|
|
|
Member
(07-14-2009,
06:08 PM)
 |
#52
I did some fun SUPER prototypey shots for a upcoming series which is taking FOREVER to plan and set up, not a bad sign ya know. Was fun to take these at such an early stage.
  Hopefully the actual series will be up soon, Im realllllly hoping so!!!, keep your eye on nickdifilippo.com new stuff soon |
|
Banned
(07-14-2009,
07:53 PM)
 |
#53
|
|
Member
(07-16-2009,
12:07 AM)
 |
#57
Originally Posted by zombi:
I love this shot. Not sure I agree with the lighting, but still awesome. I find it the hardest thing in the world trying to coax models into doing something overtly physical like that on a shoot. Depends on the personality, I suppose... |
|
Member
(07-16-2009,
06:00 AM)
 |
What about the bitching about the bitching?
#58
Originally Posted by TheWiicast:
|
|
Member
(07-16-2009,
03:39 PM)
 |
#61
Since the current assignment thread will soon be the "old" assignment thread, I'll post my thoughts here:
Sure, there may be a lull in assignment participation lately, and it may be due to a variety of reasons: people have jobs, finals, kids, vacations...and maybe some themes have been lackluster. But we've had lulls and peaks in participation before, and I think the fact that we've persisted for 70 assignments says we have the right idea. There really aren't that many rules, and they've stayed pretty consistent since we've started. I'm not sure what fart's proposal for month-long workshops will really give us. Photographs aren't usually works in progress like writing, by the time you post it, it's done. I don't know if anyone will (or necessarily can) reshoot a photo in response to CC. And personally, I think a month on the same topic would be too long...if you find you only have time to submit once a month, you could enter every other assignment. But like SK said, if you want to try starting such a thread, by all means go ahead. I don't know about there being cliques...I definitely have favorite photographers in the assignment threads, but concidentally they tend to be people who have submitted regularly for a long time, and who obviously put a lot of care into their work. And I think we're not shy about letting each other know if our work doesn't measure up. :) Also, we have had a good number of first-time submitters winning now and then. Outside of the assignments I haven't been doing much photography or contributing to the quarterly threads lately...it's just my own lull. The assignment threads are what keep me picking up my camera every two weeks. |
|
Junior Member
(07-16-2009,
03:40 PM)
 |
#62
Originally Posted by Newbie:
D40 w/ the kit 18-55 (have the 55-200 VR as well). I've had it since November (1st DSLR) and am still getting used to it. I've certainly been able to learn some things in the camera/photo threads while lurking though! |
|
Member
(07-16-2009,
03:58 PM)
 |
#63
Originally Posted by ErnieMcCracken:
This one is great. I would have liked to see a wee bit more contrast, though. Great set all around! |
|
Member
(07-16-2009,
09:08 PM)
|
#64
Originally Posted by ScientificNinja:
 .was about to relaunch the site yesterday but ran into some snags, but check on that soon for the final version of these. |
|
(07-16-2009,
09:54 PM)
 |
#65
Here's a couple shots from my friend's bachelor party. He's a Philly guy living in Finland, and since he hasn't gotten his Finnish passport yet, he hasn't been to the army like all the other Finnish men. We decided to arrange a 24 hour military service for him.
 Morning exercise   G.I. Joe packing his gear  Make love, not war?  Making his own breakfast  One of my other friends ready to ambush the soldier with a banana grenade  Combat training in the wild  Joining the air force (about to go up on a trick flying plane)  Ready for takeoff   A happy soldier after the flight I edited these on my laptop, so any comments, especially those regarding contrast, exposure and color balance, are much appreciated. |
|
(07-18-2009,
09:39 AM)
|
#67
guess: I love the first pic, but I think I'm a bit bothered by the mug's handle approaching the left edge. I also feel that the barb wire is a bit too close to the bottom in the last pic.
|
|
Savant
(07-18-2009,
10:01 AM)
 |
#68
it sounds like only a couple of people are interested in a more workshoppy style thread. if that's the case, i don't see the case of inventing some silly structure for it. i do see the point of running it in parallel with this thread though if only because the new thread will be less cluttered.
ok, so here's the deal: i'm a methodical, introspective person. i sometimes take photos which i would like to workshop with the intent of either improving the specific photo (either by reshooting or further editing), correcting poor technique in future work, or simply to find new ideas in the input of others so as to stretch my boundaries. in short, i'd like to improve as a photographer, and my thesis is that doing so requires interaction with other people with similar intent. if that sounds good to you, link: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthre...4#post16717244 |
|
Member
(07-21-2009,
04:38 AM)
 |
#77
TECHNICAL QUESTION
so I have this photo of a pendant taken straight from the camera at the resolution on the outside borders:  This is my tightest lens (50mm) and this is the closest I can get to the pendant to lock focus. I need to make a small crop of the pendant that is eventually going to be blown up to 4' high x 3' wide. This is with setting the photo at 150dpi, which was requested. Is it even possible for me to get that tight crop and to blow it up to 4'x3' and not have it look like crap? I'm using a 5D which is 12.8 MP. Am I basically limited by my equipment here, do I need more megapixels and a tighter lens to blow something that small up to 4'x3'? Last edited by Futureman : 07-21-2009 at 04:49 AM. |
|
Member
(07-21-2009,
06:15 AM)
|
You sure you meant ' and not "?
#79
Originally Posted by Futureman:
Since 75dpi up scaled to 150 will probably work, upgrade the lens so that you can fill the frame. |
|
Member
(07-21-2009,
06:31 AM)
|
What is it that makes old wrinkly guys such great subjects?
#80
Originally Posted by aidan:
I'm so pissed at myself though. At the beginning of the walk, we went over a skybridge and down by a casino on the riverfront. As everyone else went downstream and blatantly trespassing on casino property, I went upstream to take a shitty picture of the lock and dam. As I rejoined the group, I passed this old, wrinkly, down-on-his-luck guy sitting on a bench in front of the casino. I was worried about getting left behind and missed the shot until I was well past him. I thought about going back, but by then casino security was getting all uppity and I figured being that obvious, I'd lose the shot anyway. |
|
Savant
(07-21-2009,
06:46 AM)
|
#81
dude, futureman, you need a macro lens. srsly. rent or borrow one if you have to but to blow up to 4x3' you're going to need your sensor's full resolution (and then some). just eyeballing it it looks like you're going to need something approaching 1:1 (i'm guessing the 50's max magn is ~1:7-1:10).
depending on what's under your camera you may need a heavier tripod to not sacrifice resolution going that long/close, and you definitely want to shoot mirror lockup with a remote trigger. |
|
Member
(07-21-2009,
07:37 AM)
 |
#82
futureman - try and get the canon 100 f/2.8 macro if you can - good value, sharp and you should be able to fill the frame with it no problems.
The thing with large upscaling like that is to do it in steps, ie: don't do it all in one go, incremental gives you finer control over the definition. You can add minor sharpening adjustments at each stage and you'll end up with a much better result overall. Never send a too small file to a print house, unless it is a pro lab you will get shockingly bad results back. you should be aiming for 200 dpi for photo reproduction (300 for text) but your eyes will be able to cope with 100 dpi without too much strain, especially on a 3' by 4' print which you won't be looking at very closely. Easiest way to test it is to create the file as if you were going to get it printed, then do an A4 (letter) (or smaller) crop of an important detail and get it printed, you will be able to see then if resolution is your limiting factor. sorry for rambling, hope this helps! |
|
Savant
(07-21-2009,
09:35 AM)
|
#85
Originally Posted by iam.rass:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
Member
(07-22-2009,
11:55 PM)
 |
#89
Nachkebia, did you buy a fan off that street seller at the end? great photos, that one in particular. I can't believe it's been over 6 months since I was in Delhi.
Does anyone have any advice on how to photograph music events? I was at a friend's gig and just happened to have a camera on me. It was quite dark so I just took a bunch of photos at with a nikon 50mm f/1.8. What kind of preparations do people usually do for things like these?      |
|
Member
(07-23-2009,
12:22 AM)
|
#91
Originally Posted by Futureman:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc....html#features 
Quote:
I have the 500D and used it on a 28-85mm zoom to get this shot, from their description I probably should have gotten the 250D. To give you an idea of the scale, that's the top of a wineglass.  |
|
Savant
(07-23-2009,
07:28 AM)
|
#93
Originally Posted by Lucky Forward:
it's not really that much cheaper either. retail is 100 and you can get a full set of extension tubes which don't have the MTF problems (but do have light falloff issues) for the same amount that will give you more flexibility on repro ratio. more importantly, i see two scenarios: a) you never do a closeup shoot again. if so, then a lens rental is cheaper. b) you end up doing many more closeup shoots. if so, then you're still going to have to buy a macro lens (at about 300$ for the tamron 90 for example) and you'll have blown 1/3 of that on an accessory you're unlikely to need after you break down and get the new lens. |
|
Savant
(07-23-2009,
07:44 AM)
|
#94
oh that reminds me. comicon this weekend. for those that have shot cons, do you think it would be worth it to bring two bodies? for various reasons i still have the old one and could do
d700 + 17-35/2.8 d80 + 75-150/3.5 (no metering) i was planning on skipping the midrange (35-70/2.8, or 50/1.4 no crop), but i can bring along/mounted if this is actually where all the action is. i'm a total klutz with flash but i'll probably have an sb800 |
|
there is joy in sucking dick
(07-27-2009,
11:28 PM)
 |
#97
My cat is weird...
 Whenever you touch its face and close its eyes, it tends to keep one eye closed. Guess it likes the lack of depth perception. and Nachkebia, I love those photographs. Which model Zeiss Rangefinder do you rock? I was actually looking at rangefinders recently, the price of entry for modern ones (from Leica or Zeiss) are pretty expensive.
Originally Posted by RefigeKru:
Get a cheap SLR, Lens and develop your own B&W film!
Originally Posted by Timbuktu:
Your photographs came out nice anyways but usually, in dark scenarios, I purposefully underexpose an image to get some shutter speed, then bring back the exposure in post (I shoot RAW when doing this). You'll get really bad noise doing this but I find the noise easier to manage than a really blurry picture. Other than that, from what I've seen from people who shoot music gigs is their reliance on stage lighting. Just expose for that and shoot away. You could also set your camera on Manual, set the exposure for the stage lighting and snap away (without worrying about the camera trying to compensate for dark parts of the stage). Last edited by BlueTsunami : 07-27-2009 at 11:38 PM. |
|
Member
(07-28-2009,
12:53 AM)
|
#98
mrnorush, I really like the nighttime colors you've captured and the sharpness and vividness of your shots, they really come alive.
Nachkebia, you've really got something special there. mrkgoo, I always enjoy your outdoor shots...just perfect compositions. |
|
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(07-28-2009,
01:07 AM)
 |
#100
mrkgoo - love that outdoor stuff.
Here are some i took for the street photography assignment, but forgot to mess with and submit. Not sure which I would have picked and if i would have gone B&W but looking at the submissions its probably better i didnt submit one.     all taken with 50-200 at 50mm mostly. That juggler(sp?) was seriously good. |
