sprouty

<p>A little too small to print much bigger than 4x6, but perfect for display online. That's a pretty good deal if they don't require any significant effort to clean them up.</p>

<p><em>"...where is the boundary between "respecting the subject" and the realization of that work?"</em></p>

<p>There is no one, universal, boundary, there are three: what the artists wants, what the subject is comfortable with, and what the viewer sees*. And it is the only the odd chance that they all blend together sublimely.</p>

<p>* interprets as the message</p>

<p><em>"This photo was scanned at Shoppers Drug Mart in Toronto cost me $3.00 to process and scan a roll."</em></p>

<p>Looks pretty good, what resolution was the scan?</p>

<p>All these posts ever do is expose two things: a lack of knowledge of the history of photography, and an insensitivity to the personal vision of others.</p>

<p>And that's not a slight towards anyone, it's just a fact.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00S1vI">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00S1vI</a><br>

Well worth the time...</p>

<p>Very nice Jeff. We're planning on Alcatraz and it seemed to make sense to do the first boat. Thanks for the heads-up on the Mission District.</p>

<p>I've been to quite a few places in Western/Eastern Europe at some pretty late hours, it definitely pays to keep your wits about you.</p>

<p>The only taped camera I've ever seen was a guy shooting street in NYC a few years ago. Every inch of the camera, and I mean <em>every</em> inch, was covered in silver duct tape. My only thought was that he might be interesting to talk to. But he was in his zone and I didn't bother him. </p>

<p>We all wear a uniform whether we think we do or not, the camera is just an accessory. I say live an let live.</p>

<p>But then again, 98.99% of all DSLR users aren't professional wedding photographers.</p>

<p>I'm not sure this matters much but...the viewfinder is slightly larger on the D3; the shutter is rated for 300K vs the D700's 150K; the D3 offers a 5:4 aspect ratio and a masked finder, plus the 2 CF slots already mentioned.</p>

<p>If you're a pro, and don't mind the weight, the D3 seems like the logical choice.</p>

<p>Definitely well put together and it just a has a really cool vibe. Glad you both liked it. </p>

<p>Just checked out the Rowells image, that would be incredible to see. Thanks again for the recommendations everyone.</p>

<p>I know everybody is aware of these, but I somehow missed this one and found it quite enjoyable. <br /><a href="http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/essay/la-nuit">http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/essay/la-nuit</a></p>

<p>Unfortunately I would tend to agree that it was your camera since they don't seem to be linked to a highlight or other artifact of the image and especially since they are moving around from shot to shot. <br>

But a simple method to confirm this would be to download a different RAW converter (I think most offer 30-day trials). Then if you still have the issue it's the camera, and if you don't, it's related to DXO.</p>

<p>I'd be more worried about those giant orange circles...</p>

<p>Thanks Bruce, I look into the book, I should have plenty of time to order it. <br>

As for Alcatraz, I know several people on the Street & Doc forum have shot there and I'm sure there is info on line, I just haven't looked yet.</p>

<p>Excellent, thanks.</p>

<p>Thanks Thomas. No intention to drive, you miss too much in most cities that way. I'll definitely check out your recommendations.</p>

<p>For the type of photography I do, mostly people in either available light or low light, I know I saw a noticable difference in detail, and noise when I went from a D200 to a D700. But I'm not sure you'd see as much of a difference if you shoot daylight urban scenes. Is there a chance you can find a D700, drop your CF card in and snap a few images?</p>

<p> Nadine, I appreciate your point, and I'm sure you know I'm not a wedding photographer, so my comment was more from the perspective of the consumer. And one thing I know as a consumer is that anyone who goes out of their way to impress me with commitment and dedication to their craft gets high praise to from me, and referrals to everyone within earshot. <br>

<br>

So maybe this makes no sense from a hard-line business standpoint, you could be absolutely right. <br>

<br>

But again, as a consumer, it would sure mean a lot to me to find a sympathetic photographer who happened to be free on a Tuesday afternoon and wanted to help salvage the memories from one of the most important days of my life. <br>

<br>

The images matter to this bride, after all she is obviously distraught and wants to do a re-shoot and is willing to pay. So would there really be anything wrong with helping out on an otherwise un-booked day?</p>

 

<p>As an "Uncle Bob" who has shot weddings for family members I can give one more piece of advice - keep an assistant close at hand: husband, boyfriend, girlfriend, anyone who you can count on to be near you all day. <br>

 

<p>Because when your dear friend has a moment of panic and needs someone to run an errand, and this <em>will</em> happen, she will stop thinking of you as a photographer and immediately revert back to "dear friend" mode and ask for help. </p>

</p>

<p><em>" ...a local photographer respond and offer to do a trash the dress session (for free, no strings attached) and fix some of the photos from the photographer I had hired. Guess what, now I talk her up like crazy and refer clients to her all the time."</em><br />

<p>There is a lesson in there for all of you that immediately said no. </p>

</p>

<p>Headed to SF the third week in February (staying in the North Beach area) was wondering if anyone had any recommendations for places/areas to visit. The funkier and more out of the way the better. Photo, beer, food, any thoughts will be appreciated.</p>

<p>BTW, in case it hasn't been said above, a big thank you to Hansen for taking the time to shoot and post all these images.</p>

<p><em>"But at 1.8 the Nikkor 50/1.8 for $150, beats them both. Its a common discovery."</em></p>

<p>Not by my eye. It looks to me like the Zeiss is the sharpest, and also notice the white bleed on the "J" with the Nikon 1.8.</p>

<p>Not to high-jack this thread, but is there really no metering with the Zeiss?</p>