then I selected 'Crop Image'. The resulting cropped sections, from each larger print, measured 12X18 at 300 ppi. I didn't select or specify the 300 ppi, it just came out that way. So, after all is said and done, does it sound like when I print the 12X18 sections from each of the 24X36 and 30X45 images, that I will have the same degree of detail as if I printed the whole 24X36 and 30X45 print looking at the same area? Whew. Sorry to put you all through this.

Thanks Scott, What I do is go into the 'file size' menu of the the native file and change the length and width to the desired size, set the dpi to 300 and accept the Photoshop suggestion of using bicubic smoother. I'm not at my computer now but I don't think I hit any other checkboxes. I do know that when I look at the resultant larger file, it seems very clean and detailed at 100%. I have not seen pixelization at 30X45. I will have to check what I do, or don't do, with the 'Resize' checkbox. Thanks, Bob

Great. Then I'm all set. Thanks all for the help. Bob

Dog, I went into PS and cropped the most detailed portion of each image, the 24X26 and 30X45 to 12X18. So I ended up with a nice cropped portion that measured 12X18. But in each instance, the resolution of the final 12X18 remained at 300dpi. How do I take that final step to make sure, as I assume is going to be the case, that the dpi resolution will fall in relation to the cropped percentage of the original size? Or are my final 12X18 image files correct as they are? Thanks, Bob

Thanks Dog, I'll do that. Thanks for the help.

I want to see how well my Fuji XT20 will print at 24X36 and 30X45 but the print cost is more than I want to spend. I know there is a way to create these two image sizes but print just a portion of each of them on a 12X18" print. I just want to see how the resolution/details hold up and to ensure that I see no pixelization. 12X18" will demonstrate that. I created each of the two larger sized images in Photoshop but when I set up a print order at Adorama, since the aspect ratio is the same for all sizes, they just showed that everything was great to print at 12X18. How would I set this up using an online order process? Also, in general terms, when I output for print, I usually just use the image size box in PS to enlarge the image to the final print size and adjust the dpi to 300. Is that what most people do? Thanks, Bob

Thanks again Jochen, I think I’ll stick with my 60 and be satisfied with that level of ‘macro’. Since my objective is a simple walk around solution and the Fuji does indeed have very nice high ISO performance, I think that’s a better option than pulling my hair out. You’ve been helpful. Bob

Thanks for the information and insight Jochen. The 60mm Fuji is indeed a very sharp lens and great for portraiture. I've used it to great advantage for street portraits as well. Yes, it can be sluggish to focus but it is still effective. We're so used to such monster focus speeds now that something that is merely 'quick' is considered too slow. Your thoughts on camera movement are helpful. Macro is a lot like super telephoto where even tiny movements are amplified into out of focus images. Thanks again. Bob

I shoot Fuji and have the very nice 60mm macro. Not really macro, I know which leads me to my question. I want to start doing macro. I have a few manual focus Rokkor lenses that I enjoy using which opens up some options. Can I get the Fuji to 1:1 by stacking the MCEX11 and 16? If so, that is a nearly $200 option. Or, I can find a 50mm 3.5 Rokkor macro with 1:1 adapter for around $100. What do some of you macro people suggest? From what I've read, I can see that even with the Fuji MCEX option, I might be forced into manual focus because of the focus hunting the MCEX option seems to cause. Thanks, Bob

Very good. That was going to be my next step. This was informative. Thanks

Need so tips here. I have a Fuji X-T20 and experimenting with a Rokkor 55mm 1.7. When I manually focus on general objects, the focus peaking yields good results. But I just tried my first portrait 'test' session and I'm finding that I got close but missed critical focus on the eyes several times. My subject wore glasses. I was using focus peaking, in red. I waited until the actual eyes were being highlighted so focus should have been good, but wasn't always. What techniques are some of you using for manually focusing for portraits? Thanks,

Thanks Rick, I think I will ! Bob

I shoot with a Fuji X-T10, soon to be an X-T20. I already have the 60mm Fuji which is great for portraits, very sharp but occasionally 'hunty'. I am interested in experimenting to find an older manual focus lens, also for portraits. My aim is to find something that renders in a slightly more interesting way than a modern 'tack sharp' lens. I've settled on Rokkor lenses and the 58mm 1.2 in particular. But before I spring for that, I want to experiment with a true, classic manual focus lens to make sure that I will be satisfied with the experience and results. For not much money, the 50mm Rokkors, 1.4, 1.7 or f2 seem like inexpensive options to test the waters. If I'm not happy with the 'manual focus only' experience, I'm not out much money. I'm pretty sure that the sharpness of any of these is going to be more than adequate for portraits. But I'd like to get some feedback on which of the 50's yield the smoothest bokeh and overall most pleasing (yes, please interject your own definition for 'pleasing') results. Thanks for your opinions.

Thanks for the explanation Bill. I can also see that this is a nearly 'machine shop' little job not really suitable for this New York City apartment dweller without a suitable workspace or tools. I will pursue the other options. Thanks again though.