-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GAF Photography 2007 - Q2
- Thread starter imastalker co.
- Start date
- Status
imastalker co.
Banned
Lucky Forward
Member
20D w/ 100-400 L.
Lucky Forward
Member
Yeah, you're especially right about the "always there" part. I can't pick up my camera anymore without Duncan giving me that "Where are we going...where are we going?" look. If I can't take him with me I try to sneak my gear out of the house. :lolmrkgoo said:
imastalker co.
Banned
perfect.
I took a business trip to Chicago during this past week and got some fun shots. It was my first time ever being there and I was amazed at how different it was from NYC. My coworkers and I were walking about 5 blocks from our hotel to the Accenture building at 7:30am, and the streets were bare. No people, no cars. It was so strange. Even later in the afternoon when I took these pictures it wasn't nearly as crowded as NYC gets. Enjoy.
I really like the last one of that Chicago set. Very good overall, I'm such a sucker for Black and White shots of the city.
I went to a John Mayer concert a couple of days ago and brought my camera. Nothing too exciting, but I was happy with some of these shots.
I went to a John Mayer concert a couple of days ago and brought my camera. Nothing too exciting, but I was happy with some of these shots.
Wow - great shots everyone. Do people see themselves improving?
EinDS: Is there any extra technique or tips you have to keep in mind if you intened on making a picture black and white? You know, like contrast, or composition/exposure things?
Kuran: In that picture with a bike, and then without- did you move the bike, or did someone take it away? ( I like your images - you definitely stand out with them, and inspired a few people here too!).
Anyway, I tried for a sunrise assignment shoot this morning. It was ok - I might try again tomorrow, but I got some shots I like anyway ( a few - tried to keep them small):
efs17-55IS, 23mm, f4.0, 1/20s, iso100 (ok, I lied, this one is a dusk from last night)
efs17-55Is, 55mm, f5.6, 1/5s, iso100
efs17-55Is, 38mm, f5.6, 1/25s, iso100
efs17-55Is, 17mm, f5.6, 1/15s, iso100, adjusted in iPhoto
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f4.0, 1/1000s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 70mm, f5.6, 1/125s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 70mm, f4.0, 1/1600s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 70mm, f8.0, 1/500s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f8.0, 1/800s, iso100
Some woman doing Tai Chi:
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f4.0, 1/4000s, iso100
Actually, I took photos of a number of people, but they got self concious and quickly wandered off. I was pretending to take pictures of the scenery, but a huge tele is hard to look like you're not pointing at them
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f4.0, 1/250s, iso100
efs60mm, f2.8, 1/125s, iso200
efs60mm, f2.8, 1/125s, iso200
EinDS: Is there any extra technique or tips you have to keep in mind if you intened on making a picture black and white? You know, like contrast, or composition/exposure things?
Kuran: In that picture with a bike, and then without- did you move the bike, or did someone take it away? ( I like your images - you definitely stand out with them, and inspired a few people here too!).
Anyway, I tried for a sunrise assignment shoot this morning. It was ok - I might try again tomorrow, but I got some shots I like anyway ( a few - tried to keep them small):
efs17-55IS, 23mm, f4.0, 1/20s, iso100 (ok, I lied, this one is a dusk from last night)
efs17-55Is, 55mm, f5.6, 1/5s, iso100
efs17-55Is, 38mm, f5.6, 1/25s, iso100
efs17-55Is, 17mm, f5.6, 1/15s, iso100, adjusted in iPhoto
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f4.0, 1/1000s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 70mm, f5.6, 1/125s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 70mm, f4.0, 1/1600s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 70mm, f8.0, 1/500s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f8.0, 1/800s, iso100
Some woman doing Tai Chi:
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f4.0, 1/4000s, iso100
Actually, I took photos of a number of people, but they got self concious and quickly wandered off. I was pretending to take pictures of the scenery, but a huge tele is hard to look like you're not pointing at them
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f4.0, 1/250s, iso100
efs60mm, f2.8, 1/125s, iso200
efs60mm, f2.8, 1/125s, iso200
holy caw! this is perhaps one of the best sets I've seen from youmrkgoo said:Wow - great shots everyone. Do people see themselves improving?
EinDS: Is there any extra technique or tips you have to keep in mind if you intened on making a picture black and white? You know, like contrast, or composition/exposure things?
Koran: In that picture with a bike, and then without- did you move the bike, or did someone take it away? ( I like your images - you definitely stand out with them, and inspired a few people here too!).
Anyway, I tried for a sunrise assignment shoot this morning. It was ok - I might try again tomorrow, but I got some shots I like anyway ( a few - tried to keep them small):
efs17-55IS, 23mm, f4.0, 1/20s, iso100 (ok, I lied, this one is a dusk from last night)
efs17-55Is, 55mm, f5.6, 1/5s, iso100
efs17-55Is, 38mm, f5.6, 1/25s, iso100
efs17-55Is, 17mm, f5.6, 1/15s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f4.0, 1/1000s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 70mm, f5.6, 1/125s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 70mm, f4.0, 1/1600s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 70mm, f8.0, 1/500s, iso100
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f8.0, 1/800s, iso100
Some woman doing Tai Chi:
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f4.0, 1/4000s, iso100
Actually, I took photos of a number of people, but they got self concious and quickly wandered off. I was pretending to take pictures of the scenery, but a huge tele is hard to look like you're not pointing at them
ef70-200f4l, 200mm, f4.0, 1/250s, iso100
efs60mm, f2.8, 1/125s, iso200
efs60mm, f2.8, 1/125s, iso200
i miss so many shots trying to look like i'm not taking people's picturesActually, I took photos of a number of people, but they got self concious and quickly wandered off. I was pretending to take pictures of the scenery, but a huge tele is hard to look like you're not pointing at them
dasein said:
Wow, thanks! Made my day
Yeah looking back, I really like these pics. I woke really early to get them - and dedicated atleast a couple of hours, taking my time just getting shots. I think spending time to get photos makes a big difference. I managed to use all my favourite lenses! I guess the time allowed me to take a lot more photos, and thus have a higher chance of 'keepers'.
What I'm especially happy about is that all but one of those required any post-processing at all (not counting cropping, and even then I needed little). I plan on going back tomorrow morning - hoping for an even foggier morning, with less cloud...*crosses fingers*
Fart: I'm not sure I really 'miss' shots - because I really haven't taken enough pictures of people to recognise a missed opportunity. Of course, up where I was (which is a volcano - you can see the lip of the crater in the cityscape shot), there's always people milling about with cameras, so atleast I didn't look out of place. The couple standing on a peak were there for most of the sunrise, and I got quite a few pictures of the including one where I tink they're looking directly at me - they eventually left, and I ahd to pretend to stay and keep taking picutres to make it look like I was never using them as a subject :lol - and then the Tai chi lady went up...I snapped a few, and she left after like three moves/sets :/ I guess a bonus with an SLR is that you look somewhat 'professional', so it somehow doesn't seem as creepy. But then, I'm kind of dodgy looking, so people probably get creeped out anyway.
from my readings, people tend to find camera size to be the deciding factor in the creepy/not creepy perception.
at the same time, i think you're right in that having a major name SLR gives you some small degree of credibility. this can be good or bad though, as they may think you're going to sell your picture, and money never makes a situation better
i don't think i ever recounted the time a bypasser wanted to pay me to take their picture (this was like a day after i got my camera). it was awkward, but hilarious in retrospect.
at the same time, i think you're right in that having a major name SLR gives you some small degree of credibility. this can be good or bad though, as they may think you're going to sell your picture, and money never makes a situation better
i don't think i ever recounted the time a bypasser wanted to pay me to take their picture (this was like a day after i got my camera). it was awkward, but hilarious in retrospect.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
any way i can get a high res version of this? would be nice to use for wallpaper
fart said:from my readings, people tend to find camera size to be the deciding factor in the creepy/not creepy perception.
at the same time, i think you're right in that having a major name SLR gives you some small degree of credibility. this can be good or bad though, as they may think you're going to sell your picture, and money never makes a situation better
i don't think i ever recounted the time a bypasser wanted to pay me to take their picture (this was like a day after i got my camera). it was awkward, but hilarious in retrospect.
Yeah, I suppose a large camera cna look somewhat...stalkerish. But I reckon the opposite is true! If someone has a alrge camera, and they're being open about taking photographs...well... Hmm...I guess it can seem creepy either way. Especially if it's a guy taking pictures of a girl.
SnakeXs said:*applauds*
Amazing stuff, mrkgoo. Really. All of them are great, but the standout for me is the 6th. That, sir, is art. I would pay many monies to hang that upon my wall. Absolutely stunning.
highresplz?
Wow, thanks! This is flattering.
You know I was just thinking about something - as much as I know we all like to get praise for our images, I think it's really helpful to acknowledge, when we can, what we like or don't like about the images posted. It pushes our game further! I'm going to try and post more comments in future, as it also helps me to analyse what I like about other images I see (or don't like).
Larger versions:
http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/1958/img6874iq8.jpg
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/6517/img6893hs3.jpg
mrkgoo said:
Real quick before I pass out.
It's the lighting, the colors. It's how those interact and contrast with the highlights and shadows of the mountains. It's the mountain contours themselves. The way everything is evenly layered. The clouds atop, then the mountain peaks start to break through, then the man made beaty starts to eek in, and then take over, with some flair of it's own.
The fog blanketing everything in a beautiful atmosphere doesn't hurt, either. =]
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
mrkgoo said:
thanks so much!!
this looks really good. I love the colors the sun is giving off at this exact moment. its also dark on the left side of the desktop so i can actually see all my icons
its just a really beautiful shot. you've got great camerawork.
imastalker co.
Banned
posting some oldies because i felt like it.
Alright, this summer I plan on formatting my computer and installing Ubuntu. I just don't want Windows anymore. I've thought about different programs I may need that are Linux-supported and of course, photo-editing came to mind.
Thus, I ask: Do any of you know of any good photo-editing Linux-supported programs?
I want to have the basic flexibility of cropping, contrast/brightness, b/w, histograph, etc.
Thanks.
Thus, I ask: Do any of you know of any good photo-editing Linux-supported programs?
I want to have the basic flexibility of cropping, contrast/brightness, b/w, histograph, etc.
Thanks.
the canonical free raster editor is the gimp
http://www.gimp.org/
ooo cool! picasa runs on a version of wine. you can download binary + runtime here http://picasa.google.com/linux/
http://www.gimp.org/
ooo cool! picasa runs on a version of wine. you can download binary + runtime here http://picasa.google.com/linux/
dasein said:
Seriously, just go out and get a mac. Do it do it!
I'm no computer expert, so I just want a computer that does the things I need to, and with as minimal fuss as possible - and Mac Os X accomplishes that. Simplicity, elegance and just working-ability.
I guess I'm sounding abit like a fanboy (and truth be told, I am), but there's a reason why all Mac owners love them so much - it seems like elitism, or wanting to be different, but it's more than that - I don't exactly know what it is.
There's something cumbersome about Windows. It's not it's user interface per se - that's all just preference... I'm not sure I've ever really figured it out. Just a lot of little things.
imastalker co.
Banned
yeah dude, seriously.
get a mac, and that'll be that. you'll seriously forget what life was like before you had it.
not to mention you'll have your choice of iphoto, or aperture.
get a mac, and that'll be that. you'll seriously forget what life was like before you had it.
not to mention you'll have your choice of iphoto, or aperture.
fart said:
I like iPhoto (it's all I use) - not for it's editing and technical stuff (which is medocre at best and criminally lacking at worst, I'll elaborate later), but I like it's organisational properties. It's a great tool to just browse through photos (well, my library is getting large, so it's chugging somewhat) - and it integrates well with the rest.
I'm not professional, so I haven't justified a huge purchase (well, ANOTHER huge purchase on top of my camera gear) on computing and post processing side- I guess in the future I'd like a better mac that can run aperture/lightroom photoshop well, and also afford said software.
Anyway, note I'm on iPhoto 5 (I didn't get 6, but I'll probably get 7) adn they fixed a couple things from it but a few reasons why I think iPhoto lacks some NECESSARY features, esepcially considering it's a photo app:
- image resizing (or default image in largest view) on my screen can give an artificial impression of softness - obviouslydue to the way images are drawn when not at native size - but other apps manage to overcome it, and iPhoto should too. (I think they fixed this in iPhoto6)
-colour profiles are NOT imbedded when imported. This is a big nono. Worse yet, when you edit a photo, it copies the original and puts it away (good), but then assigns a default profile (generic RGB) - this is really bad. I mean, really, really bad. However, This is fixed in iPhoto6, which has the option to embed colour profiles (imastalker - you'll notice all your camera files use cameraRGB, which is the default camera one for apples - it's close to sRGB). Luckily, I found a workaround for iphoto5 - the plist allows you to embed colourprofiles - so it was always in the application, just not enabled in iPhoto5. This has made a huge difference to my photos, at least as I view them.
- coloursync for iPHoto behaves like a 'simple' application. That is, it applies the color profile (if one is imbedded), and the display colour profile on your default monitor (fine), but when you move the application to an external monitor, it does not apply the display profile of that monitor. Inexcusable, considering macs taut themselves as being fully coloursynced, and even moreso considering it's a photo app.
But ya - just like most tasks, as a user, if you know the limitations of your tools, you can minimise any disadvantages. Just as a camera does not necessarily dictate the quality of the pictures you take, if you know what you are doing.
Imastalker: while I'm here, and looking at your reposted pics, I thiught I might pose the question to you as well. Concerning black and white images - is there anything you have to consider specifically? Like when you look down the viewfinder, and you intend for it to be a Black and white, do you think about your composition differently? DO you look for more contrasting light, or anything like that? SOmthing I notice about yours (and kuran's, and einDS, and anyone else who does black and white/desaturated fairly often) is that the images are very striking, but only some pictures work with it.
SnakeXs/Air Brian/Davepoobond: thanks for the input and comments. It really helps to know what to aim for, in terms of other peoples perspectives.
abq: I like your image. It reminds me of kuran's iamges...all these shots look non-descript at first...which only serves to make you sit there and observe them even longer. Soon, you start to see things you didn't notice straight away - lines, lighting, textures. It's a very soothing kind of viewing experience - quite opposite from the kind of cliched shots I'm taking. I notice strong colour, contrast, sharpness and 'pop' make people go 'wow', but subtleness is a harder skill to master. Well done.
Imastalker: I like the first shot you reposted. Teh seond one is ok, but for some reason I don't like the last. Maybe because it looks a bit 'point and shooty'. Nice composition though, as always. What is your 'keeper' rate for your modeling shoots? (if you don't mind me asking).
abq: I like your image. It reminds me of kuran's iamges...all these shots look non-descript at first...which only serves to make you sit there and observe them even longer. Soon, you start to see things you didn't notice straight away - lines, lighting, textures. It's a very soothing kind of viewing experience - quite opposite from the kind of cliched shots I'm taking. I notice strong colour, contrast, sharpness and 'pop' make people go 'wow', but subtleness is a harder skill to master. Well done.
Imastalker: I like the first shot you reposted. Teh seond one is ok, but for some reason I don't like the last. Maybe because it looks a bit 'point and shooty'. Nice composition though, as always. What is your 'keeper' rate for your modeling shoots? (if you don't mind me asking).
i've never actually used iphoto to edit anything because the interface is so terrible, but to be fair i think it's a fine application for sifting through photos. what bothers me most about it is that for such a limited app it's SO SLOW and such a hog.
aperture i basically can't run at a reasonable speed, and the editing was again worthless.
aperture i basically can't run at a reasonable speed, and the editing was again worthless.
oh! i did not know this. thanks for the info.
imastalker co.
Banned
fart said:
you know, if you don't like iphoto for whatever reason, fine, but aperture sucks? alright dude.
for me, black & white is used for one thing, and one thing only, and that's tone. it doesn't affect anything else i do when shooting. but yeah, b&w to me is nothing more than tone, and feel.mrkgoo said:
elaborate on "keeper".mrkgoo said:
imastalker co.
Banned
so much for it sucking then huh?
imastalker co.
Banned
the program was never intended to be used on anything less than a computer that a pro photographer would have. that's the whole point. even then, a macbook with 1-2 gigs of ram runs it great.fart said:
do you dislike Ferrari's because of the mileage they get?
i have an imac with 2gb of ram. it's worthless.imastalker co. said:
a "pro photographer" doesn't and shouldn't need to spend tens of thousands on a computer. the degree of computing performance you can buy for less than a thousand dollars is roundly sufficient for working with still photos, given reasonably efficient software.
yes, they're completely useless for reviewing and editing photos.
imastalker co. said:
you know, if you don't like iphoto for whatever reason, fine, but aperture sucks? alright dude.
for me, black & white is used for one thing, and one thing only, and that's tone. it doesn't affect anything else i do when shooting. but yeah, b&w to me is nothing more than tone, and feel.
elaborate on "keeper".
Thanks for the input. I'll keep it in mind. We need a winner in the assignment to make a black and white theme
. Which reminds me, I went out in the morning and took a few more snaps.Oh, by Keeper, I mean a photo you're willing to show off as one of your examples.
A question for everyone - how many of your photos do you keep? What is your workflow?
At the moment, since I only use iPhoto, my workflow is something like this:
Load up iPhoto and dump the images into my library.
Go through the images, and delete definite duds (blurry ones that are no good, way over/underexposed shots that have no value). Lol, this is up to half of them!
Return through the images, and delete duplicate style shots - if I can't decide, I err on the side of caution and keep them both. Shots which aren't pleasing, but still have some kind of informative value, I will also keep (like test shots, or something is particularly interesting in the shot, even if I don't like it overall). The way I see it, I can always get more storage space, but I can't recover deleted images. This runs the image count to about 1/3-1/2 of the original number I captured.
Go back through the images and assort them into my folders in iPhoto (like themes: sunrises, or places:Mt. Eden, people, events, etc.).
Return though again, and decide which photos I actually think are really good, and dump them into my ;'favourites'. This is what I show people, and it will be about 10 % max of what I originally snapped. but only 1-2 out of a hundred I take I actually think is a breathtaking photo.
Finally I go through the favourites I just took and apply any post processing I think suits them, typically only cropping. If I see a picture earlier that can do with some adjustment, I will do it then, and it may make it as a 'finalist'.
If I'm free, I will go back through again and select some that are worth posting, ecport them from iPhoto and upload to imageshack.
imastalker co.
Banned
depends on who's shoot it is. there's a lot of stuff that i absolutely love and consider to be some of the best i've done, but i can't use outside of my portfolio. if a company/agency is paying me for the shoot, they tend to want complete ownership of the pictures. now a days, i'll make sure that i can atleast use them for my portfolio. i had to learn that the hard way. clairol sued me a while back for publishing some pics that i took for them on my website without their permission.mrkgoo said:
if it's something im doing for myself, i'll get prints 90% of the time. i don't put much of the fashion stuff up here on GAF though since it seems out of place. sames goes for flickr since i only use it to host pics for these threads.
imastalker co. said:
Yeah, I remember you mentioning the Clairol thing. That was harsh. What happened to that in the end? I'm hoping they just pushed forward with a threat to take them down, but nothing much else. It's tricky business, professional photography.
I take photos a fair amount, but I wouldn't say I'm Pro-like in ability. I wouldn't be able to work under pressue probably. I have taken a couple of promotional-style pics for my work, but all of thsoe are pretty much just snapshots anyone can do - they don't often want creativity. They just want a photo, and don't care how I do it - they only come to me because the 'megapixels' on my camera are higher. :/ Since I'm still fluffing about mostly, I end up taking a lot of time taking multiple picutres, adjusting exposure and so on and so on - but they just want me to push the shutter release and get on with it.
I don't think I have the chutzpah or confidence to just take a great shot when people are expecting - i'm very much the take a billion pictures and select it kind of person. That doesn't make photography any less interesting or fun for me, though, which is great, but my point is, a lot of people say, what the Hell are you doing here? You should be a photographer! But I think it takes more than what I've got to become a professional - and that all changes depending on the type of photographer you want to be anyway.
- Status