sherman_peabody

The email service I've been using is going out of business. When I go to my profile, make the change, and hit "save changes", it says "saving", but that never changes, and the email address change isn't saved. Is there any way to make this work?

<p>I used a 50mm 1.8 on a T2i, so essentially the same setup as yours, and it worked fine for paintings about that size that were actually blown up a little larger than original. I would say, though, that to fill the frame on a work that size, you'll be fairly close to it, and the closer you are, the more you'll experience barrel distortion which you'll have to correct for in software. If I had it to do over again, I would use a longer lens so I could get further away from the subject.</p>

<p>And of course you'll be shooting at f8 or so, not wide open, and use a cable release or self-timer.</p>

 

<p>On my two Canon cameras, the A590is P&S and the T2i, there's an option to "low level" format the card. I believe that does completely erase the card, not just delete all the files. I tried running Recuva after a low level format, and it couldn't find anything on the card.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Justin, are you a professional photographer? If so, perhaps you should follow the advice of the pros and spend a couple thousand dollars to get everything you need. So you'll need the Pocket Wizards, and of course the 580EX. Oh, and of course a new camera because your lousy 60D is just no damed good. Right.</p>

<p>Or, if you're just getting started with this, you might just try the YN-560 you referred to in your post, and inexpensive radio triggers, for less than $100 in total, and just see how they work for you. If they don't work, you can throw them away, or more likely get all your $100 back selling them on Ebay or Craigslist. Oh, and stick with the 60D for now. Then you can spend the thousands of dollars later if you feel that's necessary.</p>

<p>One thing in particular that I think some pros are a bit out of date on is the inexpensive Ebay or Amazon radio triggers that they may have tried back in the day, and which were, indeed, junk. In the last couple years, a number of those triggers have been substantially improved, and they are now long-range and reliable. You might want to read the Amazon reviews on these triggers. I think you will find them to be quite favorable.</p>

<p>If it turns out that the inexpensive stuff is all you need, then you can spend the rest of the money on new glass, or whatever else you need. And if you find that you need additional functionality in your lighting setup, it may be that a little experience with the simple stuff will give you a better idea of exactly which features you really need.</p>

<p>In any case, I wish you good luck with your shooting. Perhaps you'll report back later as to what you bought, and how it worked for you, so others can benefit from your experience.</p>

 

<p>Well, actually, that trigger is more expensive than you really need. It's an ETTL trigger, which isn't needed for manual shooting. The Yongnuo RF-602 or RF-603 would be good manual triggers that should work fine for a good bit less money. Another option for a manual trigger is the Cactus V5, at about $60 for a pair of transceivers. They are quite popular.</p>

<p>However, it's possible the 622 would let you change the manual flash power from the camera, which would be handy. I just don't know about that for sure.</p>

<p>You would mount the receiver on the umbrella bracket, and then mount the flash on the receiver's hot shoe. Triggers like Pocket Wizards work differently in that you mount the flash on the umbrella bracket, and the receiver plugs into the flash using a short cable.</p>

<p>If you meant shooting two flashes through one umbrella, then you would need some kind of adapter to do that. That's beyond my pay grade.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I would discourage you from using cable connections. They just get in the way, the connections aren't really reliable, and they are now more expensive than the radio trigger alternatives. Radio trigger sets (not Pocket Wizards) start in the low $20 range for a non-ETTL set, and work quite well. It should be possible to put the radio receiver on, say, your 430EX, and put the YN-560 in optical slave mode - so it fires when the 430 fires. This usually works fine indoors, but a second receiver would be more dependable outdoors.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>No, Ellis, my belief about what David Hobby says is based on watching his Strobist video series from start to finish. It's all about manual flashes with manual power settings, and learning to light that way. That point is emphasized over and over, from the equipment selection video all the way through his workshop classes. In hour after hour, it's nothing but manual power settings and non-ETTL radio triggers. I'm sure David uses ETTL when he thinks that's best, but the "Strobist" idea as he uses it is all about manual flashes.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Just to clarify something - I believe the basic premise of the whole Strobist technique is the use of off-camera flashes in manual mode, as opposed to using ETTL. I think Mr. Hobby's position is that while ETTL may be good for on-the-go photo-journalism using on-camera flash, where you may have only one chance to get the shot, it only makes life difficult when using off-camera flash under controlled situations. The reason is that with ETTL every time you move the position of the camera, or the subject, or frame the shot a bit differently, you're going to get a new calculated solution which has nothing to do with the previous shot, and it may not be one you like.</p>

<p>So let's say you take an ETTL shot, and find that you need to make a compensation adjustment. Then you make that adjustment, but take the next shot from a bit different position, or framed a little differently. Well, the camera is going to calculate a new solution, with your adjustment built in, but depending on exactly how you've framed the shot, the adjustment may no longer be appropriate. So you end up chasing your tail. It just becomes an exercise in frustration.</p>

<p>Hobby would say that for off-camera lighting where you have some control and can take multiple shots, it's easier to get good, consistent results setting both your camera and your flashes to full manual mode. This not only saves money on the flashes and triggers, but also lets you learn about lighting since you have to make all the decisions. I should also say that Joe McNally and Syl Arena appear to disagree with this point of view, and frequently use ETTL for off-camera lighting. I've never had the luxury of using ETTL, or even master/slave flashes, but have found that full manual works quite well for me, and I learned to be pretty good at it pretty quickly. Anyway, my point is that I think "Strobist" implies the use of manual flashes.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have the retaining ring, and a thin black threaded ring which the manual suggests may be the "adapter ring insert". That threads into the end of either the lens or the retaining ring. It appears the filters are not threaded, but are just dropped in and are held in place by one or more of those rings.</p>

<p>I have a genuine Kodak Series VI Wratten 23A filter, which is redish-orange. And I have a Harrison Series VI YL3 (K2) filter, which is yellow. Well, I just told you everything I know about filters. So I don't know what the effect of these filters would be - as to their effect on B&W and the number of stops they drop.</p>

<p>If I can't find a Series VI ND filter, I thought I might be able to use a threaded ND4 filter of another brand - somewhere between 41mm and 43mm. My 23A is 41mm, but it looks like a somewhat larger size would still drop in. 43mm seems to be a common size for modern cameras. 41mm - not so much.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Since the fastest shutter speed on the Medalist is 1/400 second, I would like to find a 2-stop ND filter that would let me use Tri-X as though it were ASA 100, and open the aperture a bit even in bright sunlight. I think there was actually a ND4 Series VI filter made back in the day, but I've had no luck finding one. Anyone know where I might find one?</p>

<p>Alternatively, if anyone has used some other brand of filter successfully, it would be helpful to know which one fits.</p>

 

<p>Matt is right about the way to determine the best focal length. But if 85mm is too long, you might borrow a friend's nifty 50 and give it a try, or maybe the f1.4 version for better bokeh. I use the f1.8 50mm on my T2i, and it works fine - but I haven't tried overhead shots. But it's really just a function of how much you can back up.</p>

 

<p>I would just offer that for someone with no resources to buy lighting gear, there is always the option I used - cheating. I did the photography for a local oil painter, and in the end I found a good spot outdoors in the shade, and took each painting there to be photographed. You have to be careful about white balance, but in general the light is even, broad-spectrum, and omnidirectional, and the results were quite good. Of course that's not an option for some works, but when it is, it works pretty well, and costs nothing.</p>

<p>Getting the camera centered and square to the painting is more difficult than you would suspect. I think Rodeo Joe's idea of using a mirror is a great one.</p>

 

<p>Hi Duncan,</p>

<p>Yes, the transmitter has a test button, and it functions on the camera, and off. As long as range isn't an issue, it works quite well. You'll find lots of favorable reviews for it on Amazon. And for that price, it's a low-risk purchase.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Here's another inexpensive trigger:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002W3IXZW/">http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002W3IXZW/</a></p>

<p>This is the CowboyStudio trigger for under $25 on Amazon. I use this one, and can confirm that it works whether mounted on the camera or not. The only shortcoming is a relatively short range - about 30 feet.</p>

 

<p>I would second the XTi, but you might also be able to get an XSi for that price or a little more, and you pick up some significant features. Either way, these 4-6 year old Canons still take great pictures.</p>

 

<p>It's been mentioned that with oil paintings thick depositions of paint may lead to reflections you will have to adjust for. But I've run into this problem as well on very thinly painted works on woven canvas, or in particular areas of the canvas that are thinly covered. What happens is that the light may reflect off of the weave pattern itself in a way that isn't even, because the weave itself is three-dimensional. I remember one painting where the photo seemed to be lit evenly, but appeared to be covered with a strange kind of grainy overlay. Well it turned out to just be that the light was reflecting more strongly off the sides of the vertical threads in the weave. I was trying to do that one with two lights, but just couldn't get it to work. For that one we ended up taking it outside in the shade so that the light was uniform in all directions, and that worked nicely. But of course that's not always a practical alternative. Basically, I agree with Rodeo Joe and others that lighting with four lights at the corners should give you your best shot. But just be prepared to make adjustments no matter what setup you use.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'm told an ETTL external flash will work in live view just like the built-in flash does. But I don't have an ETTL flash, so can't confirm that. Perhaps someone here could try that with a Canon flash and let us know.</p>

<p>So, is there such a thing as an ETTL ring flash?</p>

<p>I suspect your explanation for the dark screen is correct. The camera must be basing it's simulation on the ambient scene and your current exposure settings because it doesn't know what the manual flash will contribute. So the scene shows as very dark. Well, if you find a solution for this, please let us know what it is.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I believe the 60D and 7D have a setting to turn off "Silent Shooting", and doing that is supposed to enable flash in live view. But my 550D has no such setting, and I suspect your 600D doesn't either (i.e. - not a Rebel feature).</p>

<p>So it may well be that you have the wrong camera for doing flash in live view.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Is it possible that you have the exposure in M set so low that the display is just dark?</p>

<p>My problem with live view on my 550D is that I can't use a radio trigger. It just doesn't fire. The popup flash works, and I'm told that an ETTL Canon flash would work, but either a dumb manual flash or radio trigger doesn't work in live view. But I don't have a problem with the live view display itself.</p>

 

<p>But, does an aspirational horse really like to be photographed?</p>

 

<p>Well, in M the shutter speed is one stop slower, but the exposure is therefore one stop greater.<br>

Yes I think this is typical behavior and done on purpose. On a non-5D2Canon camera with a popup flash, the exposure in Av mode will be one stop less when the flash is popped up than when it isn't. I think this is in recognition that the flash, even as fill, will be adding some light even to the background. At least my XT did that, and I haven't checked it, but my T2i probably does too. But of course in M mode, it just shows you the actual reading whether a flash is present or not.</p>

<p>So if you stay in Av mode on your 5D2, you should get a one-stop difference in exposure depending on whether something is in the hot shoe, all else being equal. I think that's completely normal for Canons.</p>

 

<p>Bob - nevermind. I understand now. It's 1.6X less DOF with the 7D, which is what your writeup said. But that's because the field of view is smaller. If the field of view with the 7D was the same as the 5D, either by backing up, or switching to a 31mm lens, the DOF of the 7D would be 1.6X DEEPER than the 5D.</p>

<p>And on further reflection, I think I understand that pixel size doesn't affect this unless it's too big. In other words, the 36MP full-frame sensor on the new Nikon won't affect DOF.</p>

 

<p>So, Bob, if I go to my favorite online DOF calculator, DOFMaster.com, and select the Canon 5DMkii with a 50mm lens at f/2.8 and subject distance of 6 feet, it says the DOF is .73 feet. But if I change the camera to a 7D, with everything else the same, it says the DOF is .46 feet, or much shallower than the 5D. How should I interpret these numbers? Are they just bogus? Is there a way to tell what assumptions are being used? They give the fomulas, but in the end it comes down to the circle of confusion, which they don't define further.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Well to follow up on this - the image circle is produced by the lens, and the crop sensor just uses the center part of that, but the image is the same, and the depth of field should be the same with either sensor, all else being equal. But I wonder if the pixel size has any effect on that - not the megapixels per se, but the size of the individual pixel sites. Does anyone know if that makes any difference in the depth of field?</p>

<p>In a pinch, I once tried using one of those lights to light a white backdrop, and it's definitely in the tungsten range. I was trying to mix that with regular flash to light the subject, so of course it didn't work. But it might have if I had used orange gels on the flashes.</p>

<p>The other thing with those lights is that the reflectors they usually have behind them produce uneven illumination - lots of banding. If you have any choice, you might consider another choice of lighting.</p>

<p> </p>