Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Thomas
ParticipantDon’t be harsh on yourself, you clearly have a good grasp of what you are doing, I wouldn’t necessarily say you were faux if you were charging. Of the 6 shots left on the flickr page I like the last 4 a lot. The first one (in colour) and the where she is sat down with a brick wall behind just don’t grab me as much. I’m not saying they are bad, I just really like the others. The last 2 are gorgeous in my opinion.
ParticipantSo this guy https://www.facebook.com/X9Photography I’m sure you would all remember if you have seen it.
Has decided to remove his page and I found out yesterday that he is starting up again as MS Photography (or something along those lines).I’ll keep my eyes open and post a link to whatever endeavor he decides to go for this time.
He actually said to my friend, “I see you are promoting Tom’s FB page a lot, why don’t you do that for me?”
My friend just panicked and said she would do it in future. I said she should have just told him the truth about his work being a gigantic sack of man balls wrapped up in scrotum. The reason my friend promotes me is because people love my work and actually want to hire me, if only they would…The guy has no job (our of choice I believe), and is living on benefits in a free house (supplied by the council). He has a young baby and is obviously desperate to make some money but is going about it completely the wrong way. He is one of those who seems to think that photography is just owning a camera and getting paid to take pictures instead of people doing it themselves.
Participant@ dont.care That made me lol, don’t ask why, it just tickled me…
ParticipantFor anyone wondering what comment I posted on Cains photo it was something like this:
“Using the excuse that different monitors and devices show images at different brightness is ridiculous. I’d need to power my monitor with plutonium to be able to see this image correctly. I suggest you remove it”
Something to that effect anyway….
ParticipantJust scrolling through his FB newsfeed… I think this guy has some kind of God complex. He almost refers to himself in the 3rd person….strange fellow.
ParticipantAs cameraclicker has pointed out Strobist is the best place to start learning. Go through the lighting 101 section first.
If you have a 580 then try doing this and then read the rest of my post if you want to.
Put the 580 on the camera and set to ETTL. Set camera to manual and spot metering (or equivalent to spot metering if, like me, you don’t have it Boooooo :o( )
Set your shutter speed to 1/200th second which is usually Canons maximum flash to shutter sync speed. Set ISO to 100. Point the camera at that lovely blue sky above your model/subjects head and set the aperture until the meter shows that the sky is under exposed by 1-2 stops (for now). Then point camera at subject and fire away. If the sky still looks too bright then under expose if more (i.e increase the aperture). If it really is a bright day and you have a high f/ number then that is what will limit the flash you will see lighting the subject so you need to be quite close sometimes.
The other option is to use the high speed sync (HSS) option on the 580ex. Basically you can then increase the shutter speed above the 1/200th sync speed to reduce the exposure of the sky. The aperture can then be reduced which means you see more flash output working in the image.
(Shutter affects ambient, aperture affects flash and ambient, it’s a case of balncing the 2. ISO also affects the flash seen in the image).
This is all using the 580 on camera with ETTL but learning manual is also good fun and satisfying when you get it right, see below for more.For any of you who already know this and more, I do understand there are a lot a varying factors when using these techniques but it’s a good starting point if you’re not sure what you are doing.
The one thing that bugs me about a lot of the answers to these kinds of strobist queries is that people usually seem to suggest that you buy the most expensive flashes and triggers. YOU DON’T NEED THIS STUFF. I have 2 Canon 430 exII’s. The power difference between these and the 580s is such a small amount that it doesn’t justify the extra £200 here in the UK. (430s about £195 for best deal, 580s about £395 best deal). I bought 2 Canon as I’m a brand whore but I bought them YEARS apart. I have also bought 2 used Centon FG105D flash units branded for use with Nikon because they have built in optical slaves, i.e, they fire when they see another flash go off. I bought them off ebay and spent a grand total of £50 for the 2 units and they are just as good as the Canons but feel less well built. So I have 4 great flashes in my kit for £450 instead of spending more than that on 1 600ex. Yongnuo as Nesgran said, might also be an option for you.
You don’t ‘NEED’ ETTL. If you are just starting out, ETTL can be a no go as it will cost more money in triggers. Don’t buy infa red, it’s not reliable. Don’t buy PWs, too expensive. There are a load of budget wireless controllers out there, ebay sell quite a few but I wanted a proper brand sold here in the UK. I started with £120 for one transmitter and receiver Seculine Twinlink T2D. They stopped making them before I had chance to buy more receivers so have changed to the Hahnel Combi TF system. Totally manual, cheap and TOTALLY RELIABLE. I spent £50 for one transmitter and receiver and additional receivers are £40 each. I only need 2 for my Canon flashes as I use the optical slaves on my Centons. The optical slaves have only failed me once in practice.
Anyway the point of my post is to get you to understand that you don’t need to spend $2000 on a strobist set up. Obviously ETTL, Pocket Wizards and 600ex units have some major advantages over cheaper models but if you learn your kit you can do a lot of things for a lot less money. I’m in no way disagreeing with anyone who has suggested expensive gear, I’m sure it’s fantastic, but if iliketag can’t afford all the expensive stuff then they have somewhere else to start with the advice I have given. Start with 1 flash unit, whether it’s Yongnuo or Canon, and try to get it of camera ASAP. If you do go for a different/older branded flash, you will need to make sure that the voltage wont fry your camera if placed onto the top hoptshoe. This is why it is sometimes safer to start with something specifically made for specific SLR manufacturer.
Hope some of that helps
ParticipantSo this is a bit off the initial topic and continuing with the lens theme here. I’ve got 5 lenses at present, the kit, a 50mm 1.8, a 90-300 (it sucks and I never use it anymore), and 2 old manual lenses with M42 mounts which I don’t use on shoots as I find it difficult to get perfect focus.
Anyway, as Nesgran said about the kit. I use this and the 50mm all the time, that’s it. I HATE that these are the only lenses of any use to me but I make them work for me. If you’re going to be a pixel peeper then I see the serious disadvantages that come with using these, but most clients aren’t going to notice whether you use a £100 lens or a £2000 lens when they get their prints. The only reason I want a Canon 24-70 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 is due to reliability. My lens hunts for focus under certain light where these more expensive lenses SHOULD hit the mark.
I shot a wedding in Snowdonia (Wales, UK) over the weekend and I’ve come back with some great shots using the 50mm 90% of the weekend. I am NOT a wedding photographer and was doing it for a friend of mine and for the chance to visit a beautiful part of my country and stay for free.
go to my FB page and have a look at the sneak peeks. I’m not looking for harsh criticism but if you have any sound advice then please message me and let me know. Please don’t leave it on the wall or in the album, they haven’t even had their honeymoon yet, hahaha.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.453814624709916.1073741831.398190253605687&type=1
Participant@ Browneyedgirl
I just went on to that Ricky Cain guys FB page and posted this comment.
ParticipantThanks for the feedback everyone. Ill take a long hard look at what Im doing here. No more favours, no more free stuff, if you want my services you pay me accordingly. You all had some sound advice, cheers.
ParticipantI understand where you are coming from. The problem is, you can give a client the full res copies with an “Online-only” license but they will still go and get them printed. That fault lies with Asda (walmart), Boots, whoever for not checking who created the images. I’m all for this digital age idea, hence the reason I let the client use the selected images on FB. I have kept them watermarked and low res specifically because I know that otherwise you lose out on print profit. I charged £40, minus the £6 it will cost me for their free print, minus fuel, minus my tax contribution, minus class 4 national insurance here in Britain, minus cost of electricity for editing, my public liability, my monthly website hosting fees etc etc. I worked around 9 hours for the client and have made less than £2 per hour!!! Or less than $3 an hour. I’m trying to build and run a successful business. Why do people bother contacting photographers if they don’t want to pay for the work? They clearly know the images are better than something they can produce, otherwise they wouldn’t use photographers at all. The kick in the nuts comes when they realise that the photographer actually has to CHARGE for the work. I’m sure some people think that they could go out, spend $6000 on a camera, set it to auto and produce the same stuff we are charging for. They seem to think they are paying to rent your equipment, not for an actual service. I feel like telling them to go buy a really expensive hammer, a bag of screws and some wood and build a house! You have the most expensive hammer right? Then you must be able to do it….
ParticipantTo be honest Ive seen far worse on here, some shots on the site aren’t bad at all in other galleries. The resolution of the images there is definitely weird though. People seem to be getting pickier on here at the moment, lets find some truly god awful fauxtogs!
Participant@Photocriticgirl. – I hope people dont hate me here for saying this but I think both of those photographers have some okay images. Ive seen far far worse in these forums. Obviously they both need improvement, the worst thing is Photo Chanel’s bit on the front page about being a worldwide famous photographer. Got to give it to her for optimism though….lol
Participant@ browneyedgirl Glad you agree, why advertise for something you clearly cant do, I actually found out more about the unpaid shoot from my friend on Saturday. He actually turned up with dead batteries AAs mind, god knows what camera he is using, I think its a fuji bridge. He had to ask my friends dad if he had some!
@Tomservo 51 & picarusslim – incredible isnt it, never ceases to amaze that people will pay for this crap!
@tslrgj8288 & worst case scenario – facepalm! that is all for that guy!@ concerned shocking, and so manynice comments? “beautiful” ….wtf!
ParticipantOk I’ve decided to share this at last. I know the guy as he is my friends, cousins, fiance….yeah I don’t know him well but I do know him if you get me. He is a proven fauxtographer in so much as he recently did a shoot of someones dogs for them for £50. When the client saw the photos they then refused to pay him and said they could have taken better shots with a P&S camera. I’d have to agree….
I’m not saying it’s easy to photograph animals, but if you are going to advertise the service, be good at it! I can’t do it so I don’t advertise myself as being able to. Just like I don’t advertise myself for weddings, I can’t do them well and I’d rather leave it to the people who can.
Anyway, check out the link https://www.facebook.com/X9Photography
ParticipantWe should all chip in and ask them to touch this one up….
http://crystalmoth.com/pictures/230809/crazy_picture_ugliest_girl_in_the_world.jpg
-
AuthorPosts
