nathansanborn

<p>I would use your studio lights or strobes. If you set them up far enough to the sides the reflection of the light will not be visible to the camera, and the reflections of everything else in the room will be so underexposed that they will become invisible.</p>

Keep in mind, as you are learning you are likely to fumble, as you lack the previous experience to assist you in knowing

exactly how to achieve what you want. The only way to avoid fumbling, is to keep fumbling until you don't. Me, I'm a

fumbler. Just when I thought I was really figuring out lighting, I now have to struggle to get my speed lights low enough to

match very dim Christmas tree lights, while still giving a natural look to the overall lighting of the room. I fumbled, looked

like I didn't know what I was doing. Next time, I'll fumble a little less, but I'll still be practicing.

<p>Also, Rick Moran, WOW!</p>

<p>Michael Ferron, love that image. It's a very interesting composition, very nice.</p>

<p>Roberta Davidson, a very nice tribute to a friend. One of the things I've learned to love about photography is how the camera gives us an excuse to get to know people. Once you get to know someone it becomes hard not to become friends.</p>

<p>Chris Wick, I love the simple composition and the sky. I've gotten to become a fan of your work through the Wednesday forums and always look forward to your submissions.</p>

<p>Also Matt Laur, great image. I would normally skip on complimenting the moderator, it's like complimenting your teacher... but what the heck, good work.</p>

<p>Everybody else, yes YOU, well done sir or madam, well done.</p>

<p>So, I think I've fallen prey to NAS. Years ago when I dropped my 18-55 kit lens on my D50, I figured if I were going to replace I would upgrade. Welcome 18-70. This lens has been my trusty companion for 5+ years. I have honestly taken some of my best pictures with this lens. I liked the added speed and additional focal length above the kit lens. Recently the zoom has been sticking and against Shun's best advice I fixed it myself. Problem solved, for a few months. Then, against Shun's best advice, I fixed it again. This time, I've created focus issues and random softness. This bugger still creates amazing and sharp images, just not with the consistancy I'm beginning to demand. To solve this problem, I've resorted to using my 35 1.8 more and more. In fact on a trip to San Francisco, the 35 was the only lens I took. Amazing pictures, but not wide enough sometimes. I need a zoom.</p>

<p>Welcome the 17-55 2.8, used through KEH. Although this is not pure NAS. I would have repaired the 18-70, but at a replacement cost of not much that doesn't seem to make sense. One thing I've learned from the forums here is to answer the question "what need does your current setup not meet?" For me it came down to build quality, low light performance, focus speed. Specifically that the 18-70 with a 3.5 - 4.5 max apeture is 2/3 to 1.5 stops less light for the AF to work with, and it's falling apart. Plus with all of the great FX cameras Nikon is introducing, I get to take advantage of all the full frame upgraders selling off their amazing glass. But yeah, this lens used cost about what the D50 kit did in 2005.</p>

<p>Here are some of the penultimate photos from the venerable 18-70, making disfunctional holiday pics.</p><div></div>

I would look into the Paul Buff Einstiens with a couple large soft boxes. But you'd be surprised at how good the results

can be with just a couple of speed lights if the setup is right.

<p>Also, if you had an eye level tripod, it would be positioned to take perfectly dull eye level photos. Everybody sees the world at eye level, show them something different.</p>

<p>Don't be afraid of the light reflecting in his eyes (as long as we're not talking about red eye). The catchlights give a nice little sparkle. Cant wait to see how it turned out.</p>

<p>Flanel will give difuse reflection, meaning no glare, so it should work well. A satin fabric may provide some direct reflection (glare) depending on where the lights are set up in relation to the camera. It just depends on if you want a shiny look to your background or not.</p>

<p> Also, bouncing the flash off of a wall or reflector is a great simple way to soften the light.</p>

<p>2nd try.</p><div></div>

<p>70-300 4-5.6 non afs plastic mount G, not that much sharper than the Holga.</p>

<p>Bob, be sure to tell your son in law Semper Fi from all of us Marines. (once a Marine, always a Marine.)</p>

<p>For all the pixel peepers, here's 16 mega pixels of plastic Holga lens.</p><div></div>

<div></div>

I guess I can elaborate on "stop pixel peeping", and maybe get deeper into the heart of the question. The problem with

pixel peeping, is when looking at something at 100% (assuming you crop a 700 pixel image out of it) you are looking at

something that should be about 2 1/3 inches printed, on something as big as your computer monitor. And you can zoom

in from there even!

 

When you have good light, are you pleased with the pictures? Take your best shot and print it big, how does it look?

These things are far more important than how a 100% crop looks on a monitor.

Also... Stop pixel peeping.

<p>Valencia Spain for Las Fallas!</p>

<p>From a recent long weekend in San Francisco. One of my first attempts finding the picture and waiting for the moment. I framed the shot, and waited, and waited, and captured a few moments, but this one stood out to me.</p><div></div>

You can buy a light stand, an adapter to mount a flash to the light stand and hold an umbrella, and a large 60" convertible

for less than $90. I would start with this 1 light set up and use a reflector to fill if needed.

 

To trigger, nothing beats pocket wizards. But it can be done much cheaper. An optical slave, or using pc cords can be

very effective and cost very little.

 

Go to "the strobist" blog. Read lighting 101, and lighting 102. Great information on that blog and it's all about moving the

flash off camera.

 

Also, if you are looking to add a second light, look for something powerful and manually adjustable. Don't spend too

much on the flash, as you can move up to a studio monolight like an Alien Bee or an Einstein for less money than the top

of the line Nikon or Cannon dedicated flashes.

<p>I thought I knew how to get it off my phone...</p><div></div>

<p>Taken this weekend in the Haight-Ashbury district in San Francisco.</p>

I think you may be above your cameras sync speed. My understanding is that those cameras may sync only up to

1/160sec. Also, if you could post an example that may be helpful.

<p>I've reached a point in my life where I am no longer afraid of spiders. I appreciate how their murderous traps and posionous fangs keep the insect populations in check, but they just no longer have the ability to bring dreadfull fear to me.</p>

<p>This combined with the purchase of a used 60mm 2.8D macro (clearance from KEH) got my eye pressed firmly into the viewfinder mere inches away from this little guy. Slowly moving closer, checking focus, "Oh how magnificant and majestic this tiny little thing is. I had no idea they had all of those little hairs covering their body."</p>

<p>Camera slightly bumps web, causing some subject movement... read, this gigantic MONSTER starts violently shaking in front of me, jumping around in the frame... "RUN FOR YOUR LIVES! HE'S PISSED AND COMMING FOR REVENGE!"</p>

<p>Oh... never mind... close focus, very slight movement. Now what was I saying about my fearlessness?</p>

<p>On a side note, I'm the first person to tell you not to pixel peep, but that was before I had this macro lens. The detail it shows is amazing, and the closer you focus, and the closer you zoom, the more amazing it is.</p>

<p>Also, does anybody know what type of spider this is?</p><div></div>

Powerful.

<p>I get it too. Internet explorer.</p>

Liz, if you're that close to p-town, look into the photography section of the PCC community education catalogue. There

are some awesome classes offered no matter what your level.

<p>Started a project where I meet and photograph 100 strangers. The hardest part was just getting started. This was my first stranger Lyle, only 99 to go.</p><div></div>