Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Home | Photography Digest | Active Topics | Search | Login | Register | Help
Posts for: bkellyusa
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 21 next>>
Feb 16, 2017 21:32:37   #
I like the Expodisc. It's simple, fast an affordable.

I usually set my White Balance manually but there are usually presets on every camera. Things like, Daylight, Evening, Shade, Night, Incandescent, Fluorescent and such. If am are shooting in mixed light with a mix of incandescent, candlelight and florescent for example it sometimes works for me to set the camera Daylight and shoot. You'll till need ot go over it in Elements but you might be a little closer than Auto White Balance.

As some others have suggested you can shoot with your WB adjusted to create a desirable color cast as well. It's your choice.

I don't want to discourage you but shooting weddings is best left to pros. That a very competitive type of photography with very high standards in my opinion. If money is an issue for your friends maybe you and someone else with more experience can work together.

You are probably going to need at least some off camera flash as well.

Either way best of luck.
 
Jan 23, 2017 11:43:48   #
burkphoto wrote:
What's wrong with kittens? They're insanely cute!



Your comment is equally cute!
Jan 23, 2017 11:38:48   #
[quote=dpullum]
Linda From Maine wrote:
Oh come on, tig, how often have you seen me become violent on this forum?
Linda, send out your press spokesman [person] to admonish those who you disagree with!!!

We should all read the lengthy Free information on Composition [A psychological exploration into how people create, share, and react]
http://truecenterpublishing.com/photopsy/article_index.htm#sthash.Jb7Stp96.dpuf
http://truecenterpublishing.com/photopsy/article_index.htm
Oh come on, tig, how often have you seen me become... (show quote)


I've read this article. I read it last year at your suggestion. It stays on my computer. It is very in depth. Can't recommend it enough.
Jan 23, 2017 11:23:07   #
Gene51 wrote:
Not my strength or focus, but from time to time I stop and "smell the roses" so to speak. Critique welcome - it will help me be a better photographer.


Gene,

I love this sort of thing. Like you I don't specialize in it but I am definitley attracted to abstract art and photography. It intrigues me how a photograh can be very pleasing with absolutely no context other than it's pure visual appeal.

1,2 and 5 are very nice.
Jan 23, 2017 11:10:15   #
oldtigger wrote:
Linda is going to skin me alive and nail my hide to the wall when i say this but
there is a fourth group so innocuous that i didn't mention them:
They are the images so familiar, inoffensive, subdued and commonplace that
(like Linda's second image or sharpshooter's abstracts) you could hang them anyplace not as objects of interest
but merely as space occupiers.
They don't need labels and subjects because they serve only as
visual background noise to "enrich" our environment.
Linda is going to skin me alive and nail my hide t... (show quote)


Different pictures for different purposs.

At this point both art and photography are both highly developed and very sophisticated artforms. With that there is no surprise that very little of it is really new. Today it's some sort of hybrid, fusion of styles or access to new technology that seems ot make a difference but in truth we are all still phtographing kittens' playing with knitting balls.
Jan 23, 2017 10:55:49   #
rdgreenwood wrote:
Well, you forced me to drop my iPad and move to the computer and its keyboard/larger monitor. Good going...

When I judge a competition, the most damning question I can ask myself is, "What does the photographer want me to look at?" I'm not seeking a "subject," per se, but a point of interest, a starting point for seeing the visual plan of the image. Using this rule, I judge the "shareworthiness" of my own images by trying to figure out if an outsider would understand why I took the photo I took. For example, here are two images. The first, I think, passes the test even though it doesn't have a specific subject. The second fails the test because it lacks a context. In the first, you just enjoy the image. In the second, if you weren't there, you won't understand what you're seeing. In the first image, the entire scene is a "point of interest." In the second, you guessed it, you're left wondering what you're supposed to concentrate on. It's not a matter of "subject"; it's a matter of "point of interest." Does that make sense?
Well, you forced me to drop my iPad and move to th... (show quote)


We are on the same page. I love the description of you use of "seeing the visual plan of the image." I usaully use some description like the "graphiical layout" out but yours is much better. With that idea in mind I practice taking pictures where the "visual plan" is more important that anythng else. I dn't keep those practice hots much but I enjoy making sure I understand the "visual plan" it is built on.

Thanks for your words of wisdom.
 
Jan 23, 2017 10:38:34   #
Linda From Maine wrote:
I love to capture moods with light and weather and tell stories that encompass a wider view; most of my landscapes are not designed to cause an immediate WOW (they require a bit of contemplation...and viewing larger than 800 px wide ). Most do not have strongly defined subjects.

I agree with much of what was said earlier in this thread: "It depends," "different for each viewer," subject can be defined by "general concept." I was very interested in oldtigger's three groups definition and I identify most with "allow me to share this with you."

I do photography for myself, and if someone else enjoys my vision, that is a great gift indeed.
I love to capture moods with light and weather and... (show quote)


Linda, I agree with much of what you said here. In a lot of my photography it takes the entire photograph to create the subject. Nothing need be particularly stronger than any other element.

I also think that the mood a photo creates can easily become the subject as much as any object in the photo.

Like you I take pictures to please myself. I don't mean that arrogantly but that seeems like the only way it coudl be for me.

I love your photos as well. Keep it up
Jan 23, 2017 10:07:02   #
rook2c4 wrote:
Aesthetic considerations in photography are essentially the same as those for painting. As such, a "subject" need not necessarily be defined by a tangible object within the composition, but can instead be represented by a general concept or relationship. You will find this especially prevalent in abstract painting, but not exclusively.


Tht about as good comment on what is and what might not be a subject as I have ever seen.
Jan 19, 2017 07:45:41   #
I looked that adapter up. The reviews are not that good with others have similar complaints. Surprisingly the Metabnes adapters ratings are nto a lot higher and as far as I know that is a well thought of adapter. Check with B&H and see what they recommend.
Jan 19, 2017 07:36:32   #
I'd talk to B&H if that adapter is not working as expected.

If I understand the second part of your question correctly theen "imagemeisters'" recomendation to use "focus peaking" is correct. It's on the "geared" Menu 2 as Manual Assist and you choose what color.
Jan 19, 2017 07:20:09   #
mcveed wrote:
Anybody can take extraordinary pictures of extraordinary things. It takes a photographer to take extraordinary pictures of ordinary things. Be a photographer.


Love this response.
 
Jan 16, 2017 14:20:28   #
cactuspic wrote:
All exposure to the right means is that there is additional headroom in some cameras between when the histogram shows blown highlights and when the highlights actually turn detailess white. For the most part, the idea of ETTR was most important with Canon shooters whose sensors registered more noise and had less dynamic range than the Sony and Nikon sensors. it became more important therefore to maximize the dynamic range of the sensor and minimize the noise with Canons. To do so, you give it as much exposure as possible without blowing out the whites. All expose to the right means is give it as much exposure as possible without clipping which often means giving it more than the histogram would otherwise indicate. With the dynamic range and noise capability of the better current cameras, there may be less need to expose to the right than with earlier sensors.
All exposure to the right means is that there is a... (show quote)


This is the version of ETTR that I understand and use. Anything more difficult than this seems unnecessary. I also wouldn't use higher ISO to raise the exposure level since that seems counter-productive.
Jan 16, 2017 12:17:14   #
rmalarz wrote:
Scotty, see my post in response to your request. Wait better yet, here's a photo taken, much like yours, in a room with window light for the primary source of illumination.

My theory is that you don't completely understand ETTR / EBTR and thus with to poo poo it as useless.

--Bob


The orignal poster doesnt understand ETTR in the same way I do or I don't understand what he is saying. His use of ISO seems bacjkwards if I am reading this right.
Jan 14, 2017 15:14:10   #
rawlins wrote:
This forum rocks! A topical education. I have begun a spreadsheet of cameras and lenses mentioned here - with pros and cons. Thanks, Uglyhedgehog "experts".


Is that spreadsheet avaialble? Sounds interesting.
Jan 14, 2017 13:43:56   #
I own a Sony A6000. I love it. I have never fooled with the Olymous cameras but I am familiar with the Fuji's and the Panasonic. The Fuji's takes really nice pictures in JPEG and is easy to use. It's probably my second favorite mirrorless camera. I say probalby becasue I think Panasonice is the most undervalued camera line out there. They are generally very high quality and usually very innovative. I don't shoot video enough to have an opinion but I ahve been told by people who do that Panasonic leads the pack in that area as well.

One of the biggest reasons I stay with Sony is that they seemd to be doing most of the innovation in newer mirrorless cameras and are by far the most popular. I read where the A6000 is the largest selling interchangeable camera in history. I don't know if thati is true but it sounds right. As a result of their popularity they have huge support. From fan forums to high quality, competively priced aftermaket lenses and the list goes on and on and on. That will only get better as so many manufacturers are now focusing on the A series Sony cameras.

If I have any recommendation it might be the A6000 in the bargain category. Nowadays it seems like a real bargain for a camera with that kind of power.

I suppose the best news is that you probably can't go wrong with any of those cameras.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 21 next>>
          
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2016 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.