gatorpan

Please connect with me offline. i can help. thanks

 

Thanks for the reply. My friend did the editing so I'm off the hook. But next time I'm asked to take photos I will keep you in mind!

I do know. I shot a wedding for a friend but told him he had to edit it. I gave them the NEF files. I told them I recall there were companies that did this. I told them I would ask for recommendations.

 

Thanks for your reply!

Looking for company where I can outsource wedding NEF files for photo editing.

 

Thanks!

<p>I have tried to clean my D7100 sensor with a Lenspen kit that I got for my D70S and then used on my D300. I have not been able to clean the D7100 sensor. It seems to just move the spots around. I read in another forum that somebody used a Q-Tip with 100% C.P. Ethanol. I have Ethanol because I used it for cleaning laser printer drums and computer contacts.<br>

Can anybody recommend this method? Could it damage the sensor? The Ethanol dries very fast and leaves no residue.<br>

All ideas and thoughts would be appreciated.<br>

Thanks,</p>

 

<p>I am using my new D7100 now. My 16-85 Zoom lens is doing wonders. Depending upon the light level I go from ISO 200 - 6400! I still have my 50/f1.4 and 35/f.14 when needed.<br>

But the new high speed has done wonders.<br>

BTW: So far I have not really needed more the 85mm but my travel has all been in urban areas. I have a prime 180/f2 at the ready if needed.<br>

Good luck,</p>

<p>I have a laptop and 3 USB drives ... one seems to be failing. I wonder what suggestions people have for on-line storage of digital photo images. So far I have 80 GB. I know I have 2 working USB drives but I am still looking for fail safe ideas. I expect in the next week to double that quantity, close to 200 GB.<br>

Any ideas. TIA</p>

<p>Regarding the D400 … My opinion is that the pricing on the D7100 was purposely low to get customers into the Nikon stable. After all, the body is just a start. If you will, Nikon is looking at rival makers. The D7100 is small, very capable and making the price super attractive helps Nikon against other competing brands. For us loyal Nikon users, we just got a bonus.<br>

I personally like the DX format because of it makes for smaller & lighter telephotos. As for wide angle shots, they there are DX lens available but I have always found them of limited use for me. I hope never to go back to FX.</p>

<p>Thanks Shun for answering my question. I will take my prime 180 for long shots. It’s interesting that when mentioning travel people though in terms of ‘snapshot’ type photos. Actually my real concern was theft and the desire to travel light. I rarely take simple snapshots, I always shoot at high resolution because when crop your photos lots of that full frame resolution falls away. As for the D7100 body, I am looking forward to ‘owning the night’. I use my Nikkor 50 F1.4, Sigma 35 F1.4 or Nikkor 105 F2 on the streets and in museums.<br>

Since I take about 1,000 images a day, then edit of course. Anyway, I reserve images for review later. I shoot architectural details and things of interest. For example, I have detailed photos of the drain pipes at Herculaneum, Pompeii and Ostia Attica.<br>

BTW: the size of the D7100 is great. Much better than my D300. Regarding theft and street photos. I love the BlackRapid strap. I hardly know the camera is there and people on the street, don’t see the camera because it rides behind my hip.<br>

Lastly, I just want to say, the D7100 has put new life in slow lens like the 16-85 Zoom by adding 1-2 F stops in speed. This lens is fantastic. When you are riding in bus, train etc… you hardly know what lens you will need next as you go around a corner. I proved this with lots of photos last year in China.</p>

<p>Shun: I like your review. I have already retired my D300 for the D7100. One concern that seemed to be lurking in your review was the increased resolution of the D7100. I am going on vacation trip and would like to travel light. I have the Nikkor 16-85 Zoom. I have used it since I got the D300. I was thinking of getting the 18-200 Lens so I could leave my prime 105 F2/D and/or my 180 F2.8 IFED lens home. However I am concerned about the quality of the 18-200 on the D7100. I would appreciate thoughts on this? Is my fear real?</p>

<p>I’m confused. It’s your advertising, your web site. Why are you under an obligation to change or add to it for each wedding… beautiful bride or ugly. I feel an obligation to take great photos at every wedding. I work hard at making the customer look good. The other day I had a very overweight father whose belly looked disgusting. I cropped the photos to make him look good. I think a good photographer can make anybody look good. Pretty brides will understand you take photos of all customers … so they won’t care. Ugly brides might hire you because they see you have the skill set to make them look better.</p>

<p>First of all, I am of school of not changing cards. I would not shoot an important event with a card I bought that morning, but if you know the card and have worked with it, then it probably is not going to be the most likely point of failure. I would rate misplacement/damage/loss of these small cards as a bigger danger than computer failure. The room is dark, you just changed cards and a major photo opt pops up. You don’t secure the card and it falls, gets stepped on etc. I believe shooting a wedding is like combat, the KISS principal rules.<br>

I work with computers all day. One thing is for sure, nobody has mentioned that cards are magnetic media and fragile. Those little pins can break or get dirty. The more you change cards, the more likely they will fail. (As opposed to the card failing if it stays in the camera.) Nadine mentioned formatting the card in the camera you use. Great idea, formatting can renew the card and fix issues.<br>

When I get to the lab after a shoot I download the images and back then up and burn a DVD too. I work with RAID 1 drives, a server and a NAS unit too. BTW: I do like the dual card idea in the cameras but I have not tried it. Frankly there is no end to this.</p>

 

<p>I know I am late here but I personally have decided to look long and hard at what equipment I need to shoot the project. Then I carry everything with me, in pockets, around my neck, shoulder or whatever. One thing I love about my DX format camera, (D300) is that my prime lenses are very small, so its easy to stuff in your pockets. I know it’s not so elegant but not only are they hard to steal … but best of all I have them with me.<br>

Going to the car … yikes that probably when something important happens, missing a photo is as bad as losing a memory card. What do you say to the Bridge/Groom? I was in the car playing with equipment when your long lost relative showed up etc. etc.<br>

I do leave spare batteries in my empty camera case. I leave the case open under a table. (Works well with long tablecloths.) But most of all, I concentrate on getting good shots. I think Nadine did a great job of outlining the problems.<br>

Oh ….. Alarms on the locks! In the noise of a wedding you would never hear them, and what would you do if they were being stolen during the ceremony?</p>

<p>I know I'm late here, but I want to say, I use the Sigma 17-50, f2.8 And I could not be more pleased. I have lots of prime lens to use, and I use them when I want to do something fancy or with available light. But I shoot hi-resolution Fine JPEG + NEF, (I have a D300), I rarely miss a shot with the Sigma. I'm sure the Tamron is also a good lens. One complaint is the bayonet mount for the lens shade. I had to tape this to the lens with gaffer tape.<br>

Good photos come from making the shot! I should mention that I have the SB-900 + Nikon Battery pack. I took advice from this forum and Neil van Niekerk. I even bought his book on flash techniques.<br>

Lastly I want to ditto Nadine's comment on the Lightsphere. A disapointing purchase.<br>

Good luck.</p>

<p><br />1) I love my new Sigma 17-50.<br />I can shoot 90% of the wedding with that lens. I think you should get<br />experience shooting … if you are working with another photographer than he can<br />cover long shots. ( I use a D300)<br>

<br />2) Wedding photography is in the eye of the photographer. I find beginners use long lenses to hide away in the background rather than getting in taking photos.<br>

3) Telephotos flatten prospective that makes a wedding look like a sporting event.<br>

4) I would worry more about flash and flash technique than long lenses.<br>

<br />Get in and start taking photos. Don’t worry about loading up<br />with equipment from the start.</p>

<p>I don’t know why a MACRO lens is needed. My Sigma 17-50mm<br />F2.8 gets me very close if needed. But people are moving fast. IMHO it would<br />probably take too long to set up a shot like the wedding canopy in the<br />reflection of the eye glasses of a spectator … and they would think you are<br />crazy.</p>

<p>I’m with Robert. Not only is the dress not so clear … but<br />those windows make think this is a copy of 15^th century painting. Looks<br />like somebody going through treasures in the attic.<br>

Good photo but I’m sorry, not a bride getting ready. Wedding<br />photography is a subset of journalism. The photos must tell a story of a<br />wedding.</p>

<p>Neil VN's book is very good. The thing I find helped me the most is shooting only in manual mode. I also set the camera display to show me the histogram. This way I know my exposure is right.<br>

I am not sure why the using the flash diffuser is the holy grail. I find that this might make the photo a bit nicer but customers really appreciate good sharp photos. This is a wedding, they want to preserve the event for ever. That's why you take photos. Good wedding photos do not have to museum quality art photos.<br>

BTW: the comment about not brining too much equipment ... well, wedding photography is for sure an equipment game. No way to avoid extra lenses, battery packs, etc, etc.<br>

I also shoot with a cropped sensor, (D300). I find 1600 to be my best speed. If you have clear focus and good lighting I have had no complaints of noise. (IMHO 3200 is hopeless when it comes to noise. I never use it. But between 400, 800 and 1600 I find the difference too small to worry about.)<br>

Hope this helps.</p>

<p>I was called to take a group photo at a family event. I showed up and to my surprise everybody has white tee shirts with a happy birthday message stenciled on. The photo was a night in the garden. I used 2 flashes. The photos were taken in NEF format.<br>

How can I reduce the blast of white from the tee shirts with LR3?</p>

<p>David;<br>

Yes that is a problem with food like cakes. You think do it later… and you find the caterer has started cutting it up! Anyway I have these folding reflectors with a wire. So I will look for some scrims like that. It’s probably easier and faster to go to your truck than start improvising.<br>

Johns cake is certainly interesting and the tablecloth too. No problem blowing out whites! I think I would have shot it with telephoto, wide open aperture, to capture the ghastly figures head on. Again this is something you would spend an hour on in a studio. But in a wedding you shoot this in 5 minutes or less!</p>

 

<p>David;<br>

I see what you mean about not moving the cake. That window is more interesting than the cake. I am looking into a folding scrim to put in the trunk of my car for next time. In this case, the ceiling was very high and black! So the bounce option was out.<br>

However I would like to say, from journalistic point of view… the whole hall was lit with these spots from above. So in fact this picture also captures the mood of the wedding. While I did blow out some of the white of the cake and the tablecloth, I did capture the colored flowers and cake decoration / details. Also the details of the brass plate are there as well as the lace table cloth.<br>

Regarding ‘blowing out the whites’ … I would like to throw out an idea here… frankly there is not always so much interesting going in a white table cloth or the white of the cake. I might throw out the idea that in a high contrast situation, loosing details in the white is not the end of the world. In your photo, you did have a real challenge with light pouring in from a window right behind the cake. You handled it well although I bet with the cake on the side you probably could tackle the cake during the entrée or dinner. </p>

 

<p>Craigh;<br>

Yes I think its logical. I don't know if STG 240 is the right price, but if yours is the only album it seems to be a good deal. Anyway, why not do a 3 month trial. Since this is an album sitting in their shop, they can easily put the album in the back room after 3 months and ask you to come pick it up. Let us know how this goes.</p>

 

<p>First of all, I am grateful for all the comments.<br>

1) The lighting was not natural; it came from ceiling spot lights. I actually liked the effect. I think the spots had gel on them but I can’t remember now.<br>

2) I did not want to move the cake. The last thing I needed was for the photographer to drop the cake or some other catastrophe. When you are dripping camera equipment I think it is an invitation to some kind disaster. Take you camera off and some little kid will poke it and drop it. It is not so easy to always think on your feet but I think these things are a real possibility.<br>

3) Tilt: I see it now. It could have been fixed.<br>

4) Camera angle: I tried and did other shots. I also realized there was a limit to how many cake pictures would be interesting. As I went to a higher angle I lost side details. This was my best compromise.<br>

5) Changing the lighting. I had flashes. The cake was in the wedding hall only a bit to the side. I had to shoot it as guests were arriving. I had to work fast or miss reception photos and I knew that later I the cake would be surrounded by guests sitting at their tables. David’s comment has given me some ideas. I think if I shot in RAW I would have more post processing control on those highlights. The advantage of the strong light, I believe, was to make the cake details more dramatic.<br>

As I review all this, I realize why I like shooting weddings. They move fast. It’s a real challenge to make good photos and work fast. Lots of decisions have to be made on your feet and under pressure to get the shots before it’s too late. Never mind dealing with tricky camera equipment, the demands of the couple, their families and the guests. And all this time trying to be polite, un-obtrusive and get the shots. After the affair there are no excuses if you don’t cover all aspects of the event.</p>

 

<p>I am a pro using now a D300. I love the beep! When shooting wedding photography, I am busy changing lens, moving around and most of all concentrating on composing great shots. I find the little lever that controls ‘continuous’ and single shot gets flipped without me knowing. So the beep is an extra help for me that helps me remember my focus is locked on. Nobody has every complained my camera is making noise!! For subtle street photography, I can see you might want to turn it off. That’s why you have the option.<br>

AF light assist is really another topic. For street photos it definitely spooks subjects. But it also has its usefulness. Have you ever been in an Egyptian tomb in Luxor? Again, that’s why you can turn it off and on at will.<br>

A camera is a tool. The options are there to be used. Use them.</p>

 

<p>This special cake was made by an aunt of the groom. I shot this with available light since the light had a nice quality to it. However I struggled how to present such a carefully made cake, on a fancy plate and on the other hand make an interesting photo. (The struggle was between details and artistic presentation.)<br>

Technical Details: Nikon D300, ISO 1600, Nikkor 16-85mm at 58mm, 35mm Focal length: 87mm, 1/40^th of a second, F5.3. BTW: this was a high resolution JPEG.</p><div></div>

<p>I think most of the comments cover the technical aspects very well. I would like to deal with the techniques of being a wedding photographer. I find that one thing that makes a difference between a pro and an amateur is fear. Being a good photographer means not being afraid to stand up and take photos. I don’t mean making lots of noise and drawing undue attention to yourself, but just standing up when everybody is sitting and taking a photo/s. Frequently, if the spot is awkward I will get up and take what I need and then kneel down so I am not in the way.<br>

People realize you are there to take photos. They expect you to do it. So you must get in there and take photos. I find I can shoot an entire wedding with at 24-50 or 16-85mm lens in cropped format. I do carry a 105mm F2 for special times when I really need available light and a telephoto. I also use my 30mm and 50mm F1.4s for great shots of dancing and up-close action.<br>

But I think the least useful lens would be a 70-200mm. You would spend lots of time with his heavy piece of glass, and a tripod for a few unusual shots. In the meantime you would miss most of the action. I feel that your desire an extreme telephoto is more to hide out of the way. Particularly with a crop sensor camera … this belongs at a sporting event, not a wedding.<br>

Get in there and shoot. Good luck!</p>