josh_baker

When the lighting is not too dark, and the chuch is not too small I use a 24-70 (sigma) and 70-200 f2.8. In low light I use the 50 f1.8, and If I need it I rent a 10-20 for tight spaces. (I use a crop sensor camera.)

Go to Grande Pre. It's an old Acadian settlement where they were deported from by the british. There is a beautiful little chrch, gardens and buildings. That time of year it shouldn't be busy.

Point Pleasant Park in the city is a must, and go see Shakespeare by the sea (check about camera restrictions but I don't think it's a problem). There are amazing gardens in the middle of the city called the public gardens. Right next to that is the citidal hill, an old fortress in the hill overlooking the harbour.

 

On a non photographic note:

Go to Le Cave for cheesecake or a meal (it's inside an old monestary with an office building built overtop of it).

On a Monday go to "economy shoe shop" for free jazz.

I used to live there for a few years and always want to go back now. I hope your trip is good.

Responding to Brooks and Charles, I have to use elements due to budget constraints. If I was doing a series of courses photoshop suite would be the way to go, but this is a one of course, so there is no time to develope the skills that make CS better than elements.

I am actually going to be including a class on GIMP and GIMPshop so my students can get a nearly identical program an home for free. ( I use GIMP more often than photoshop at home because anything I can to without a plugin in CS I can do in GIMP, but GIMP runs faster.)

 

Thanks to everyone for the responces, I am going to include some file management in my course that I didn't think of before, and I think I'll keep with my focus on fixes and layers. (I'm starting with work on capture and composition.)

I am a high school teacher for my day job, and this year my other life as a photographer has been found out so I have

been asked to teach a beginner digital photography course. (I think that it's funny that I announced I'm a teacher then

proceded with a run on sentence with two passive verbs in it lol.) Anyways... I am putting together an outline for the

course, and I have the basics of the camera functions, settings, etc. Then I get into photoshop, but they just need

the basics. The question I have is what are the essential skills you need? I have a list in mind myself, but I wanted a

little input from others who know, and may have a perspective on it. I'm not going to put my list, because I don't want

to have others read it, and think I mean the same thing they do, but I am missing out what they think is the most

important part.

So that's it:

If you were teaching a newbe the essential skills of photoshop what would you focus on specifically?

 

Thanks for any input.

The photo's are not lost if the original has low contrast. In processing (RAW) set the black and white points around the histogram exposure. If you still want more, then bump up the contrast slider. This should help the pics pop.

I'm not an old guard when it comes to this but what I do is go through the shots and pick the best from each situatation out. This leaves me with about 200 or so. From this I take the ones that "tell the story" of the wedding (some I include because I know the couple wants them in). This usually gets rid of another 40-50. The rest I individually correct for exposure, WB, black/white poine, and sometimes composition. Once this is done I batch convert them all and then I resize once I know the prints that are wanted, and what is going into the album. In the end I usually give around 150 corrected pics. If I give all 500 then there is too much. Too many duplicates, and really who need to see the pic with aunt Betsy's flash going off at the same time washing everything out.

The look is much easier to create durring capture with lighting than in post processing in my opinion.

My work is wedding photography. My pastime is sports and kids (my own at dance etc). I am looking to get a canon

70-200 and these two are in my prince range. I would like the IS, but worry about the low light focusing of the f4. I

have the 24-70 f2.8 and love the results I get with it, but I worry that if I get the non IS f2.8 70-200 I'll have trouble

getting usable shots without a monopod.

So the real question is:

Does the 70-200 f4 IS have the ability to focus in low light (I don't mean candle light, but normal church/hall lighting)?

It'll cost about $500, but it's the best solution I can find. Buy a NAS (network attached storage drive) housing, they come from d-link, linksys, HP, and others (buy some other names suck). Make sure that is has two drive bays and supports RAID. Then buy two 500gb hard drives, and put them in. Set up one hard drive to mirror the other. This way if one crashes the other is still good, and your info is safe. (If the drives are hot swappable the process of replacing a drive is relatively easy.)

I have an sb-24 that I use on my 40D. It does only work in manual, but there is a little control because you can fire it at 1/2, 1/4, ect power by selecting it on the flash. I havn't used it for anything other than to fool around with, but the results are limited by my skill rather than the set up.

 

Just a note. I had a cheap CF card that I used with it once, and it became corrupted. I am 99% sure this was a coincidence, but I thought I would mention it anyways.

I have been reading many post for the past few months, and I have noticed a disturbing trend. It seems like when

someone asks for a critique it is translated as "please bash the work I have done." In one such post a member

came out with the comment that "i never ask other photographers for a critique" his reason was that we over analyse

the image. I can see that, but that is also what we are looking for to take the next step. I think that the issue has

more to do with the way the message is delivered. The amount of knowledge available in this forum is emense due to

the number of quality photographers there are here, so in order to deliver this information in a way that builds the

community I would like to look at positive ways to deliver criticism. (I essentially offer criticism for a living, I'm a

teacher so I have experience, I also have done the research.)

 

1. The person asking for your opinion is not trying to waste you time, they are not joking, and they are not making

fun of you. They are doing the best they can with the information/skill they have.

 

2. Begin with the positives, even it they are hard to find. Nice subject, good exposure, or just commenting on how

they are brave for putting their work out for everyone to see.

 

3. Try to state advice as a positive, not a negative. i.e. Instead of "you really underexposed that image" you could

state "you should try to expose the image for the highlights".

 

4. Don't make it personal. What we are putting out for others to see is already personal enough, no one needs to

read that "your work is no good, and niether are you". To be fair I have never read this exactly, but the messages

often feel that way at times.

 

5. This is for the internet in general. Remember there is a face behind these words/pictures. I often think that we

would never act this way in person but the fact that all we see is a computer sceen takes away some of our

humanity.

 

Disclaimer: I have never asked for a critique in a post, so I am not talking from a personal experience I am just

commenting on what I have read that has been left for others.

 

I would also like to say that the work displayed in the portfolios of the members on this site is amazing, varried, and

inspiring. When I see it I want to find a way to tap into this community to help my photography improve. I assume

others feel the same I just worry that many get scared off.

 

I am just posting this in hopes that it will keep more posts pleasant and allow everyone to step out bravely when

they put their work out for a critique.

I looked at the same things you are, and I found so many posts about how soft the lens is that I decided not to get it. Wherever I looked all I could find were people saying how horribly soft the lens is across the entire field, not to mention how bad the edge sharpness is. The sample photos I saw supported this conclusion. In short I found no one that would recomend this lens.

Like I said though this is not personal experience, this is the sort of "a friend of a friend said" sort of information, but what I found scared me off. The sigma 15-30 on the other hand gets good reviews, and there is a used one on e-bay now ending in a couple days (currently at $200 probably go for ~350). Don't worry it's not mine I was just taking a look at it myself.

In the end I think I'm going to go with the canon 17-40.

Hope the information I gathered can help you out.

You may have to unistal the USB driver for the camera so it can properly reinstal. To do this you need to connect the camera, go to the control panel, go to printers and other hardware, go to cameras and scanners, right click on the 5d and slect to delete it.

Once it is deleated do a full reinstal of the eos utility, including any updates, then reconnect the camera. This SHOULD allow it to work properly.

How long are you gone? So how many dumps do you need?

Do you need multiple copies, or is just one fine? (i.e. do you reqire a back up copy)

 

One option is an independent dvd burner like the EZDigiMagic Portable DVD Burner. I havn't used it, but in theory you could make a copy of the info every night (even two copies, and store them like dvds/cds in a small space)

That is a steal of a deal, but it'll only be able to be used for the entire range on a crop camera. I think there is serious vingnetting on a full frame at less than 17mm. Don't quote me on that, but I read it somewhere. I can't find the source now, but I know that the tokina 12-24 was desinged for APS sized sensor.

Don't listen too much to all the 24mm is too long on a crop camera. I let that talk get me into buying an inferior lens so I would have the 17mm wide end. Now I have a sigma 24-70 f2.8 (sigma because I wasted money before on a 17-85 canon), and I hardly ever find a time where I want more in a wedding.

Granted I have found that group shots over 10 (20 if I can get elevated) can be a little a little dicey, but if you need it you can rent a wide angle for that time.

But if your personal style includes alot of wide angle work, go for the wider lens.

I have used quite a few sigma lenses, both on my nikon film, and now my Canon digital SLRs. The one message I have is test them as soon as you get them.

The lenses can be great, but there are definite quality control issues with sigma. If you get a bad one, exchange it. As far as your lens goes I would say if when you manual focus the lens is sharp, and you have the time, send it to sigma for recalibrating. If the sharpness is so so, then try to exchange it. Sigma glass can be excellent, but sometimes you need a try or two.(It's the price you pay to save $500-1000).

Sigma has a 12-24 lens that is for full frame. So you can use it not and get ultrawide results, and then when you upgrade to full frame you can still use it for super wide angle shots.

 

Here's a link:

<a href="http://www.pbase.com/dhatchner/sigma_1224_vs_canon_1740_l"> Sigma 12-24 vs Canon</a>

The link has some good test shots to look at.

"the quality of the lens does make a difference on the noise department"

 

This is not so. A faster lens will help only because of the shorter exposure, and lower ISO, but the noise is 100% from the sensor. Cameras use software to remove it, but ALL the noise comes from the background current in the sensor. Better sensor = less noise, and since software removes detail as it removes noise, buy the best sensor you can get. Full frame are better because they have a better signal to noise ratio, but you pay for it in the pocketbook.

Went through the routine.

The one card is toast, others do fine no matter what.

Frank: thanks for the flash info I looked all over for which contacts to tape. I guess I should have just asked here first.

 

The card is the problem. I wanted a card to shoot pics of the kids, so I found on cheap. Turns out it is a fake Sandisk. Only lasted 46 days, and I needed to file a dispute with paypal in 45. So some con man on the other side of the world makes $23, and I learn a lesson.

I had a card corrupt on me yesterday. I took the flash of my nikon film camera (SB24) and used it on my 40d. I used

it in the manual mode, and everything seemed to be fine, then when I got home I downloaded my images, and found

that the entire card was corrupted. Even images I had taken a few days ago.

 

My question is, does anyone know if the flash is to blame? Yes I know that it isn't made for the 40d, but I only use

manual control anyways, so I didn't see the point in paying $300 for the canon flash. Maybe this is the reason I

should though.

They'll price the cameras where they will sell. If they will sell for $5k that is what they'll cost, if they'll sell for $7k that is what they'll cost. It's not like they're only making $10 a body. Sure the components cost, but the price has more to do with what the market is willing to pay than how much it costs to make them.

As I looked out the window tonight at the wonderful sunset glowing pink and red as the storm clouds peeled away

from the sky leaving a dramatic scene, I thought of going out to set up a few shots. This picturesque moment should

have been inspiring, but instead I fell flat. Let me reiterate ... I ... fell flat.

I don't know where my inspiriation went, but I know I used to have some. To me the most important question now

is ... how do I get it back? So that is what I am looking for.

 

What do you do to get your inspiration back when it is lost?

 

P.S. Please don't clog up this thread with a bunch of statments saying how wonderful you are for never losing your

inspiration. I don't really believe you, and it's not helpful.

The terrible crimes that occur in a police state may not happen today, but I don't think I want to wait until the first time I see someone dragged off the street to notice the slow erosion of freedom.

I agree with what others have said. If the soil was dark/black it dominates the scene. The meter would expose to get that to a mid tone grey, which it did.