Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Chan Garrett
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
Feb 2, 2022 07:06:45   #
Bison Bud wrote:
Seems like new camera bodies with a built in flash are becoming a thing of the past, especially in the upper performance level bodies. While I realize that I can always add a hot shoe flash and the ability of a built in one is limited when compared to what can be done with the add on and/or use of slaves, I still think a built in flash is a nice feature to have available. Frankly, if I know I'm going to be doing flash photography, I will indeed use my speedlight setup, but I really don't carry it along regularly and the use of the built in flash has saved my butt a number of times. This is especially true when I simply need a fill flash to expose the subject rather than the background and I've even been rather successful using the built in flash for some low key photography of flowers, etc. Anyway, a built in flash is far from useless in my opinion and since the manufacturers seem to be moving away from them as an option, I was wondering how others out there might feel about them. Good luck and good shooting to all.
Seems like new camera bodies with a built in flash... (show quote)


The trend of not producing cameras with built in (pop-up) flash in higher end cameras is probably due to the fact that professional photographers will not use, and do not want them. Not only is a pop-up too close to the lens, but it is a very small light source and therefore more likely to cause harsh shadows.
Go to
Feb 1, 2022 10:11:47   #
Snooks0544 wrote:
I can understand that but I can't wrap my head around some of the stuff. I am 77, that is my biggest hang up.


Quit using your age as an excuse. I am now 87 and continue to learn new things every day. Just sit down and do the work. Don't let a number limit your enjoyment of life.
Go to
Jan 10, 2022 09:54:05   #
Be sure to carefully read the compitition guidlines and definitions. It does not matter what dictonaries or other people say. It is the compitition guidlines that matter.
Go to
Jan 8, 2022 07:49:43   #
blumoon722 wrote:
Picked up a D90 today. It is in very nice cosmetic condition. Shutter count 8615.

It auto focuses fine with a few different lenses, BUT all the pics are coming out pink.

What if anything will fix this?


This looks very much like images first appear from my IR converted camera. There are a number of conversions that can be made that control the mix of IR and color. My conversion blocks all visible color and produces only true B&W IR. The raw file appears with this pink overall cast prior to PP.
Go to
Jan 3, 2022 12:16:24   #
All pixels are not created equal. Let's assume that I have five buckets of paint, and you have five buckets of paint. Does that mean we both have the same amount of paint? Not if my buckets are five gallon buckets and your are one gallon each. In order to fit more pixels in a fixed size sensor, the new pixels will have to be smaller than the old ones. Thus, capturing less light than the lager ones.
Go to
Jan 3, 2022 08:22:29   #
Built-in "pop up" flash is designed to ruin as many photos as possible. Not found on many "professional" grade cameras.
Go to
Nov 27, 2021 08:55:12   #
We should all recognize that the problem with such photos is that they are taken with "straight on" lighting from a very small light source. Thus the washed out, harsh result. We need to think about that before we decide to light a subject with the small light source "pop up" flash on most cameras.
Go to
Nov 15, 2021 09:21:59   #
vg wrote:
Did something stupid. I installed my CPL filter over my UV filter.
Now I cannot unscrew the CPL filter.


I have found a method that works for me. Take a piece of masking tape and carefuly wrap it around the filter being sure to cover the intire side. Do not let it overlap the one below. take hold of the taped filter side and turn. This will assure that the screwed section of the filter turns while giving you a firm grip.
Go to
Nov 5, 2021 11:23:34   #
CHG_CANON wrote:
LR6 is so so much cheaper than film. Why? Because you paid for it once in 2016/17 and haven't paid a cent since.


I greatly respect your knowledge and helpful answers. I do, however have a question for you and do not know the answer before asking. You seem to be using Lightroom 6 (your choice.) Have you bought a new camera since 2016/17? If so, why? Have you compared Lr6 with the current updatwes of LrC and PS?
Go to
Sep 21, 2021 10:25:02   #
jaymatt wrote:
For some reason, LR will not import photos from my iPhone 8+, though it used to.

I have the phone connected to the charger cord as instructed. The photos show on the screen; but when I choose import, LR begins, the white import line starts, and then it just stops and will not move no matter how long I wait.

I can always email myself the photos and import them that way, but it’s an awkward process.

Any ideas as to how to solve this problem?


I do not have an iPhone, but an Android. I have only imported into LrC once, but had no problem. I connected my phone to my computer using the charge cable with a USB connection. From there I found the phone on the computer just as I would any external drive. I went to the picture files and imported through LrC in the usual way. No problem.
Go to
Aug 9, 2021 10:43:16   #
Raptor wrote:
Im at photo workshop in Maine. Im learning to use PS. One of the participants, very accomplished, feels the same way about LR catalog system as I do. My workflow is very simple and I have a good organizational system on my external drive. I want to ditch LR and use Bridge (browser capability) and Adobe Camera Raw. I understand It can do most of what LR can do. I don't batch edit. I also use Luminar 4 and am learning PS. Also I won't have to worry about LR losing photos or not recognizing a drive. Your thoughts? In an earlier post I thought my master photo disk was corrupted. It was an LR issue. I don't want this ajada.
Im at photo workshop in Maine. Im learning to use... (show quote)


During my days as a professional wedding photographer I moved with the from film to digital as soon as I thought digital could give me images that matched film. I was a very early user of Photoshop. I continued to use Photoshop to edit images and sent the digital files to the lab for printing. I retired before Lightroom came on to the scene. After a period of 5-6 years of inactivity, I returned to photography as a hobby and discovered Lightroom. At first it was confusing. " What is a catalog?" "Where are my photos stored?" I made some mistakes along the way. It was frustrating. After a little while of struggling on my own, I decided to watch a number of good YouTube videos and learned what I was doing wrong, as well as what strengths of Lightroom I was ignoring. What a difference. Now, I load all my images directly from my card into Lightroom. I use a simple file system, but by learning to use keywords I don't have to remember which folder I placed them in. If I want to edit an image in PhotoShop, or any other editing program I have as a plug in for Lightroom, I bring up the image in Lightroom and right click on the image (Windows) and go to edit in and choose the program I want and check Edit a copy. The new program opens and I do the edit. When I am finished I click "Save" and the file is saved as a new copy back into LightRoom.
Use what you like. Lightroom Classic works great for me.
Go to
Aug 8, 2021 17:38:06   #
Photolady2014 wrote:
Morning all! So I just got through taking a 5 day class with a very well known photographer who has won many, many awards, photos in the Smithsonian and is a judge for contests like Natures Best Photography. I learned sooo much about what makes a great photo.

Half way through the 5 days I was feeling quite overwhelmed and almost in tears because to get the photo that he would consider a photo seems near impossible. I totally understand photos before and just after sunrise and sunset are the best, but is it awful that I still want to take photos mid day? On several of my trips I have still gotten photos I really like, even though they do not have the special light and there are shadows etc. I scoured my photos and submitted them for the class and so far I do not have one photo that is not a "non-photo" due to shadow or lack of a hook or a background that is not totally creamy, or a host of other bad things.

I will post some of his comments to what I thought was going to be an ok photo.

The last one was reviewed verbally, the shadows! Bridge of the nose by eye, and the light patch of fur below the right eye as you look at the photo and curve shadow back to the nose is a big distraction. He could tell I was off by 2 degrees and that caused the bad shadow. The lighter fur to the left of the nose stops the eye from traveling from the lower left to the eye. You are supposed to have something soft in the lower left that makes your eye travel from lower left to the "hook" eye. In this case it does not work due to light fur interrupts the flow to the eye and then the shadows on the right. Then, the white fur on the lips could have been lightened to make it better if the other issues had not condemned it to be a "non-photo". Oh and the green line going through the background is bad.

Who knew you were not supposed to have sky in a bird photo, or that with something like a coyote all 4 legs must have separation and no crossover and that the farthest away front leg should be going forward. That the background must be very creamy with no light and dark areas. Shadows are the worst! Like crap, I was off by 2 or 4 degrees with the shadow. Must have a hook, no lines and of course good light, no messy sticks. Example an owl in a tree is bad if the leaves are all around it.

Anyway, I feel like a bad person/photographer for still liking some of my photos that are not perfect and still wanting to just have fun taking a photo and if I see a mom and baby moose at noon in a messy field of grass with a shadow, I'm still going to take the photo!

Again, I learned a LOT and the pro is a very nice guy and very talented. I will try and do what he says, but may still take what I know will be a "non-photo" am I bad?

Comments welcome, I have had lots of criticism lately, I can handle it! Well I might cry....
Morning all! So I just got through taking a 5 day... (show quote)


I know that I am chiming in very late, but I have some thoughts. Your friends are not giving you helpful information. They want you to feel better, and not to worry about improving your photography.
Many, most on this forum are here because we enjoy the hobby of photography. We love what we do and do what we love. That enjoyment is the whole purpose of photographing, and most have arrived at a level of skill that brings that enjoyment. You, on the other hand decided to try to move your photography up a level. That can sometimes be painful.
Let me compare photography to the game of golf. The average golfer plays for enjoyment. We are not thinking in terms of joining the professional tour. We fit in with our golfing buddies because we all play at about the same level. That's what makes the game enjoyable. But every so often one of the foursome decides that he, or she wants to become even better at the game. Money and time are spent with instructors in the often painful attempt to improve. Something happens. Golfing friends start discouraging that one from spending time attempting to get better. "But we were having so much fun together." "There is nothing wrong with your game." Those egotistical instructors want you to feel the need to spend more of your money with them." On and on it goes.
From what you have said, I judge that you have made the decision to become an even better photographer. That can be painful for a while. There is work to do. It also appears your "egotistical" instructor has realized that you are a good photographer with the talent and desire to become a better photographer. He, or she sees the task as one of prodding, leading, teaching you to become that better photographer. The rest is up to you.
If this is your desire, don't listen to those voices saying, "you are good enough, don't spend time or money in the search for improvement."
Go to
Jun 23, 2021 09:09:46   #
ghellmann wrote:
Anybody done it?
Experience with?


I don't know your camera, but it is important that you can shoot in live view. Your camera meter measures visible light, not IR. Therefore, you need to shoot in manual mode and make your settings and focus by looking at the screen and not through the mirror viewfinder. Ask the company you choose for the conversion if your camera is a good candidate for the conversion you select.
Go to
Jun 21, 2021 10:18:55   #
larryepage wrote:
I am not a professional photographer, but I have shot some organized events. You do not want to do that with two cameras that don't shoot "the same." Having two cameras is important...reliability insurance, yes, but flexibility even more. So either get a second camera like the one you have, or get a 5D4 as step one on the toad to having two of them.

There are a few cases where you can find two cameras that shoot exactly the same, but it's pretty rare.


At the prices you list, you are not placing much value on your time or talent. You risk placing yourself in the category of, "I am cheep for a reason." You may fill a "nitch" for people that can't afford a "real" wedding photographer, or who give no real value to photography. Not where you want to place yourself.
Go to
Jun 14, 2021 11:37:38   #
User ID wrote:
This is an intentional case of leaving the best camera home. Turns that old cliche on its head. Inverting cliches is a great way set out on a journey of discovery :-)


That old saying about the "best camera" does not ring true if you had a better camera that you could have had with you.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.