rasi_wickra

<p>Thank you for your responses everyone. As the moderate said, I understand that some people may have reservations about Mr. Haring's compositional or postprocessing techniques, but as I posted the question what I wanted to know if anyone knew HOW he achieved this effect, not whether the effect in question was visually pleasing or a "good technique" -- ultimately, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I had to confess that despite the criticism in this thread, I remain a fan of his work. Thanks again for your responses. </p>

<p>Thanks guys, especially Michael, Bob and Jeff for your comments!<br /> I really am trying to understand how to recreate the photographic quality. There are so many things I love about Otto Haring's work, even how he chooses to isolate the subject in each of his photographs.<br /> There are some compositional elements that I am baffled by (as in, not sure how he creates this effect). For example, take a look at this photo:<br /> <a href="http://www.haringphotography.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Haring-Photography-17-of-55.jpg">http://www.haringphotography.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Haring-Photography-17-of-55.jpg</a><br>

<br /> How is it that the area of focus is between two vertical lines in the center of the photo. Are there lenses that can create this effect or is this something done in post?</p>

<p>Next, take a look at this image:<br>

<br /> <a href="http://www.haringphotography.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/00016-copy.jpg">http://www.haringphotography.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/00016-copy.jpg</a><br>

<br /> In this image, I've also noticed that the bokeh in many of his images taken at "natural" focal lengths (like 35-50mm or so) have a swirly nature to it -- where the out of focus highlights become more elliptical as they extend out from the focal plane. I've never seen this effect before in other wedding photography and was wondering whether this was also a photography technique or postprocessing.<br /> Lastly, I love the advice and comments from all of you. I am not a wedding photographer but what you said about being able to capture the perfect picture at the perfect time is quite a talent to develop. My hats off for people like you in this business. Amazing work, everyone.</p>

<p>Agreed. I am sure he used some work on the photos, but I agree with Michael that it does not take away from the fact that he is a talented photographer. I liked what he had done with some of the macro shots (rings, shoes etc) by using props that give color so that when using a shallow DOF the subject is in crisp focus, but the background is a creamy emulsion of multicolor. This is probably something that's quite common in your world, but I thought it was cool.</p>

<p>Absolutely agree.<br>

And you're right, Mark. As an amateur, I can take decent pictures but my pictures on average do not look as breath taking as Mr. Harings (or yours for that matter -- impressive work on your website). I guess I do agree that I am looking for that one shortcut, not necessarily to bridge the gap between the quality of my work and Mr Harings, but perhaps a little piece of the puzzle that will help me get one step closer. <br>

Thanks again for all of your comments. I love this forum, and you all have been wonderful.</p>

<p>Take this one, for example:<br>

http://www.haringphotography.com/blog/blog-home-wedding-photography/best-indian-wedding-photographer-3/</p>

<p>The colors are so rich, contrasty -- is this all done in post? Most of his other pictures have that same quality that is hard to describe but looks very pleasing to the eye.</p>

<p>Thanks for the response. I looked on the site and the "information" seems to talk more about his philosophy. The only tid-bit I could gather is that he seems to use primarily prime lenses. What I don't get is what sort of post-processing he does to the images. No question he is a talented photographer!</p>

<p>I am a photo enthusiast and not a professional wedding photographer. Recently, I discovered the website of a very talented wedding photographer, Mr. Otto Haring.<br>

<a href="http://www.haringphotography.com">http://www.haringphotography.com</a><br>

Can someone explain to me how he takes such rich pictures? What I don't understand is that he has perfect sharpness, incredibly color rich images, contrasty, and absolutely breathtaking.<br>

The irony is that about 4 years ago, Mr. Haring was active in this forum and asked the very same question about someone elses' photography. I would love to hear from him, and I have written to him twice but have not received any response. I imagine he must be very busy with his successful wedding photography business.<br>

If someone else can provide suggestions about how the richness of color, sharpness and contrast are achieved, I would be grateful. Do you think he does this out-of-the camera, or is this all post-processing? I am just stunned at the color and would be so lucky to be able to take pics like that.<br>

Thanks for your time!</p>

<p>Rasi</p>

<p>Wow. I never expected this many experts to post responses. Thank you everyone! You guys are awesome, and really made the decision process easier for me. I kinda always had a feeling for what I wanted to do, but needed to hear from experts that that is in fact, the case.<br>

Thank you so much, everyone!<br>

... BTW, I decided to stay with Nikon.</p>

<b>Moderator's note:</b> Moved from the Beginner's forum. Note that the Beginner's forum 'is intended to be used by beginners who have basic photographic questions. For the most part, these should be about photographic technique or theory. "What should I buy" type questions stand a good chance of being sent to a forum dealing with that specific sort of equipment.' It is <b>not</b> the place for Nikon vs. Canon questions.<P>

 

 

<p>I know this is a rather cliched question about the proverbial Nikon vs Canon dialogue, but my situation is rather unique. I've been a newbie into photography using a Nikon D40 + 18-55 VR + 55-200 VR lenses. After learning spending a significant amount of time shooting in manual mode, and honing my skills I think I am ready to make the next step into the Nikon D90/Canon 40D-50D territory (and price range).<br>

Given that I already own two Nikon lenses, one would think my upgrade choice should be rather obvious. However, my dad owns a Canon EOS 7D along with some rather expensive Canon wide-angle and telephoto (200-400mm) EF-S lenses. He's been trying to talk me into buying a Canon, and part of his argument is that in a matter of years, that he would give these lenses to me for my use. He also makes the point that Canon DSLRs feature-for-feature are actually somewhat better than the Nikon models in the same price range.<br>

So my question is this: I love my D40 and I'm very used to the feel of a Nikon -- I feel rather compelled to upgrade to a Nikon D90 because of those reasons. However, the fact that my dad owns those expensive Canon lenses which I could inherit really is making me think about Canon as well, although I don't have much experience with those Cameras. In-store, I've tested Canon and Nikons both -- and they both feel fine.<br>

Does anyone have any thoughts on what a good buy would be for me, given this situation? Would greatly appreciate any input.<br>

Thanks!</p>