Christopher Sperry Photogr

rodeo_joe, Thanks for joining this conversation, as your comments bring more flash considerations for anyone following this thread. At the time that I chose the SB-80dx it made sense, and still does for photographing interiors.

 

I shoot from a tripod, typically setting my camera at its base iso, and the speedlights as low as 1/8 power. I also use a Paul C. Buff White Lightning as a key light when needed.

 

As you know, controlling window light is often more about subtracting and diffusing light. Soon I would like to consider adding remote control electronics to the lighting mix.

Miss Annette, I once owned a Vivitar 283. Due to the uncertainty of the voltage, I gave the 283 away when I bought my Nikon D80. I then bought two used Nikon SB24 Speedlights. Now my four primary Nikon Speedlights are the Nikon SB80DX, Introduced in 2002. I continue to use the SB80DX with my full-frame Nikon camera.

 

The SB80DX has a built-in slave unit, which functions perfectly if the distance from another flash is not too great. The SB80DX also has secondary built-in defusing and flash-bounce features, and a model-specific diffuser dome is also available. With re-chargeable batteries, the Speedlights have always performed perfectly. It is very important to have the Speedlight user manual with you to learn and remember the settings. I also use radio triggers to fire the Speedlights, often adding umbrellas or soft boxes.

Adobe Creative Cloud subscription includes phone tech support. Try the Adobe 800 number if you feel so inclined.

One of my kayaking photos in the Action Sports Contest needs to be rotated 90 degrees. The orientation was vertical in the source file. In the contest, the photo is horizontal. Three tries, no charm.

Goo Gone -- Citrus Based gooie, sticky stuff remover.

 

I have come to having a Bob Dylan song replay in my head -- "Everything is Broken". I still have confidence that some day in the near future, the scattered bits and bytes will be glued back together. In the meantime, I keep checking the Photo Contest page, and reading the forums.

I am still trying, once a day, to enter the Action Sports contest. Maybe tomorrow ...

I also use a word processor for longer posts -- in gmail, and Meetup. Too much work has gone *poof* due to either a time-out, or an automatic save.

<p>I purchased the original Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 years ago, new. The lens is sharp, reliable, and produces quality saturated images. The lens was purchased along with a D80 body (still going) and now produces even better photos on my D7000. Like any zoom, controlling flare is part of the shooting process. Shooting landscapes with the sun in the frame can produce significant flare -- but when controlling the flare, the Tamron can produce some nice effects for those who like that sort of thing. I have photographed interiors with the D7000 and Tamron 17-50. Tripod mounted, along with speedlights and umbrellas, results in nice crisp images.</p>

<p>Here in Montana, fire season is months away, but this is a good time to view these photographs. While we celebrate the fresh powder at our ski areas, a good yearly snow pack is the most important.</p>

<p>Whether remembering the 1988 fires in Yellowstone National Park, or Norman Maclean's "Young Men and Fire", or learning about firefighting in London, these photographs offer compelling photojournalism.<br>

From The Weather Channel http://www.weather.com/tv/shows/responding-by-storm/news/vintage-firefighting-taming-flames-20130807</p>

<p> </p>

<p>From the Lone Mountain summit on a clear day you can see the Tetons. This photo shows the Big Sky Tram above the Big Couloir.<br>

Samsung Galaxy S4</p><div></div>

<p>Last spring in Montana, Big Sky Resort. View of Lone Mountain 11,162 feet.<br>

Samsung Galaxy 4</p><div></div>

<p>The photo.</p><div></div>

<p>Subject: Amber, from a visit to Poland. Nikon D7000 w/Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/4 Ai & PN-11 for 1:1; north facing window light. This lens provides all I need for my macro interests, although my Micro-Nikkor 55mm Ais is often in my kit just in case. A focusing rail would be handy.</p>

<p><em>"maybe a virtual machine"</em> ... I am interested in the concept myself, as I have Windows 8, a copy of XP, and some XP software to run.</p>

<p>http://www.howtogeek.com/171395/how-to-get-windows-xp-mode-on-windows-8/</p>

<p>http://www.vmware.com/products/player/</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Paul Ferrante specializes in the repair and maintenance of Nikon LS-2000 and LS30 scanners. Perhaps he can help you. You can email Paul at:<br>

paul.ferrante@charter.net</p>

<p><em>Hadn't been aware of the file size limitation on PE.</em></p>

<p>Art, please do your own research also. I haven't checked out PSE12.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I am moving from Elements 9 on a 32bit Windows 7 system, to Lightroom 5 & CS5 on a 64bit Windows 8 system. I suggest that you research Bit Depth in Photoshop Elements. Using my 32bit version of PSE9, I cannot utilize a 16bit conversion of RAW Files.</p>

<p>Also, as far as I know, PSE9 has limits on file sizes that it is capable of handling. Medium Format scans, large stitched files, or large multi-layered files can be out of the PSE range of capabilites. PSE12 could have more capabilities in bit depth and large files.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>A peaceful easy feeling, high in the Montana Rocky Mountains, 3:30am.</p><div></div>

<p><em>I'll bet if a vendor ever comes up with a way to replace the sensor without having to replace the entire camera (i.e. the same way you used to be able to just change film when a better one came out) you would see a lot of people changing cameras a lot less frequently.</em><br>

<em> </em></p>

<p>Still, our DSLR's are small, specialized computers. Consider this comparison: your three-year-old desktop computer could benefit from a power boost, so you upgrade the micro-processor and add some RAM, and even add a new cooling fan. Six months later the motherboard fails. Dang -- you should have just waited a little longer and bought a new desktop. This didn't actually happen to me -- it's just a scenario I made up for comparison.</p>

<p> Personally, reading and thinking about optics is ultimately more interesting. Therefore, when NAS begins to creep into your photographic thoughts, consider what a new lens will do for you, and skip one or two camera upgrade cycles. Then when you do upgrade your DSLR, all of your new camera's electronics will be new, making the most of your new sensor, and your carefully considered lens collection. Of course lens acquisition takes extra forethought for DX shooters who are considering FX in their near future. So it goes. </p>

<p>Gerry,<br>

Wikipedia has a good Cinerama page, which is interesting, and generates more ideas about the concepts we have been discussing. For now, this is a theoretical (casual) conversation, but it may come into practice in the future. Thank you for your suggestion to think Cinerama.</p>

<p><em>Something that I would consider is to separate the group with a gap in the center.</em></p>

<p>Yes, a gap would work in this example. The photograph in the magazine is designed to be informal, and the individuals are spaced loosely, and randomly separated anyway. And as Bill C mentioned, the separation of the cameras would change the perspective. Therefore, it would be important to keep the cameras as close together as possible.</p>

<p><em>If you can make it work the nice thing is that you don't have to get good expressions from everyone in one shot; you just have to somehow make them fit together in the stitch. ;-)</em></p>

<p>Exactly. Typically, everyone wants to look their best. My thinking was, if you did have this two-camera technique dialed in, shooting multiple shots could be no different than with one camera and a wide angle lens (assuming your lighting is also dialed in). The stitching is the next trick. If the group gets larger and wider, add third D80 w/ 35mm f1.8? </p>

Chas, the twelve people were in a straight line

for the most part, parallel to the back wall. If

you swing the camera in an arc, without

moving the tripod, the distance from the plane

of focus to the subjects changes. That is why

people are sometimes asked to gather in a

semi-circle for a group portrait. I wanted to

imagine the cameras' sensors to remain

parallel to the group.

 

Additionally, people move, blink, and can lose

patience while you're recomposing your

camera. The two camera idea is also that the

entire group is photographed straight on, with

a portrait friendly lens, in one instant, with

your back against the wall. I'm thinking

outside the box.

<p>A recent issue of a glossy magazine from my region contains an article about a new local restaurant, with several nice photographs and good window light. The article includes a well-designed group shot of twelve people. It's apparent that the group photo was taken with a wide angle lens, and although it's a nice setting, the people on the edges of the photo are subject to wide angle distortion. I imagine the photographer was against the wall, and had to shoot wide.</p>

<p>Question: When you're up against the wall, what about using two digital cameras of the same model, with the same portrait-friendly lens, set up on tripods apart from each other, to be remotely fired at the same time, with about 20% overlap -- then stitch the two photos together?</p>

<p> I recently purchased a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 for my Nikon D7000 -- primarily for shooting night skies and landscapes. I know this lens is a popular choice for interiors, and that distortions can be corrected in post processing. But -- if you add people to the photograph, it's a different scenario. Although I typically shoot landscapes and outdoor sports, the magazine's restaurant photo just got me thinking about a distortion solution for group portraits.</p>

<p>The small print: this assumes that you have a back-up camera and lens of the same models, and that your lighting is well done. For example, with good lighting, my Nikon D80 is perfectly capable of publishable photos, and a second D80 is an inexpensive consideration. I have a Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8G, and a Nikon AF-S 18-55mm 3.5-5.6G. Either of these lenses are inexpensive. I have searched the archives regarding my question. If it's been discussed, I didn't find it.</p>

<p>Keep your D7000! I have a D80 and a D7000. Both have pentaprism viewfinders, two control wheels, and similar external buttons. The D7000 meters with manual focus lenses, which is great for macro using older AI and AIS Micro-Nikkor lenses. You want a zoom lens: the D7000 has full functionality with AF-D zoom lenses; you are not restricted to AF-S zoom lenses. As mentioned, the D7000 is faster and easier to operate compared to a D5200, once you have learned the basics of the camera.</p>

<p>Recently I was handed a D800 to take a few shots. I was immediately comfortable with the camera. I made a few shooting changes with the external buttons and took my shots. Conversely, my friend recently handed me his D5100, and I began menu diving in a foreign environment. I wouldn't mind shooting a D5200 -- it's just a slower process, and less like shooting my Nikon film cameras.</p>

<p>Some books have been mentioned. I use "Mastering the Nikon D7000" by Darrell Young. You could also consider joining the Nikonians, where a user forum is dedicated to the D7000 and D7100. In order to feel truly comfortable with any of the DSLRs, you have to put in some quality study time, and put your camera through your normal paces with some regularity.</p>