Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Mrs Woo
Participant@Punk28 – did you notice that there are some better shots on that page but that they are all watermarked “Cristallo Fenestre Photography” instead of the unwatermarked photos the rest of the page? It is just the one shoot. The post production techniques, etc., everything has a different feel. There’s one image there that’s not in focus, but most of them seem better than the rest of the page. I just find that fascinating… Hmmm…?
ParticipantAnd most of this album made me feel sorry for the bride and groom:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.464810736874061.103052.464807956874339&type=3
ParticipantThe Dynamic Mobile Photography one confuses me. Some things are really pretty interesting (found myself turning pages and looking around), other stuff is junk. You almost wonder if they have multiple personality disorder and sometimes the hack takes over at bad moments.
You Nique is definitely sad…
What do you guys think of this?
ParticipantI actually got talked into shooting a wedding long before the days of digital. My step sister (who is by nature very frugal to begin with) was planning an outdoor wedding with at total budget of less than $300. Not only did I get lassoed into shooting the wedding (all the time insisting to her, “I have never photographed a wedding, do not have adequate flash, etc.” (to which she argued this is an outdoor wedding, there’s this big thing called the sun to provide light), do not have my own dark room to do prints, etc.) I also did all the flower arrangements and decorating. I guess I should be grateful that since she made me photographer I was not required to also be a member of her small wedding party…
I had been trained to do darkroom work by a former wedding photographer a few years previous. At the time, I aspired to be a professional photographer one day. I love photography, love people – it sounded like a great job. He talked me out of it. He had done it for a long time, but even back then the competition and unpredictability and lack of respect for the craft by many clients made him frustrated. He told me that if I really was that naive I could try, but I should always make sure I had a day job.
ParticipantI tend to agree with Browneyedgirl quite a bit – on the last one there’s a ton of select color and faddish posing. Then again, it could be faddish posing is everywhere and some assume everyone wants it. Sometimes (to this old lady, at least) it seems like some of the stuff around here lapses into the “isn’t my competition terrible?” rather than truly bad photography (then there’s that picture of the little girl that someone shared that still haunts my retinas – PhotoShop should require examinations and license before use!).
I was jealous of the one photographer – they have had access to some absolutely beautiful sites to do their work, and they used it to their advantage. Whenever someone attempts to tell me my images are amazing, I look at my pictures and think to myself, “It’s rural farm land in the Midwest – how exciting is that?”
ParticipantI am surprised you had issues with the 55-250 f/4-5.6. Most users actually call it the “nifty two-fifty” because its image quality is so good for the price. Mine actually got me some incredibly sharp (could see the barbules on a cardinal’s feather) images when shot with the lens’s strengths in mind. I also got a pretty nice quality kit lens with the T1i I got and have some good shots with it. I am a pixel peeper, so maybe one of the issues with the consumer quality lenses is that there is a lot more ‘room’ for what is considered a good copy and one can get an excellent, sharp copy and one can get a not so good copy as well.
I have to admit, also that the sharpness and image quality weren’t as consistent as they are with the higher priced lenses. My 70-200 f/2.8 IS II was shockingly sharp, even wide open – something that you can’t get with a lens you pay 90% less for. Then again, the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is 10 x the price, so once again it is easy to see why people are impressed with the 55-250’s performance.
(sudden aha! moment…) Wow. Maybe that is why I wonder how in the world all the fauxtogs are passing off these out of focus pictures as good work. Maybe part of it is a combination of lower-priced lenses and not knowing how to play to their strengths (i.e., shooting as much as possible in the sweet spot, etc.). It’s not that the images look badly focused as much as they are ‘slightly off’ or ‘muddy’ and fine detail like eyelashes, etc., are lost.
I have to admit to some confusion here (perhaps it is my bird brain?) – you say “alas, those nice lenses work even more seamlessly with my 5D Mark II.” Why is that a bad thing? Every lens I bought since focusing on creating work on a consistent basis that I was willing to sell to people will fit both an APS-C camera and full-frame, because I intend to add a full-frame camera to my lineup at some point. Is it a bad thing that the lenses work on both cameras? I have to admit a Rebel with a huge piece of glass on it feels kind of unbalanced in the hand and looks a bit awkward, but the best possible image quality comes from the best glass. That is the big factor. Also, lack of knowledge regarding the lens’s strengths when you are dealing with lower quality glass can often be a tripping point for less experienced photographers.
Once again, I would argue that you might see image quality improvement on your kit lenses if you take the UV filters off. I have noticed (pixel peeping again) visible differences on $2000 lenses between ‘nude’ and ‘covered.’ You are dealing with another layer of glass, its possible imperfections, its reflectance, etc., etc. These all can degrade image quality.
And please understand, I was using $100+ UV filters to cover the nice lenses. For some reason I don’t expect quite the same investment from whomever sold you the kit lenses. It would be a surprise to find a $100 UV filter on a $200-250 (depending on when you get it and what packages might be going on; some have even been able to get one new for $150) lens.
ParticipantThat has got to be one of the creepiest pictures I have ever seen. I’m still horrified and I closed the window…
January 25, 2013 at 1:34 am in reply to: She will call your clients and offer cheaper services #5917ParticipantI found this photo disappointing. I know from experience that FB can cut off inconvenient parts in the thumbnails, and I figured that must have happened in this case. However, I was wrong.
ParticipantI notice straps. I have a WTD strap.
For some reason I hate the straps that come with the cameras emblazoned with the company name.
If you’re uncomfortable with it, find a more neutral strap. However, ‘old-fashioned photographer straps’ are probably immediately just assumed to show you’re an old-fashioned photographer.
If you’re female and want to be especially interesting you could always get one of those straps with the silk flowers on them… (j/k)
ParticipantWell, you aren’t out there marketing yourself as a pro with absolutely no experience and a brand-new entry level camera you got for Christmas, so that’s a bonus. 😉
Your images weren’t bad (there are also not enough to judge). The focus doesn’t seem to be ‘spot on’ on either, but is better in the first picture shared. The one in the middle (second in list) does not go to anything anymore. I do like the first better. The second one the light is also not very good. Just definitely not ‘great.’
Do you plan on overselling yourself, refusing to be criticized, skipping paying income and sales taxes while undercutting the competition? To me, that, more than anything, is what constitutes a fauxtographer – no real skills, no interest in playing by the established rules and no clue as to why the first two should matter.
ParticipantOf course – if you can find a good used 60D/50D/40D to replace your older one (consider the canon forums on POTN), you get to save money ahead for either more/better glass or a new body later. So money does factor in. Once again, it isn’t a simple answer, because it is actually a very complex question.
ParticipantOkay – gonna skip what everyone said and point out something really quickly here. If I remember correctly, the Canon T1i had pretty much the same sensor as the 50D. The Canon T2i and T3i both have very similar (if not identical) sensors to the 7D and 60D. Yes, you are going to miss out on things (though I suspect trickle down will still actually improve much of the technology vs. your 40D) vs going with a pro-type body, including weight and size (I like the feel of the larger cameras in my hands), but if you buy new with that, especially a T3i, you will also have a year warranty coverage as well.
Also, depending on what lenses you have already bought, going full-frame like with a used 5D you might have a lot of lenses that won’t work anymore. If you go to a Rebel series for now you will still be able to use your lenses. With the 5D those same lenses could actually damage your camera (anything with an EF-S designation will not work with a 5D or other full-frame – some will just put a circle in the frame with everything dark outside of it, some will actually have parts that can interfere with your mirror).
Purists love full-frame cameras because they are so similar to film, but if you’re used to working in APS-C land dealing with the 1.6x crop factor isn’t going to throw you.
People look down on Rebels, but internally there is a lot more about them that is similar to the higher end APS-C camera than different. Yes, they cost less. Yes, they have the cute little scene modes on them and the other modes that are kind of like training wheels before you move to Av,Tv and Manual (I started with manual and worked backwards when it came to SLR-type cameras), etc.
SO – my two cents – depending on what you are looking for and what lenses you have available right now, a Rebel is NOT a bad camera. My Rebel was drowned in an unfortunate incident last summer (my son pulled a raft out from under me when we were already beached and somehow my foot caught my camera where it was sitting as I fell backwards and it was kicked into a river) and for some things, like ‘traveling light’ moments I really miss it, even if it was only a 15.1MP T1i. I love the feel and handling of my 7D – it is definitely “more substantial,” but I’ve gotten beautiful shots with ‘just a Rebel.’
I am one of those ‘it’s the glass’ kind of people mostly as far as what really affects your image quality (after knowledge). As long as the Rebel does what you need it to and provides the functions you want, don’t rule it out as a possibility.
ParticipantSome really poor choices about what is selectively colored (and for that matter, it is seriously overused, but maybe clients still want it a lot?), but usually everyone who is supposed to be in focus is in focus, there is no camera shake blur, etc.
Too much trendy post-processing. A pro friend of mine was thrilled to have a customer come to him because she liked classic poses and looks and recognized that the trendy stuff would look as bad/silly as mullets do to most of us today. She said he was the only photographer in his area that she could find that had portfolios that didn’t include actions on every image, dutch angles, etc. He’s a very experienced guy who has been doing this for decades as well. It is frustrating to be constantly undersold by people who have neither the experience, equipment or ability that he has.
Still, it is obvious from his site and some of what you said that he knows how to market, even if he has grown to resent (apparently) his customer base. 🙁
ParticipantAs far as my dream kit? Though it might be nice to have a 1Dx, I’m actually realistic enough to know that is something that I would rather not fit into my budget. I still need a 5DIII (it has similar layout to my 7D), 17-40 f/4 (I do mostly outdoor wildlife and landscape stuff), 45mm tilt-shift lens (just love what you can do with those), 300mm f/4, 2x TC (already have a 1.4x) and another flash or two. Then, if a little more money shows up one day I want to get the 14mm f/2.8 II lens because it just looks so awesome. 🙂
I really should stay away from Amazon.com.
ParticipantOkay – is this to save photography for the next generation and capture how we rebuild our future (i.e., loot it to save a stash for me) or is this to build the best possible camera to at least capture as much as possible and still survive the zombie onslaught?
Because if it is the former, I would pick up all the items that are still missing from my ‘perfect kit,’ load them into two wheeled Urban Disguise bags and find a good place to hide them. Then I would pick up as many cards and spare batteries as I could and grab a Panasonic super zoom (my water proof one doesn’t do a bad job at all, but doesn’t zoom much, obviously) if the real goal was just to capture the action as it unfolded. It would give me all focal lengths I could possibly need (yes, with some tradeoffs) with very little extra to carry and not much weight. Further, since you would have to travel light, you’d have to suck it up and put everything in JPG format so you’d make the best use of memory, both the memory cards and whatever lightweight laptop you might be using to offload cards to, etc. Efficiency would have to take the place of elegance, and learning the equipment available as quickly as possible, plus a strong background in composition, etc., would have to make up for the rest.
On the guns – definitely. Knives – for emergency situations, but not to fight zombies – if they’re that close, you’d better hope you can outrun the rest of your party. LOL
Electricity? That’s what the solar battery charger I stashed was all about.
-
AuthorPosts