stephen_behr

<p>Look at the Sony RX10 Mk3.</p>

<p>The best wedding site is your own. There are heaps of templates etc. Marc is correct in that it won't drive new business. Its a place to show your work in addition to referrals etc. It helps prospective customers confirm that your work meets their expectations.<br> 90% of wedding photographer gigs come of recommendations.<br> The easiest is Flikr. (along with the other 10,000 wedding photographers unfortunately)</p>

<p>Too much kit. Way too much.<br> You should be able to do the lot with a 24-70 2.8 and a 80-200 2.8. Some delete the 24-70 and go with a 16-35. Two good bodies is enough. I have never seen anyone with more than this. My partner shot weddings for 20 years with two bodies and the above lenses. There are so many people doing weddings today, the competition is huge. Being more resourceful is the key.<br> Don't forget that all a digital camera is, is a sensor with controls, just the same as a camera in the film days was a housing for the film with similar controls. The photographer needs to add the artistry and discover beautiful moments to record.<br> I saw the reference to "high ISOs are for beginners". Thats a silly comment. Todays top of the line FF cameras, Canon or Nikon, can produce acceptable images up to ISO 100,000. Its amazing. This capability is really useful as it frees up constraints in churches where no flash is allowed. It also frees up shutter speeds that were reduced to maybe 1/250 with a flash.</p>

<p>I forgot to say that down here (Australia) we are using a clause in the contract that says:<br> "We reserve the right to change our terms and conditions without notice".<br> Insert it towards the end of the Ts and Cs. Banks use this all the time, specially in loan documents.</p>

<p>Yes. Its a movie camera lens.</p>

<p>Too many putting up images now. You might do better on a Flikr group.</p>

<p>Yes. I shot with one for 15 years. Buy a another body for spares. Great camera. </p>

<p>Probably can't. Stupid money. You can buy a IIIa, f,g for $500 and a 50/3.5 Collapsable a la God, for less. Get out and use it. Wear it out, buy another. Life is too short to sit looking at one hoping the price goes up.<br> You can get a CLA'd M3 for $700 and put a 50 Summicron on for about the same. </p>

<p>Sony RX10 Mk3. 20mp, 20-600 zoom. Its so popular its on backorder.</p>

<p>For a compact film camera I would recommend a Nikon FM2n which is appreciating. For landscape get a 5x4 and see what a 1.5gb scan looks like!</p>

<p>Is this an issue? I am not seeing why this was posted? Do we need a lecture on the definition of half frame? I don't.</p>

<p>CLA is the best thing if you plan on retaining the Topcon. Everything will be checked for a small investment.<br> I would not attempt an oiling yourself. Some manufacturers only use drylube, not a liquid lubricant. They speed of the mirror is in microseconds and any liquid may spray everythere.<br> I used a Nikon F4 since new which I still consider to be one of the best film cameras ever made, and the local Nikon specialist made the case agains liguid lube. </p>

<p>CLA is the best thing if you plan on retaining the Topcon. Everything will be checked for a small investment.<br> I would not attempt an oiling yourself. Some manufacturers only use drylube, not a liquid lubricant. They speed of the mirror is in microseconds and any liquid may spray everythere.<br> I used a Nikon F4 since new which I still consider to be one of the best film cameras ever made, and the local Nikon specialist made the case agains liguid lube. </p>

<p>Look at:<br> http://www.boredpanda.com/hyper-realistic-art/<br> Its called hyper-realism. Its paint and brushes work. Anyone can do it in PS. Its also what I am starting to do. I did one last year. It took 3 months and I got paid for the three months work. </p>

<p>Down here is a growing problem. With cameras so capable now, there are a lot of shooters who are not prepared to do the miles first. <br> Or, of course, dangle some dollars. Start at $200 for an hour and email your Model Release.</p>

<p>It seems that all the experts who have not touched or shot with it yet are full of opinions. No doubt DPReview will do a test soon enough.<br> The consumer belts Nikon for not having enough primes to counter Canon, then when they produce some they cop criticism and of course the DX camp complain too. <br> I am in the DX camp, but I accept that serious professional photographers who shoot portraits would most likely be on FX anyway. I also would say this. Shooting artistic or important portraits for which this lens is designed, in my circle, everyone uses manual focus override.</p>

<p>If post processing the image removes the haze it suggests the sensor is recording a good image in the first place. It sounds like picture controls or contrast.</p>

<p>What you don't want is a lens that is so wide the whole perspective is distorted and the center is pushed back.<br> The best gear but being realistic? In 35mm, a 24mm tilt/shift lens at least. The most commonly used would be medium format 6x6 or 645 with a 45mm lens. The best of course would be a 4x5 with a 65mm lens and tilt/shift bellows, but its impractical. All can be had with a digital back or in the latter two a hi res scan off a Velvia or Reala slide.</p>

<p>Shoot RAW, suck into View NX2 and convert to TIFF. Open the TIFFs in LR. <br> I was faced with this decision a couple of months ago and bit the bullet and subscribed to Adobe CC Photography pack. $10 a month and always on the latest version. </p>

<p>Do a test. Go back to basics. I'am going to get belted here...Shoot jpeg, large fine, Auto WB, Active DL auto, sRGB, standard picture control. Open in View NX2 and the images will look boring but then you have a base to work from.<br> Then shoot them in RAW and Open in View NX2 again and apply your presets on the computer. Try Vivid picture control +3, and Sharpening +3 and see what you get.<br> Sometimes its not worth the effort to shoot in RAW with Nikon picture controls now so good. <br> What version of LR and ACR are you on? Personally I would stay away from Adobe RGB for the moment. It just complicates things. If what you get in ViewNX2 and LR are different then it points to software or settings in LR. </p>

<p>No archive copies kept? Are you serious? Maintain goodwill and give them a once-off new dvd and call it quits after that. Its at very little cost to you.</p>

<p>Easy.<br> Better marketing at the time. Books, guides, tutor groups. He was amazing at marketing. He popularity came from the "do as I show you and you can make pictures like mine". We all know though, the trouble he took to produce the print he wanted.</p>

<p>Under contract law in Commonwealth countries, there can be an enforceable contract (verbal) if the three elements are present and can be evidenced: an offer, an acceptance of the offer and consideration (money paid). 1st year Law 101. The question is whether the gift of the prints represents money paid.<br> An action to regard the gift as income would not succeed because there was no way to value the prints at the time of transfer of possession nor was there the intention to sell them on either.</p>

<p>I own Nikon and Canon. Why not add Sony into the mix and create a new three way argument?<br> I think these sort of questions should not be asked as its a personal choice. To me Nikon and Canon are exactly equal and it often depends on how you started out. Preference also comes from familiarity. </p>

<p>I would venture saying that photography can be "artistic" but not ART pe se. I also paint realism paintings and illustrations. I have to create an image in my mind and then paint it. That is art.</p>