eyepasha

<p>Canon vs. Nikon. You are not buying into the camera. You are buying into the system. Both systems are excellent. In practice, over time, the only difference is the photographer.<br>

Since I am a Canon user, I can only recommend Canon lens. For your purpose I recommend you start only with<br>

3: TS-E 24mm f/3.5L ($1100) <br />4: EF 50mm f/1.4 ($300)<br>

If you want a longer range for closeup work, you could look at a used 180mm macro (probably too long, I am not sure what sort of texture or detail rendering you need) or the 135mm.<br>

I don't think you need a general purpose zoom, but I am sure plenty would disagree. If you do, the 24-105 L is not great, but it is good and has a wide range.<br>

Final thoughts, if you are really starting off in photography and are a neophyte, you may not have an easy time with the TS. You are probably better off buying the 50mm and practicing with the chosen system, and buy a very cheap medium or large format camera with movements to be able to understand the impact of changing the planes. I understand you are a 3D expert, but focusing plane onto film/sensor is very different from modeling it in 3D.<br>

But it does sound as if you are well on your way to enjoying a fantastic adventure in design and architecture photography and have a solid budget to get you started. I agree with JC. You may want to take 30%-50% of your initial budget and start right with an intensive workshop or course. Both Canon and Nikon have an excellent network of learning affiliates.<br>

Enjoy!<br>

P.S. Almost forgot! Do *not* forget the solid pro tripod. Essential for this type of work, and the TS is almost unusable without it.</p>

<p>Rob,<br>

If there is not enough light, then there is not enough light. Noise and blur will result from increasing ISO or aperture and decreasing shutter speed. To work in a situation without sufficient light really requires that you get your flash "off camera" and not "off". Lighting indirectly creates more pleasing shadow and tone effects. But the 960IS is truly a point and shoot, and is designed to point and shoot and record the scene, and not necessarily to work in extreme situations of low light. In those situations, you really need to control the environment and the equipment, together, to generate "good" (not harsh) pictures.<br>

You should keep reading the introductory material on lighting, studio lighting, off camera lighting, because that will teach you a lot about light and how it behaves and how to control it and you can do a lot with "natural" light to improve the situation.<br>

You should study light color and the impact of fluorescent and tungsten (normal lamp) light. The digital ixus has some basic white balance controls that allow you to compensate for the color of the light. Converting your pictures to B&W after they are shot can further improve the "color balance".<br>

With all this in mind, you can think about using available light from another room, the hall light, overheads, lamp lights projected directly at the subject (careful, these are fire hazards) to model the shading of light on a person and avoid the on-camera flash.<br>

Basically, you can do quite a bit, but it requires you to know quite a lot about how everything will pull together on the camera sensor. After much practice with the 960 you will also learn when the shot will come together and when it won't and you will get better at recognising the situations where you should just enjoy your time with people and not snap the picture.<br>

I hope this helps guide you to the next reading and learning experiences.</p>

Unless it is in your client spec, I don't think the images are so inconsistent they cannot appear in the same lookbook, but you can use the select color range tool having made a loose lasso or magix wand selection around your model (background selection). The color range will allow you to select the gray and then adjust the midpoint. Alternately, you can fill a very light gray gradient into your lighter pictures.

I am not a lawyer.

 

You only need a model release if you intend to publish your picture with a commercial intent (including advertising your own business).

Alamy is asking you not to sharpen the image, neither on import, nor in the final output. Any post capture sharpening is a software algorithm that remains the prerogative of the consumer of your final images. This is to ensure the optimal visual image quality of the final output which depends entirely on the final size and display technology of the end use. If you over sharpen for your display, it could be unusable for a theatre's poster, for example. Thus, the request to keep sharpening off throughout your workflow. Keep in mind that when selling to Alamy, you are only the upstream 20% of the total workflow.

The thread has digressed to scanner tech, but if it helps, here is my workflow:

 

- digi RAW to LR

- color reversal film reviewed by me on lightbox, selected images scanned and TIFF to LR in a separate folder

- B&W negs window scanned (low tech but quick, laid out on window, photographed with DSLR, "contact sheet" reversed, private selection by me), selected negs scanned and TIFF to LR

- final selections by me, basic toning, dusting

- final selections are consolidated to a new folder, all rejected images deleted (I have read of some who delete nothing). pictures are renamed to resequence and those coming from the "film" folders are appended with an "F"

- upload to website client site, client review

- client approved/selected images to print workflow, additi.onal image editing as necessary or as paid

Alamy's instructions are not very clear. In other words, "it is not you it is me".

 

Above advice is seconded. and Patrick's is double emphasized.

 

BTW, the info below may help you spot check you are working with the right file sizes (no comment on imagme quality requirements from Alamy like sharpness, artifacts, dust, etc.):

 

My jpg files for submission are between 5 and 20 Mb. These are compressed from the 48Mb 8bit TIFF. The only way to verify the "TIFF size" requirement is to look at the bottom left corner of your Photoshop window where it will tell you the "uncompressed" file size. Or you can save it as a flattened TIFF to confirm. This is not necessary, but it may help you to verify that your saved file as TIFF 8Bit is bigger than 48 and your saved jpg (quality 10+) is somewhere between 5 and 20Mb

 

BTW, my accepted Alamy images are minimum 3418x5218 (portrait dimension)

I bought an HP deskjet for inhouse printing, but it takes too much time. I quickly switched to printing through labs and handling my own fulfilment and after taking it through color calibrating workflow. I save to sRGB jpg, print, deliver and people are happy. I have just switched to smugmug for online automated fulfilmment which seems to save me lots of time. No complaints.

 

But, I print my own prints at home and also offer this careful attention to personal detail to best clients and at a slight premium (smug mug pricing at 85% of inhouse). Prepping for print at home is in my opinion a pain. I would rather be cloning out dust spots.

 

On the other hand watching a much labored and multilayered B&W slowly chug out of a high end printer does have almost the magic of a development tray.

Hello, I am looking to outsource fuliflment and have selected SmugMug after having researched and tried dotPhoto,

shutterfly, and smugmug. I need to set my own prices for prints.

 

My problem is that I am based in Europe as are my customers and shipping from smugmug is expensive. Is anyone

aware of a European provider with smugmugs features (digital download, high quality prints and customised pricing

for one) based in Europe or using European printers?

Yes, you could respool it, which considering you are just starting in MF risks more damage to the film than an x-ray.

I travel with film all the time and they all go through the x-ray. No problems. Many threads on photo.net claim the same. Very very few incidents have ever occurred. I assume you are using 100-400 ASA film. If you are shooting 3200 or something exotic, you may want to google it.

I think my 2nd response may need to be a new thread, but it might help us get to the root of the "what should I charge question." I wonder if it is helpful to talk not so much in terms of fees but public value. Is a photographer's profession more or less value-added than a dentist's? A plumber's? An accountant's? A lawyer's? A grocery store clerk? How about a florist? Where do we think we sit on the average wage ladder if we compare the value-add instead of the fees?

Agree with all of the above, especially Ralph's practical formula which is just good business sense. You state "I need to start making a profit". Following Ralph's calculations it is a simple matter to calculate what you will *need* to charge in order to make a living. Don't forget to ammortize your total equipment investment over 3 years to make sure you get that back!

 

I would only consider introductory pricing in order to enter the market and establish a reputation. This is a reputation based business. If you are unable to come to agreement on your *necessary* pricing, then you are either not producing quality images or more likely not marketing effectively.

 

Without calculating hours, I think I spend 5% shooting, 45% editing and in production and 50% marketing.

 

Posting your pictures to a site that is dedicated to constructive critique may help give you feedback on your pictures if you don't get sufficient feedback.

OK, since few may appreciate my mid-July heat daze sense of humour, here is a serious response:

 

Make and build:

Great cameras are generally made by great companies with serious R&D budgets. Adjusted for age and inflation, companies with relatively large investments in engineering and service have produced great cameras. Thus Leica, Graflex, Nikon, Canon and others have invested and therefore profited from quality production.

 

Lenses:

A camera is a light tight box that holds a film plane and a lens. The lens is probably the number 1 component of the camera (assuming it is light tight) that contributes to camera greatness. Putting the science aside, lenses should be able to focus sharply (and defocus nicely, i.e. bokeh) and be able to focus all elements of the light correctly in order to be able to produce color accurately (B&W photographs are made from color light entering the lens). Lens reviews abound, but a great camera is usually one that can take great lenses. So great cameras can interchange great lenses or have been produced with fantastic lenses from the factory. This thread is not about what makes a great lens.

 

Photographer:

Jack Sims is right, great photographers can use any equipment with practice to be able to create great photographs. They understand the art and science of photography and can apply the equipment, with all its limitations, by previsualisation the scene and using the tools at hand to create an interesting photograph.

 

Durability:

Great cameras can be dropped, used in light rain (or torrential rain), in dusty conditions, in heat and cold. They are made to last and endure any rugged terrain the great photographer subjects it to.

 

Useability:

How easy is it to load film (or memory cards), how easy is it to remove the film? Are the controls accessible and can they adapt to human hands after practice? Where are the basic settings for ISO, shutter speed and aperture? The Canon 450D, one of the latest consumer greats from Canon is from an image processing perspective a miracle, but I would not consider it great for professional use due to the need to enter menus or fiddle with too many simultaneous button pushes to change basic settings. Useability is important because great cameras do not require the good photographer to adapt to the camera, rather the camera is easily and quickly adaptable to the photographer and his or her need to quickly (1 second, for example) to change all manually settings in order to change to the availble light conditions. I love my Mamiya. I consider it a great camera, but the double cocking system (film advance and mirror) rules it out compared to Hasselblad's single wind mechanism. In my opinion, Hassie's system does not make it 2000 dollars better than my RB, but I can respectfully recognize that the total ergonomics contribute to Hasselblad greatness, while my Mamiya is "relegated" to professional photographer's "workhorse" status. When I am shopping for a camera I spend almost an hour (to the frustration of most shop keepers) practicing loading and unloading film holders, advancing roll film, changing settings and visualising different lighting conditions. How many mistakes I make and how much fiddling required tells me if the camera is useable.

 

DSLR sensor and imaging hardware:

For newer cameras, all of the above are the same, but sensors and chips are critical. Assuming the camera is over 6 Megapixels, I read about how many bits per pixel (range) and the size of the sensors, and the speed of the image recording, and the buffer size and other technical matters for which I rely on scientific and/or opinionated reviews and sample pictures. Great digital pictures equal or approach film in their ability to quickly record a sharp

 

Age:

I love film and shoot film. But unless special ordered, my commercial work is made with a DSLR. Newer cameras, with their newer technology make better cameras. I have an old bellows camera from the 20s, a 4x5 from the 40s, a 35mm from the 70s, and two DSLRs from this decade. In every respect the newer cameras and lenses make technically better pictures than the older ones, all other things being equal. True, sometimes camera makers mess up, introducing newer features that are poorly engineered or with quality problems (Hasselbads 205, for example; most would argue is a step down from the 203). You have your nostalgics out there, but it is just like cars. A new GM car made today is leaps and bounds ahead of a top of the line Mercedes Benz from the 50s if you sum up all of the features, safety records and total system cost.

 

Service, Parts and the like:

My old 20s camera cannot be repaired, which explains its makeshift tapes and odd sized screws. It makes a satisfying picture - to the eyes of those who love it, but lets face it, it is a crap camera. Great cameras were produced in large quantities, have a rich parts supply chain and have companies or after market dealers that can service them, fix them and provide good advice on their usage. We might complain about Canon service (I don't their CLA service is top notch), but try getting a Bolsey fixed.

 

Hopefully this serves as a quick survey of what makes a great camera and I would be interested to read follow up posts correcting or adding to the minutae that make a great camera.

 

(or for the lazy, just look for the red dot ;-)

flip over the camera. right next to the tripod mount youmay notice a little red dot.

 

...

 

if there is a red dot, it is a great camera.

If you are interested in a Hasselblad, you will want to checkout photoethnography's comprehensive detailing of all of the Mamiya RB/RZ series and the Hasselblad 500 series. http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Hasselblad500.html~mainFrame

If you are in the U.S. I also strongly recommend you investigate Mamiya's RB due to price and quality. If you are set on a Hassie and are in USA, you may want to ask someone in Europe to procure one for you. The price is 30% of the US market price.

 

If you are buying into the system today and Mamiya is not your cup of tea, then you may want to also strongly consider a 203FE Hasselblad which will last you and your descendents well into the next century.

 

Enviously yours,

Pasha (Mamiya owner)

That was annoying and it took me a while to find the solution. HP was useless and the answer came from this forum.

Turn off print spooling and make sure that the setting to start printing immediately is off. Print from PS with PS managed color and all printer color handling turned off in the driver. About 30 prints with the exact band you describe, followed by 2 years printing with not a single band.

color temperature and heat are big problems.

visualisation and cost are advantages.

 

In today's ecosensitive world I would also point out the environmental implications, but I would be hypocritical given the watts consumptions of my studio.

A color photo without desaturation<div></div>

isn't it the case that it is more likely the film plane is not in the right place when the ground glass is in focus rather than vice-versa.

 

Is your lock and back adjusted correctly?

BTW, that is 3 votes for the 85 which I wish do not own. You will find most review sites will tell you this is one of the best L lenses. I have only had the brief pleasure of a borrow and it is indeed a nice lens to work with (if a bit too showy).

On a 30d with a crop sensor 85mmL or the 135mmL will give you the most flattering shots. I believe the 50 is nice for general portraiture, but I would not use it for "fashion". The 200 on a 30D will be difficult and not so flexible to use in a studio, but if you do find one for a decent price, buy it and rehawk it for profit, I've had an ebay search going for a year to no avail.

Thanks for the clarification. It confirmed my fears. My search for an alternate solution started with construction work that has made my studio a work site. Carl, I guess I will try and rent a mac to try it out, but I cannot really campout in a store trying out my whole workflow (at least not in Sweden). Anyway, thanks both for returning to the thread to clarify.

 

Brgds,

Patrick, I don't understand your response. Do you have a recommendation for a brand and model you can confirm has a workable screen?

 

:) I don't need help trashing my current machine, I need help finding a new one :)

Thanks for answering. Yes, I realise I will never have an equivalent experience. But I want to be able to use the laptop in the field. With the Inspiron 9300, any display or edting of the photograph is impossible. I would like, for example, to be out of the studio to meet a client and show them toned proofs for selection, or to shoot tethered or transfer a shoot quickly to the digital workflow, apply some quick presets and show the client what we are working on, to relax them or guide them midway through a shoot.

 

The Inspiron 9300 (even "calibrated" with the eyeone) looks like mud.

 

Therefore I am looking for practical recommendations for a laptop that can be used professionally without shame. I am an Apple fan, but switched to Windows before making a big investment in the software, so my aversion to Apple is not one of these weird Apple vs Wintel evangelisms. But someone must be making professional LCD dispalys for wintel, right?

I work on an Eizo color edge monitor and a Dell Inspiron 9300 and I color calibrate

with the eyeOne.

 

I have tried calibrating the laptop and for me the results are not usable. So I have

almost gotten used to the habit of working tethered in my office. However, I very

much would like to use a laptop in the field for post-processing. My reference is

the Eizo ColorEdge monitor, calibrated.

 

Are there laptops approaching the dynamic range and calibration capabilties of the

Eizo? It seems recently that laptop screens have improved.

 

I have a significant software investment in Windows machines and do not want to

make the cut to Apple. Any advice is appreciated.