Forum Replies Created
My entire knowledge of Wisconsin is from a classmate in high school who said to another class mate who’d lived in Wisconsin for some time, “everyone in Wisconsin is fat”. In fact that is the only thing I remember her saying.
I don’t think she is too fauxy, just not a good photographer. Sure, there’s some warning bells ringing like having a cover photo of a rebel with a kit lens and not realising wide angle lesnse shouldn’t be used for shooting someone close up but at least she is paying taxes and some of her shots aren’t too bad. I wouldn’t want anyone to hire her for a wedding but she is honest she wants to build her skills and charge a bit excessively for I think ($100/hr)
Pants in British English is usually underwear, but it could also mean poor or awful. Things get a bit confusing though as insulating trousers worn for skiing are usually referred to as ski pants. Ladies underwear are knickers. The more you know…
Let’s not even get started on the whole pants business
Ooh, this got much more interesting now.
Blueeyes, no matter if you think you are a professional or not, the moment money starts changing hands and you advertise yourself you are in fact a professional photographer. Being that you are subject to scrutiny and frankly your shots aren’t where any self respecting photographer would want them to be.
Nobody is trying for you not to have fun, especially if you have a disabled hubby and you do it together. However to put this very bluntly, you are not good enough to charge money for what you are doing and let’s face it, have you paid tax on your earnings? Have you got insurance? Have you got a business licence (or whatever it is called around your parts)? With your prices I’m guessing no, this is also part of the problem.
In fact, if you want I can give you constructive criticism how you can easily improve your shots if you want.
Looking at your shots they mostly look good and I wouldn’t call you a faux. However, you have 1178 photos on your flickr, get the 30 best and make a portfolio and you’ll probably get a much better response.
My one criticism in general would be that your blacks and shadows aren’t black enough in some shots but look grey
Both the 6D and 5DIII are weather sealed to the same standard which is at the level one of their last 1 series 35mm cameras was. The 5DII on the other hand has minimal weather sealing.
JC, for the shot you are posting it would make more sense I think for you to go with a 6D and spend the extra money on a nice new lens. Maybe save up for one of those 15mm zeiss lenses, now that is a lens exuding quality or a canon 24mm TS-E lens. Both would make sense with the shots you are taking
What the 5DIII offers over the 6D: One more card slot (though this is a slow SD one), vastly superior AF system with the exception of the centre point which is actually better on the 6D, more robust body, joystick on the back and overall better ergonomics and two more megapickles.
What the 6D offers over the 5DIII: Slightly lighter and smaller body, slightly better high iso performance, wifi and gps
Neither of the two will really give you any better performance than a 5DII if you use iso 100 except for the fact that the two new FF offerings have better weather sealing.
Didn’t you know everyone needs a 1200mm lens? A pet project of mine is to photograph a snow leopard in the wild and I know just the spot for it. There’s a remote valley in Kyrgyzstan on the border to China with a largeish lime stone formation with a cave in it. Outside the cave there’s been large cat prints, piles of excrement and piles and piles of bones from large herbivores both years me or friends have gone past it. Up in the mountains there are no other large cats as far as we know so it has to have been a snow leopard and since they are notoriously shy 1200mm is probably bare minimum, a 1.4x extender would be useful so AF can still be retained at least on centre point
For shooting models a longer focal length is generally better as you don’t want to accentuate them with a wide angle. The lens on an iphone I think is 35mm equivalent and your 50 is equivalent to a 75mm. Lots of people like the 85mm (on a full frame) for portraits but I personally like to use longer focal lengths in the region of 135-200 (if you have enough space) as the compression is far more flattering and the longer focal lengths help with subject isolation. Just look up what a 200 f2 lens can do with portraits
I like the shot with the girl in black sports bra though, interesting lighting, good pose and nice framing. I would probably personally have added a small light from the back to give a bit more of a rim light in the hair as her black hair blends into the black background. This is probably the only shot I’d keep out of the ones you have put up in the portfolio. The other shot with the same girl could have been decent but her face looks completely smudged, did you use noise reduction on it? You want their skin to look smooth but not like plastic.
I wouldn’t mind a 1200 5.6, though I would need a new tripod head 🙂
As for upgrading to a 5DIII, the 5DII is generally considered ever so slightly sharper not to mention far cheaper 🙂
Nissin’s flashes are very similar in function to canon’s and in some ways better. The new ones have a USB port so firmware can be updated if canon change their flash software and the risk of problems is really quite small since nissin license the software from canon. In fact, both metz and nissin have been making flashes for far longer than canon has.
As for cheapo flashes like the yongnous, they work perfectly fine. They are well built and have decent specs but cost very little. If you aren’t a professional or have a big income yongnous would be the way to go I think. You can get yourself four manual flashes and a radio transmitter for less money than a single 600 EX. Nowhere near as convenient as the canon offering though. You can also get their flashes with TTL support and TTL transceivers so things will be properly exposed without too much hassle and it lets you adjust ratios between flash groups through the camera. There is little doubt in my mind that the canon system is better but it is also far, far more costly but can be relied on fully.
A 1DX is a great camera but not for every professional. The new 5D and 6D are weathersealed to the same standard as the older 1 series 35mm cameras and let us not forget the sound of the mirror of a 1DX, not exactly great for a wedding ceremony. In fact most photographers that don’t do sport would be better off with a digital medium format and a weather sealed pentax 645 costs about the same as a 1DX. While not as big a sensor as a phase one it still is twice the size of a “full frame” sensor which means lots of loveliness if light is good.
I wouldn’t have included the blurry shot when they are walking down the aisle and you’ve overdone the desaturation a little on the two kids. Otherwise I think that looks like a really nice set of shots by someone who isn’t a wedding photographer.
As for the 50 1.8, it is a remarkable lens for what it costs. Image quality is excellent but only as long as you don’t compare it to its more expensive brethren like the 1.4. The straight aperture blades and a bit off colour rendition combined with the harvester AF motor makes it less appealing to me as does the lack of FTM override.
Lenses hunting is mostly due to the body but to some extent to the lens. What body are you using? the xxxD series didn’t get good AF until the 650D whereas the 40D had good AF. Even with a tamron or sigma 2.8 you will find that the focus is far better simply because the AF sensor has far more light to work with. I had a look at your website and don’t get me wrong in a snobbish way but you badly need some better gear if you are going to charge people. You should be able to create shots that they can’t with their P&S. Go on gumtree, find yourself a 5D classic or better yet a 5d mkII and a 135 f2L if you shoot outdoors a lot or a 85 f1.8 if you shoot indoors mostly. If you shoot a lot in a well lit studio find yourself a canon 24-105 f4L for some more versatility or if you shoot mostly outdoors a canon 70-200L IS mkI or a Sigma 70-200 OS. You want to have the option to completely melt away backgrounds when they aren’t needed and for the really long focal lengths you will need the stabiliser since you don’t have lots of flashes that do high speed sync. Your shots look good and you have an eye for it but you don’t have the gear you need. In fact I would have removed the gear off your website completely as it looks really bad. If you get a full frame stick the 50 on your 400D and the 135mm of the full frame for a bit of variation.
This is her profile, I was probably in a very good mood yesterday because looking at it again the majority of photos look good but some where I can only think “why did this end up in your portfolio” http://www.theknot.com/Vendors/Roxanne-Ashey-Photography/Profile/PHO/177/550546/profile?sid=dSL0Po7fqZXPE2moZdAJ5Q&redirect=true#portfolio
Look through her older albums on facebook and the photos look more interesting. Maybe she’s feeling a bit burnt out, who knows. However she has enough sound knowledge of photography she does not belong in this thread really. A bit uninspiring as of late but like cain et al.
I unsubscribed from the knot as soon as I had registered and unticked all other promotional stuff from them. The address I left was for a phoenix walmart
I just wish all real photographers would stop using facebook as a platform, not only have they got awful terms and conditions but also what the site does to your photos isn’t great.