Posts: A.J.R. | Ugly Hedgehog

Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum

Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰

Posts for: A.J.R.

Page: <<prev 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 24 next>>

Jun 17, 2017 06:45:08 #

(For Your Consideration)

Details absorbed

Not sure if I'm so worried about the darkness of the image, but agree that the tower tilt is a little distracting (but easily correctable). Like the way the eye is led to the tower by the water reflections. My main concern however is the silhouette of the bridge above the tower. As there is no detail in it it appears as just a black shape that could be anything. I feel the photograph would improve if there was just sky above the tower.

Jun 14, 2017 06:18:09 #

(Links and Resources)

EARLY 20th CENTURY PHOTOS

Infinite Imager wrote:

Subject: Old glass plates photos--enjoy. br br No... (show quote)

Fantastic quality, but not taken on a pinhole type camera. The camera would have been a plate camera, probably half plate (4 ¾ x 6 ½ inches) or whole plate (6 ½ x 8 ½ inches). When starting my career in photography I used plates, but never broke a one. When these were taken there would have been more health and safety issues with chemicals used rather than the fear of breakages. Very interesting photographs.

Jun 8, 2017 05:43:04 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Camera strap alternatives

Yes, do take a look at Youtube videos on Peak Designs. I have just purchased the Slidelite for my Sony A6300.

Jun 5, 2017 09:18:38 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Filter causing detail loss?

fourlocks wrote:

My friend has a Nikon D7200 and I have a D5500; bo... (show quote)

It certainly could and probably is the problem, depending on the quality of the filter. But why use a polarizing filter all the time anyway? The only filter I would use on a permanent basis is a clear filter, and that would be of the very best quality available.

May 26, 2017 07:42:58 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Accurate color rendition using the Sony A6000

In my post I did not give the technique used to photograph the painting. I used daylight, auto white balance, (aperture priority), RAW/jpeg, but because the colors were good I used the jpeg, with a few slight color adjustments in Photoshop (As suggested by twowindsbear earlier Gimp would do the trick) the colors were extremely accurate. After making a small test print I made another very slight adjustment to the colors as (although Spyder Monitor Calibration and the printer is set up carefully for the paper I use) it needed a very slight color adjustment to get the print spot on. Personally I have never found it necessary to use anything like Xrite ColorChecker Passport. Of course as twowindsbear says, do not use mixed light sources. If you use artificial light all lamps used must be the same color temperature

May 26, 2017 05:59:29 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Accurate color rendition using the Sony A6000

A couple of thoughts. I know the camera is capable of accurate colors as I have had a A6000 (now have the A6300), but also have the 50mm f1.8 OSS prime and the Sony/Zeiss 16-70 F4 OSS lens. What lens are you using? I cannot vouch for the kit lenses, although other members might be able to.
Are you making prints or viewing on a screen. Your screen or your printer might not be set up correctly.
I have in front of me a print of a copy of a painting that I have just done and the comparing it with the painting it is remarkably accurate.

May 13, 2017 13:10:01 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Lenses for A6000

rdgreenwood wrote:

I replaced my 16-50 with a Sony/Zeiss 16-70 and am REALLY happy that I did it. Yes, the new glass was pricey (about $1100), but it's super super sharp and the extra 20mm makes it a dream as a walk-around lens. On my two recent trips to Europe--I know, I'm piggy--I used the 16-70 for about 95% of my shots. I didn't need any other lens and eventually began leaving the longer lens behind.

As others have posted here the Sony Zeiss 16-70 has a poor reputation, but I agree with you (and as I said earlier) I find it the ideal lens for most things that I wish to photograph and I have no regrets in purchasing it. Pricey but worth it.

May 13, 2017 07:06:24 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Lenses for A6000

jerryc41 wrote:

I use my Sony A6000 with 16-50 and 55-210mm lenses when I need something small. I'm thinking about what other lenses I might "need." What do you have, and what do you like? Don't ask what I shoot because I shoot whatever's in front of me. Everything is fair game.

Like you I photograph a wide variety of subjects. And the Sony, Zeiss 16-70 f4 lens (also) stays on my A6300 most of the time. Expensive and not particularity good reviews, but I have found it ideal for most of the work I do and to be honest find it's quality pretty good. I sometimes use the Sony prime 50mm f1.8, excellent in poor lighting, and I'm considering the purchase of the 35mm f1.8. (As in the days of film I rarely used anything but a standard prime lens). Also have (but rarely use) the 55-210 as I think there are quality issues and don't often need that sort of length. So if I had to choose just one lens it would be the Zeiss 16-70 f4.

May 5, 2017 06:38:47 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Sony A6000 vs A6300 vs A7 : Electronic Viewfinder Resolution

I had the A6000 but now have the A6300. Both EVF's are very good but the A6300 is only slightly better. I would have no hesitation in choosing the A600 if the EVF is the only thing that worries you.

May 2, 2017 10:33:22 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

outdoor sunny Apeture or Manual

Rab-Eye wrote:

I've often asked pros the following question (I'm talking guys like Reed Hoffman, who shot for NatGeo and teaches Nikon School courses): if all you do in manual is expose according to the camera's meter, isn't it the same as using aperture or shutter priority, and generally they agree. I use aperture priority most often. For sports, shutter priority. If I want an exposure that differs from the camera's meter, I go with Manual, which I prefer over another choice, exposure compensation.

The same and usually a lot easier.

May 2, 2017 10:28:07 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

outdoor sunny Apeture or Manual

camerapapi wrote:

I am afraid that your knowledge of digital exposure needs some review. Regardless of shooting mode in use your histogram is a very valuable tool to arrive at the correct exposure. I cannot imagine someone bracketing exposures every time a photograph is made.
Outdoors, Aperture Priority or Manual are both effective. Program and Shutter Priority are also effective. It all depends on the control the photographer wants to have.

Whose knowledge of digital exposure needs some review?

May 2, 2017 08:18:09 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

outdoor sunny Apeture or Manual

As a professional I used mainly medium and large format manual cameras. Now retired using digital I very rarely use manual. Why would I want too? 99% of the time the camera will automatically set the exposure I would use anyway, and I can set aperture, shutter or program mode to control movement and DOF.
Why do photographers make it more difficult for themselves by using manual? Its the result that counts. No one will know or care if you have used manual or auto.

Apr 25, 2017 07:50:08 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

photographing paintings

maschoos wrote:

Thanks for the info.....I miss spoke the lens I am using its a zoom 35-80 mm.....what type of back ground do you shoot against light or dark

I would suggest dark. The least stray light reflected back into the lens the better.

Apr 24, 2017 07:10:02 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

photographing paintings

maschoos wrote:

I am a beginner at photograhy. I am photographing art work for giclee reproduction and the initial photographs are a little dull. I am using a cannon T5i camera with a canon 200mm, 35-80mm, 1.4-5.6 shooting subject in raw and jpeg. I am using reflective/umbrella 5000K lights at 45 degree angle. Much of the dullness can be photoshopped out. Any suggestions on how to improve the initial photographs.

I have (where possible) photographed paintings with the camera on a copy stand as its much easier to get the camera precisely lined up. This of course might not be possible if the painting is on the large size. Regarding quality, although your lenses might not be ideal they should give a reasonable result. A better choice would be a reasonable quality prime 40 or 50mm. Your 200mm is too long but set your zoom somewhere around 40 to 50mm at somewhere around f8/11, (I feel the 80 and 90mm suggestions also on the long side with an APS-C sensor). You are right to set the lights either side at 45 degree's, but make sure they are a reasonable (and equal) distance away from the painting. Too close and the lighting will be uneven. Make sure the room you are photographing the paintings in is reasonably dark, you do not want any other lighting interfering with the main lighting. Check that there is no stray light hitting the lens. As for your your photographs being on the dull side use levels and (careful use of) curves to adjust. If possible check the image for density and colour on the screen against the original painting and make it slightly brighter as the print will never appear as vibrant as the screen image.

Apr 22, 2017 07:54:52 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

lenses for sony a 6000

nannyg wrote:

has anyone had any luck with lenses beyond the sony kit lens for the a 6000? i have to say, i have not been impressed with the kit lens for the sony a 6000. i did buy a used prime lens - 1.8/50 - and results have been quite a bit better. thinking about the more expensive sony/zeiss lens option for this camera but it aint cheap. anyone used the sony ziess lenses? thank you.

For two years now I have used the Zeiss E 16-70mm ƒ/4 and although reviews, vary I personally am very pleased with the results. Such a useful focal length range and some of the criticisms levelled at it, in practice, has never caused problems. It is however quite expensive. It’s worth looking at B&H customer reviews and have also attached is a link to Imaging Resource review.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1001009-REG/sony_sel1670z_16_70mm_f_4_za_lens.html

http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sony/e-16-70mm-f4-zeiss-vario-tessar-t-za-oss-sel1670z/review/

Page: <<prev 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 24 next>>

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum

Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.