Brandmic wrote:
I looked up the Lastolite are you refereed to. Looks like a good product. I have a cut down gray card I carry which is bulky. The description says it's collapsible. So it works good for WB?
When I bought it I thought it was a little expensive for what it is, but after having it for a couple years, it is well worth the money. It is about 9 inches folded, and opens to about 20 inches. With the black lines on it for focus, I don't have to turn off the autofocus when I use it. And it can double as a reflector.
CHOLLY wrote:
BTW, adjusting WB in post is putting a LOT of reliance on your memory and personal taste. You aren't necessarily getting an ACCURATE reflection of the subjects true color; just what you thought (or want) that color to be.
AWB is good when you don't have the time or motivation to set the WB... but if you ARE doing a set shot, then manual WB is the way to go if you want accurate representation of the actual colors in your subject.
Don't believe me? Do an experiment; set the camera on a tripod (to prevent a change in perspective) and take two shots, one AWB, and the other with the WB set manually. Be sure to use a gray card to set the manual. You can get them from a paint store home improvement store if you don't have a photography store nearby.
Compare the images to the subject... see which is closer to the actual colors.
BTW, adjusting WB in post is putting a LOT of reli... (
show quote)
I agree wholeheartedly about the subjectivity of adjusting WB in post. Also, if you are setting it on an uncalibrated monitor, the results could be off. I would be careful though, using a gray card from a paint store - it might not be a true neutral gray. Even some photo gray cards from the film era which were designed to measure exposure might not be color neutral. Some camera manufacturers recommend gray to set WB, but some recommend white. I have a foldable WB target from Lastolite which is white on one side and neutral gray on the other, and also has black lines for focus. Something like that, or the expodisc, are ideal.
I am a true believer in setting a custom white balance whenever I can, but especially in the studio. I know it can be adjusted in post, but that can be subjective and I like knowing it is correct. I have a circular WB target which folds up like a circular reflector, and I can use it as a circular reflector also. If it isn't feasible to do a custom white balance, I use auto.
tschmath wrote:
I went to a restaurant the other day that did this and told the manager he was cheating his employees. The tips listed were calculated on the amount of the check before the tax was added. I don't know about anyone else, but I've never heard of anyone tipping on the pre-tax amount. In my case the server was shorted less than a dollar, but over the course of a shift or a pay period that can add up to some serious change. The manager agreed with me and promised to alert corporate to the problem. We'll see next time if it gets fixed.
I went to a restaurant the other day that did this... (
show quote)
There was a discussion of tipping on a local restaurant critic's blog in San Francisco, and a fair number of people did say the tip should be pre-tax. Lots of restaurants here have the tip guide on the check, and most calculate it after tax, and many people were bent out of shape about that, feeling they were being conned into paying more than they should. I eat mostly in inexpensive restaurants, so the difference is pretty small, and I usually tip 20% after tax, if the service was decent.
As a lefty, even back in the "old" days of manual focus and manual film advance, a standard camera never felt awkward. Now after all this time, I think it would feel weird to release the shutter on the left.
I am left handed, and have had problem with tools and school desks, but I never had a problem with cameras or felt any need for a left handed one.
I would not bracket exposures with a people shot like this. You can end up with the best shot, where the most people have good expressions, being one which doesn't have the best exposure. You have plenty of time while the people are assembling to do a couple test shots and check the histogram and get the optimum exposure. After all, that is one one the greatest advantages of shooting digital. And you certainly should be shooting RAW for a shot like this so you could make minor tweaks in exposure in post anyway. Even back in the film days, for a people shot like this, I would take careful readings with a hand held meter and determine the best exposure and stick with it.
I was an early adopter back in 2001. I was already getting requests for digital files since publication was going digital and the internet was getting popular. I was tired of scanning film. Most pro quality digital cameras or digital backs were $20,000 to $30,000 back then. The most afforable option I could find was a Mamiya RZ67 (which I could also shoot film with) with a Magavision digital back. It was all of 6 megapixels, but that seemed great at the time. I think it was about $10,000 for the camera and the back. Amazing how far digital has come in that short period.
A 50mm would probably work fine. I would take whatever lenses I had and check out the view at the scene. The further back you are, the more equal the head sizes will be, but also the further back, the higher ladder you might need to see everyone's faces. Also, get people to overlap their bodies a little, so you can get them as close together as possible to maximize the head sizes.
wonkie wrote:
Thank you, I guess I won't use a flash. I thought it would help brighten things up but if it will make it worse I will just do it without. I thought about doing a pano, good idea. I also have my kit lens, would it be better to use it at about 30mm to get a bit closer?
The closer you get, the larger the people in front will appear compared to the people in back. I would get further away with a longer lens. As for the pano, with that many steps, you shouldn't need to use a pano format, you should be able to fill an 8x10 format without too much space top and bottom.
Shooting for the decisive moment doesn't mean only shooting one shot in every situation. It just means waiting for something good before hitting the shutter. That might only be a second or two between shots. But each time you are seeing what you want to shoot. To me, "spray and pray" means shooting in burst mode so you aren't really seeing each shot. That can work sometimes with very fast action, but it is still a crap shoot. Many years ago, in the army, we were taught that even with an automatic weapon, it was better to aim and pick shots one at a time. I think the same thing applies to photography.
G Brown wrote:
Can you get closer and do a portrait 3 shot panorama
or a landscape 4 shot pano. If you overlap well most stitching programmes will match and put it together into one big picture. PSE8 does so the later ones will too. If you use a tripod then the image shouldn't need much cropping.
If you are closer you could use a lower f stop and make use of that 1.4's light gathering capabilities. It won't work with flash though as the refresh time means folks will probably move too much.
If you got closer and used a lower f stop, you likely wouldn't get all the rows in focus.
The problem with the flash is that there will be some falloff of light, so the back rows will be darker than the front rows. It looks like the whole area is in the shade, so it's probably better to just use the available light. If the light is too flat, you can increase the contrast in post. You need to take as many exposures as the people will sit still for, and even then there's a chance you won't get everyone with their eyes open and a decent expression. But with the camera on a tripod, you should be able to switch heads from another exposure if necessary to get a good shot of everyone.
I had a 2200 for a few years, and when it died, I got a 2880, which is comparably priced. I like it a lot, and it's the first printer I have had that does really good B&W prints with three shades of black ink.