Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: WILLARD98407
Page: <<prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 158 next>>
Sep 30, 2023 12:58:17   #
btbg wrote:
I don't understand why we are on page four of this thread. I have shot 10s of thousands of night and indoor rodeo shots and this is what it looks like when you shoot at the same time as strobes placed near the ceiling or top of the grandstands go off. It is not a camera malfunction. You are 100 percent right about the shadows and color temp change.

👍
Go to
Sep 30, 2023 12:15:02   #
photosfromtexas wrote:
Shorty answer: mechanical shutter malfunction? Long answer: I had an issue like this on my Nikon D750 about 8 years ago. It occurred in one of about 400 photos. I shot manual with mechanical shutter. That model had issues with the mechanical shutter and many were recalled. Nikon said my serial number was not affected and would not take it back . Finally about 4 years later I got an email that my serial number was recalled. By then it had 99,000 exposures. They took it back, replaced the shutter, cleaned it up so it looked new. It never had the problem again. I gave it away to my daughter at 160,000 exposures and she has not reported it as a problem since she got it.
Shorty answer: mechanical shutter malfunction? Lon... (show quote)


Good that you got it taken care of.
Not this issue.
Wouldn't explain the shadows and color temp. change.
Go to
Sep 28, 2023 05:29:41   #
Just a few observations from an old guy---
The two pics have different light sources. First image is overall lighting from above and obviously multiple-sourced, general, leading to soft shadow in the arena. There is a general, diffuse shadow under the horse. Also observe the light source on the spectators in the background, coming from above. Looking through the gate, the cowboy in the white hat shows camera motion and has a diffuse shadow under his hat and no shadow from the gate.

In the second shot, the light is mixed-sourced, the majority of the (over)exposure was from a flash (or maybe more than one). The obvious shadows that are the telltale are: 1. the shadow of the girth strap on the side of the horse, indicating a light from above and to the left of the photographer. 2. the light direction on the people in the background is also coming from the left of camera. 3. the cowboy behind the gate has a sharp shadow line below his hat and shadows from the gate on his shirt. 4. there are two horse shadows; under and to the camera side of the horse.

The grate and bunting on the wall show camera motion in the first, as do the spectators.
In the second, all is sharp because the flash(s) has overpowered the ambient light, and has so much shorter duration it has eliminated the effects of camera and subject motion.
The person firing the flash must have some powerful heads to fill the arena like that.

Pretty obvious that the ambient light source and the flash were two different color balances.

I have experienced this unfortunate bit of timing myself at events such as weddings, car races, concerts, fashion runways, and ball games.

Bad luck in this instance, but the photographer can console himself with the knowledge that he did nothing wrong, and neither did his camera.
Might want to use a faster shutter speed in the future, though.
Also, obviously, if he would shoot in RAW, he could fix the color and exposure in pp.
Go to
Jan 28, 2023 12:06:33   #
bobbyjohn wrote:
Nice pictures. Nice background replace. Either one could have been used to sell the car. The tires look like they could use a tad more air....especially in the first image.

Yep. Radials.
Go to
Jan 27, 2023 11:27:07   #
thanks, y'all


mrbill
Go to
Jan 27, 2023 11:26:49   #
bodiebill wrote:
???? Packard
pls don't make us guess


you get a twofer.

35 Cheby

not the orig color. don't know what it was originally.
Go to
Jan 27, 2023 03:51:34   #
neighbor wanted some pics to show prospects.
here's one before-and-after




(Download)
Go to
Jan 25, 2023 14:29:14   #
Thanks, y'all.
Haven't been around much lately.
Good to hear from you again.

mrbill
Go to
Jan 25, 2023 01:34:09   #
bikinkawboy wrote:
Impressive work!


Thnx, Biki
Go to
Jan 24, 2023 18:52:26   #
thnks again to all of yu.

nice to hear from some of you again after a goodly while.
Go to
Jan 24, 2023 17:58:06   #
thnx, Mr. Long
Go to
Jan 24, 2023 17:48:37   #
?


(Download)


(Download)
Go to
Sep 6, 2022 19:53:48   #
Minolta Sr7
Go to
Sep 6, 2022 14:58:13   #
jerryc41 wrote:
KEH sent me a 5% off coupon. Will I be able to resist saving 5%? The more I spend, the more I save - but the more I spend. What a conundrum!


just pick out the most expensive item you can find, then take the 5% in cash.

now you can afford to buy something you really want.
Go to
Sep 6, 2022 14:46:23   #
[quote=Architect1776]
smf85 wrote:
I have shot Nikon since 1971. The oldest lens I own is a F mount 13.5cm 3.5 Nikkor c.1963. Which I purchased used as my first 135mm. My first 50mm 1.4 was also purchased used - made in 1969. They mount and operate on my Z9. Kinda clunky but works correctly. And on my Z7, Z6, D850, D200, and my F. Most of my AF, AF D and previous lenses will mount and operate manually on the F. Even the old F mount intrusive fisheyes will (mostly) mount and operate properly on the Z camera’s. I’m annoyed that my screw AF lenses don’t autofocus on the Z series with the FTZ. But otherwise they work fine.

During the same time period Canon has had the following lens mounts:

1959 R
1964 FL
1971 FD
1987 EF
2003 EF-S (EF compatible)
2012 EF-M
2018 RF (EF lenses can be adapted for the the R camera’s.).


Note for the ignorant:
R, FL and FD are the same mount.
EFs is so crop lenses are not wasted on FF cameras.
EFM will take EF lenses and work just fine.
RF will take every single EF lens with adapter and work 100% or even better especially with the control ring.

Nikon "Mount" changes using your logic:
Pre AI not all worked with AI and could not be converted.
AI Converted
AI
AI-s
Nikon 1
AF/AF-D
AF-S
AF-I
G
AF-P
Z which does not support but a couple of all the previous lenses including auto focus lenses.

Z orphaned thousands of Nikon owners with un-useable lenses as shown in compatibility charts, and even in the older mounts there was a lot of incompatibility, thus the need for compatibility charts.

100% of EF/EFs lenses are fully compatible with the RF mount with the adapter. (EF lenses have been around for 35 years and anyone under 50 would likely have no clue about FD lenses and could care less) Additionally ALL FD/FL/R/M39 Canon lenses work on the RF mount cameras. So those that still have those great lenses now use them again with the latest R cameras.
See photos, ALL have the same identical mount and I have mounted ALL on R/FL/FD cameras interchangeably.
The last photo has FD/FL/R lenses mounted on all the cameras shown and NOT on FD/FD but so called mixed mounts and as you can see they all mount just fine.
Your ignorance shines through loud and clear.
I have shot Nikon since 1971. The oldest lens I ow... (show quote)


What? No Alpas?
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 158 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.