Jump to content

louis_rosenthal

Members
  • Posts

    58
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by louis_rosenthal

  1. <p>hmmm (initial thought was "ridiculous!" but then, my plan is considerably worse..)<br>

    I guess with a 45° angled mirror behind such a construction I could, with enough fiddling around get an accurate idea of what I'm focusing on.... I like the creativity :)<br>

    ....now why is it that I don't have any wire coat hangers, or wires at all for that matter :-/ I'll try that first perhaps, since it is by far the cheapest option.</p>

  2. <p>So here's where I stand after reading all the comments repeatedly:</p>

    <ul>

    <li>My analog bug as I put it came in three parts. Seeing in live: Nikon F with removed prism (I consider it usable enough for my purposes), my friend's Yashica-mat and playing around with the Icarette 501, including making a improv matte screen. As I started digital, and getting just one roll of 120 film developed ($16) and scanned ($35) here is unfortunately more than just a bit pricey, I would like to have it digital, meaning everything identical, but not film, sensor (for me the point of a dslr is that one sees the analog image)</li>

    <li>After looking at <a href="

    I guess the feasibility of this project is indeed utterly low.</li>

    <li>If I do win one of the auctions I'm participating in (all three under $100), I'll tear that camera a new one and hope for the best.</li>

    <li>If not, I'll likely just save up and get a Hasselblad 5xx__ with the cheapest digital back i can find (Thanks for the thought Kent!)</li>

    </ul>

    <p>It'll be a bit over a week before I know more ...and the wait is killing me!</p>

  3. <p>Also, as the mirror would ideally cover the hole entirely, light leaks should also not be an issue. I only hope I don't end up cutting any crucial wiring or anything... perhaps it'll be best to completely take apart the camera, cut the hole, remove the prism, and put it back together.<br /> I guess it's a matter of trying it out for the sake of having done so. If I don't, I'll always wonder if it might have worked.<br /> In any case, thanks everyone and I'll be sure to let you know if I somehow make it work, or more likely show you photos of a broken D40 with a giant gaping hole in the top. :D<br>

    Wish me luck. ;)</p>

  4. <p>I shoot manual, always, so the meter won't bother me much.<br />i would REMOVE the prism, meaning i want it to be like the Nikon F without a prism, just looking from the top in, but with the possibility of having it far from my face when i shoot.<br /><br />Essentially, I want <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Nikon_F_viewfinder_DSC_6506.jpg">this</a>, digital. Affordably. With compatibility to my current 8 nikon lenses (DX and not).</p>
  5. <p>My trouble is that I'm not satisfied with live view - I shoot D700 and D300s, and recently got bit by an analog bug whilst bringing my great grandfather's Icarette 501 from 1919 back to life.<br /><br />My vision is a dslr with a functioning waist-level viewfinder. I'm thinking some old D50, D40, D100 or D200 just to try out and if things really go well I'll use that for a while and when enough money is around I'll buy an extra D700 and make the change there as well. (I need certainty, for obvious reasons)</p>
  6. <p>If I were to cut a slightly less than mirror-sized hole in a given nikon DSLR in order to make it (permanently) waist-level:</p>

    <ul>

    <li>is this even possible?</li>

    <li>does it largely matter which model I choose for the project?</li>

    <li>is there some sort of problem I'll definitely face, that will affect the images or even make it impossible to shoot?</li>

    </ul>

    <p>This project is essentially the culmination of my wish for a digital waist level viewfinder and for the love of me I hope it works. Couldn't find any material on the topic on the interwebs...<br /> Any help?<br /> Cheers,<br />Louis<br /><br />(I don't want Live View. :) )</p>

  7. <p>So yesterday I was working at an electronics store here in Switzerland and was talking to a Nikon promo guy.<br /><br />While he seemed to really know what he was talking about when it came to gear, including all kinds of different cameras, one point that really surprised me is that he said every lens should have a protective filter on it.<br /><br />According to him, not only does it protect from scratches and the like, it also makes it easier to clean, that <strong>cleaning the front element with a cloth too much could ruin the nano crystal coat!<br /><br /></strong>Now for one I always thought it would take a lot to damage that, two, that it's not just on the front element (if at all?), and three protective filters on high quality glass are a shame. I've experienced first hand what horrible quality can result from using such filters, and over the course of 4 years, using about 10 different lenses all the time i've never once scratched a lens.<br /><br />so the question is: can one ruin the nano crystal coat? And perhaps what are your opinions about using protective filters?<br /><br />cheers,<br />Louis</p>
  8. <p>Many thanks everyone!</p>

    <p>So I called the groom and he definitely didn't know what a raw file was. He thought there would be things he would see that i might not.</p>

    <p>In any case, I told him in cases of doubt I would leave the photos in the selection. What I'll do is make a rough selection, edit, export, copy the export and delete some of the less spectacular shots. Dealing with it this way shouldn't take more than half an hour extra.</p>

    <p>Anyhow, thanks again to the grand frequenters of this forum! Always a big help!<br>

    -Louis</p>

  9. <p>So I know this is an absolutely common request, but I couldn't find a wedding-specific question about it in the forum:<br /><br />Once again I've come across a couple that, aside of the roughly 40 edited photos per hour of coverage, want ALL the unedited (RAW) files, presumably because they believe they'll be missing out on something if they only get the edited ones.<br /><br />How do you go about this kind of request, specifically when shooting weddings?</p>

    <p>(Just in case this isn't obvious: My reasoning is that I don't want them to see any unpolished diamonds, test shots or multiples of shots.)</p>

    <p>(I've considered sending them 7 DVD's full of NEF's and just hoping they just decide not to bother with them, since the likelihood that they have software and hardware fit for the job is slim. :D )</p>

  10. <p>Hi guys<br>

    i'm looking for some opinions on a couple of photography programs and advice on where in (preferably) the Netherlands, UK, or Germany I can find some good BA programs for photography, sepecifically as a trade, not plain art.</p>

    <p>http://www.kabk.nl/pageEN.php?id=0004</p>

    <p>http://www.design-akademie-berlin.de/bachelor-kommunikationsdesign.html</p>

    <p>I'm especially interested in the first one (KABK in Den Haag) and would love some feedback especially from people who have been there or people who have been in a really good photography program in NL, UK, or DE.</p>

    <p>--Louis</p>

  11. <p>Hey everyone!<br /> ok so i'm starting up a wedding/general photography business in zurich switzerland, and i have been unsure which domain/logo thereof i should use, and would be very happy for some bright ideas.<br /> My main goal is weddings, but i've done several simple photoshoots. at this point i have been using www.lrstills.com, and there's a makeshift logo on there, but really i'm not sure LRstills says "wedding photographer", or photographer at all, especially because the language here is swiss-german, so i've had lots of people ask me what "stills" means, ....still images?...<br /> anyhow i'd be very grateful for some suggestions! my full name is Louis Rafael Rosenthal, if anything can be done with a name of that popularity (lack of domains) and of that length.....?<br /> cheers,<br />Louis</p>

    <p>also, i want to get a domain that is available .com and .ch, so one will reroute to the other in case people are too used to one or the other (happens a lot here)</p>

  12. <p>@matt: render a sun-lit scene down to dusk like darkness... is what i want to do.</p>

    <p>I'd use a reflector, but i don't want to blind the subjects.... my plan is to take spontaneous free portraits of people down by the lake to become more known and to work on not only my photographic skills but my people skills as well.</p>

  13. <p>Hi everyone!<br>

    So I'm looking to do some outdoor portrait photography this summer in the sun, and I was hoping I could get some advice on whether there is some way to successfully do so with SB600, SB800, or SB900, or if I'll need a portable monolight setup, how many Ws will I need, to successfully overpower the sun (perhaps in a softbox)?<br>

    Thanks in advance!<br />-Louis </p>

  14. <p>thanks.... i just couldn't find it anywhere because i have a german manual and i do EVERYTHING in english..... i flipped through it for like half an hour and figured it'd be easier to google it. "in-camera RAW editing" will give you a bunch of sites regarding Adobe Camera RAW.....<br>

    so i had to ask here<br>

    anyhow,<br />thanks again.<br />-Louis </p>

×
×
  • Create New...