Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: cactuspic
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 48 next>>
Oct 20, 2022 22:19:46   #
I prefer the color accuracy of 35mm digital over 35mm film, as well as it’s increased dynamic range, detail, and low light performance. With black and white, I don’t miss the smell of acetic acid or film grain. I guess I’m not nostalgic
Go to
Sep 18, 2022 09:59:21   #
If you use Lightroom, you can set up a collection, click the button on the top of the screen to make the collection public, then send the link out to those who you want to view it

Irwin
Go to
Jul 4, 2022 17:39:59   #
A helpful hint: always start your focus bracket BEFORE the point point you think is the closest focus. While is sound funny, sometimes the point of closest focus is not where you think it is and you therefore miss it Sometimes it is difficult to tell where it is. It is easy to locate that point on the computer screen after the fact and to trash any extraneous images. I have stacked thousands of images since I began stacking in 2006. If you stack often enough you will probably miss the starting point in an image you like. Building in a margin of error costs little and may save an image.
Go to
May 29, 2022 15:59:45   #
History is of course history. But many statutes are not an objective historical depiction. They are a glorification of a person or ideal as a political statement. I understand why the huge statutes of Lenin and Stalin were tumbled when the communist dictatorship was overthrown. They stood as symbols that glorified an oppressive regime. I can understand why black people would be offended by statutes glorifying those who fought to keep them enslaved. If I were on the hospital committee, I would not display a print that glorified a soldier who fought in a war to preserve slavery.

I am not trying to erase history. In the context of an historical examination of the Civil War, racism in America, or any number of historical discussions, the image would be acceptable. By itself, without any further explanation or discussion, I think the hospital made the right decision not to approve the image for public display, no matter how artful.
Go to
Apr 26, 2022 18:24:31   #
I import into Lightroom with a preset that generates a number based on the date, hour, minute and second that is added to the file name for each image. Additionally, in each camera, I have customized the numbering system in the camera menu. My R5 files begin with R5_, though it could be any prefix so long as it is unique to that camera.

Irwin
Go to
Apr 25, 2022 12:27:14   #
If you do focus stacking in the field, automated focus stacking in a mirrorless camera is a game changer. With most DSLRs you have to have a settling time between the shots to allow the camera to get still after the shutter movement +/or the mirror movement to obtain the best results, particularly at higher magnifications. The between shot settling time means that wind or changing light has an increasing chance wreck your shot. When I was manually turning the focus ring or moving the camera on a rail, I used to allow two or three seconds between shots for the camera to settle. Once I automated the process and also used live view, I programed a second delay between shots to allow the camera to settle after the shutter movement. (It makes a difference when you are at 1:1 or higher magnifications) If you have a 30 image stack, you have just added an additional half a minute that wind or changing light can ruin your stack...a very real difference.

I don't know if it's GAS or if you do enough focus stacking to warrant the camera change. I do know that the difference is substantial.

Irwin
Go to
Apr 19, 2022 11:07:17   #
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
65% of my commercial; work is FOOD PHOTOGRAHY. The basic concept of good food illustration is simply gettg to get the food to look appetizing. That involves recording texture, sparkle, dimension and effective staging.

Please understand, that I am not writing this to be nasty or harsh but frankly speaking, if that is what your client wants, they are on the wrong track! IAs a consumer of food, I can't tell if they are strange to look at hockey pucks or pastries. The selective focus in not help the situation it's distracting.

There are many ways of achieving a pure white background with white-on-white separation. Creating a table-top cyclorama background with white seamless backgron paper is one method, Transilluminated opal Plexiglas is another. These methods are not "rocket science" but they need to be planned, yoy have to have the light gear, and it can't be learned and mastered overnight. If you do the lighting properly and are exposed accurately, you won't' need to do any complex post-processing actions to change, remove or alter the background.

Even if you achieve the light and background affect yo need. the other aspect of the job may be missing- FOOD STYLING. This does not necessarily mean that you or the stylist needs to "fake" anything but there are ways to prepare food so it is more photogenic. Sometimes a food stylist is called in or the chef, baker, or maker can handle the task. I have big contracts I usually work with a stylist, on lowe budget gigs, I will call upon the kitchen staff and over the years, have learned many of the methods so I can DIY it.

The pure white background is not a bad concept- it looks CLEAN, however, some better food illustrations have more of an environmental or conceptual background and props. Selective focus can be affected as long as the man subject is in sharp focus and well placed in the composition. If there is no art direction or layout you need to conform to, you man be better off suggesting a more effective concept that is, in the face, easier to shoot.

If you can grasp the lighting concept, mostof the work can be done with one or two monolights, a medium-sized softbox and a few reflectors. If you are up for it, I can post a few light diagrams and explain the method.
65% of my commercial; work is FOOD PHOTOGRAHY. T... (show quote)


E.L., the only problem with the bagel shot is that it lacked lox, cream cheese, onions and capers. Well...maybe that's not so bad as I am trying to diet.

Irwin
Go to
Mar 31, 2022 15:00:01   #
I have bought refurbished from Canon and could not tell it from new. I agree with Mikey, either way you will enjoy the camera.

Irwin
Go to
Mar 26, 2022 10:17:47   #
The minute he used auto focus, he is no longer shooting at exactly 1:1, unless he coincidentally was at the exact distance to shoot 1:1, as burkephoto said. If you have a tripod that takes an Arca Swiss plate, the easiest, cheap way to get to 1:1 is to use an Arca type plate on either the tripod ring if your lens has on, or on the camera body perpendicular to the camera back. Then set your lens to 1:1 and slide the camera into final position using live view to determine when focus is achieved. For the most part, true 1:1 focusing is not a requisite of anything unless you are using it to scale the subject. Many tripod macro shots taken at "1:1" are not precisely 1:1 but they are close due to manual final focus. When shooting insects without a tripod, true 1:1 is achieved by setting the magnification first , then focusing by leaning in.
Go to
Mar 21, 2022 12:21:34   #
My most used lens while I was there was my 100-400, my second most used lens was my 24-70mm zoom. While you can get close to much of the wild life, you have to stay on the paths, so there is much that you cannot. , Also there are birds in flight, boobies diving in the surf, birds in trees, and animals on cliffs. The National Geographic photographer, Ralph Lee Hopkins, and the other pros on the trip were also shooting longer zooms. A 70-200 would have been insufficient to obtain many of the images that I cam home with, certainly some of my favorites. If someone recommends only taking a shorter lens they: 1. were on a different trip than I was, 2. they are interested in different subjects than I am, 3. or never went to the Galapagos. I am attaching several images that were taken at 400mm on a cropped framed Canon that were substantially cropped in post. There are numerous other images I could have added instead. My advice is to take a 100-400 or longer zoom if you have it.








Go to
Mar 11, 2022 11:03:23   #
Maybe if he shot mirrorless….

Irwin
Go to
Mar 11, 2022 10:53:18   #
When I upgraded my camera, I gave my son the old body and purchased a 24-105L lens for him from a Japanese camera shop on Ebay. The lens was very reasonably priced and it was pristine. I paid no additional import fees or duties. I'm not sure how far to generalize from a single transaction, but I can't imagine being more satisfied.

Irwin
Go to
Mar 7, 2022 14:54:02   #
burkphoto wrote:


Our tests in the lab in the early 2000s showed that a 4x5 needs about 325 PPI for maximum detail,



Bill, is that because we tend to look at 4x5's at pixel peeping distances? The reason I ask, is that one of the things I do with my photography is to focus stack plant macros with a great deal of fine texture and detail and then pixel peep the print. I want to be able to see the number, arrangement, texture of the fine spines, tricomes, and even cells in my botanicals. I am not interested in the least in what is required for printing if viewed at standard distances. I intend to pixel peep at the outset as will much of my clientele. When you were experimenting with pixel density, did you by chance discover the "extinction resolution" for pixel peepers? (And yes, I do "pixel peep" wall sized Monets as well as viewing them from standard viewing distance)

Irwin
Go to
Mar 7, 2022 12:43:03   #
Ysarex wrote:
Yes, DOF can be expressed in simplified form as a function of magnification and f/stop. But in practice we need to be able to calculate it in the context of normal use. So simple question then: The size of the sensor is a variable in the math formulae we use to calculate DOF. Why is that variable there in the formulae if the sensor size is not a factor?


I think there is an implied step using the concept of equivalent field of view. If you use the equivalent field of view, you would use a wider angle lens with the smaller sensor, which in turn would have greater depth of field at the same f/stop than the full framed image. I am not sure visually what happens to perceived DOF when you print and have to enlarge the cropped frame image more than the full framed image to get the equivalent size print.
Go to
Mar 6, 2022 09:53:03   #
I have the 15" M1 Pro, 16Gb with 1TB SSD. It runs Topaz programs well.
Go to
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 48 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.