The Photo Snob Thread
- Thread starter brisneyland
- Start date
Tomas
my mum says im cool
it doesn't matter which way you type it, as long as they are the same letters it all works the same!
IMO
WwW.CaLlAnRoBiNsOn.CoM is the best
I know. Im not a moron. Just making the point that the odd capitalisation makes it look weird. It's used consistently like that through the page titles and shit and looks odd.
saMfish
Likes Dirt
I think I've got to the point where all I really need to work on is getting some nicer cars and thinking of some nicer locations to shoot at. That, and a full frame body w/ 14mm lens wouldn't go astray... I only have a 10-22 for my 40d, which can't produce shots like this (which is shot with a fisheye). That's why it's cropped so closely to the left (image is not cropped at all, however it has had some distortion correction in photoshop, bringing the car far too close to the left than I would like).
wazza2282
Likes Dirt
70-200 is a big lens for a 7D. i have one and i would never use it for indoor candid shots. You need a much smaller focal length; a 24-105 would be ideal. However if you already have a lens in that range, the 70-200 does amazing shots when your able to use it; outdoors. even a 17-50 ish as i'm sure groups shots will be a must; something you would not be able to do indoors successfully on the 7d with 70-200.
just my thoughts
Kamikazee ideki
Likes Dirt
The Vimeo Video School has a heap of information on the basics of shooting DSLR video. BHphoto has pretty comprehensive guide to DLSR setup as well.
Jaydawgz, if the school is paying for the hire, I'd go for the 85mm 1.2 just because its a pretty amazing piece of glass! 85mm is also pretty good for portraits and the aperture is great for low light. If you feel the focal length is too long, there is always the 50mm 1.2.
Last edited:
Tristan23
Farkin guerilla
This goes for everyone, but i'll use this photo as an example (it's not a bad shot, but it could be better)...
Bump up your exposure.
If the lightest part of your photo isn't almost blown out, your exposure isn't correct. For example, in this photo, the sky is light, but it's still clearly, visibly coloured, whilst the bottom of the shot (the car, the wheels, the ground) are all underexposed. The sky is also the least interesting part of the photo, so even if it's very light you won't lose any necessary detail, and what you'll gain the lower half of the shot will be well worth it.
And just to cover myself before anyone mentions it: low key photos (or at least decent ones) always have at least one part which is almost blown out. You need a broad range of light and shadow in a photo for your eye to find it interesting to look at, and you'd be surprised how far you can push it before you'll have to pull back the highlights. Personally, i'd much prefer to see an overexposed image than an underexposed one.
Bump up your exposure.
If the lightest part of your photo isn't almost blown out, your exposure isn't correct. For example, in this photo, the sky is light, but it's still clearly, visibly coloured, whilst the bottom of the shot (the car, the wheels, the ground) are all underexposed. The sky is also the least interesting part of the photo, so even if it's very light you won't lose any necessary detail, and what you'll gain the lower half of the shot will be well worth it.
And just to cover myself before anyone mentions it: low key photos (or at least decent ones) always have at least one part which is almost blown out. You need a broad range of light and shadow in a photo for your eye to find it interesting to look at, and you'd be surprised how far you can push it before you'll have to pull back the highlights. Personally, i'd much prefer to see an overexposed image than an underexposed one.
As for the rig shot Sam, i'd say keep practicing before finding that nice vehicle and location. While your shots are definitely good, there's still a bit of work to be done to get rid of the visible blur at the front of the car. Think creatively as to how you can reduce it...
saMfish
Likes Dirt
Really appreciate that Tristan, thanks! Would building a more sturdy, stable rig reduce that blur? The photo is f/22 on my fisheye, so it's definitely not out of focus (although it could be a bit soft because of this, but I don't think that's the issue).
If you have any ideas re: fixing that blur, please throw them my way. I'm all for self learning and self progression, but I find it definitely does get to a point where you need a bit of a push in the right direction.
Thanks for being honest, as per usual. I was tossing up whether or not to actually post that one in here. Glad I did.
If you have any ideas re: fixing that blur, please throw them my way. I'm all for self learning and self progression, but I find it definitely does get to a point where you need a bit of a push in the right direction.
Thanks for being honest, as per usual. I was tossing up whether or not to actually post that one in here. Glad I did.
It's not used anywhere else...?
I don't see a problem with it being like that in one forum post.
Jaydawgz
Likes Dirt
Jaydawgz, if the school is paying for the hire, I'd go for the 85mm 1.2 just because its a pretty amazing piece of glass! 85mm is also pretty good for portraits and the aperture is great for low light. If you feel the focal length is too long, there is always the 50mm 1.2.
Here's the thing guys, I thought of primes, but I will be moving around, as well as being in a restricted space.
These aren't going to be just shots of people posing, more from a distance, walking down the stairs.
I think what I will do, is go to the venue beforehand, in a week or two with my 15-85 and 7D.
I could bring my mums kit 55-250, to see if I would need such a big lens.
Tristan23
Farkin guerilla
This.
If you're in any kind of restricted space you'll want something at least moderately wide. 70-200 is a nice lens, but it'll suck for an event...
Tristan23
Farkin guerilla
Think about what causes the blur - movement, right? And what is it that causes that movement? The sturdiness of the rig definitely has a hand in it, but without spending a decent amount of money it's hard to get a rig stiff enough to avoid any blur. There are other factors, and without plainly spelling them out to you too much, you should try to think about the best ways to reduce every bit of vibration the camera is likely to pick up. Does that make a little more sense?
Also, shoot at f/16 and in lower light. Without going into the physics of diffraction and all that jazz, your image quality will be higher than at f/22.
Out of interest, what shutter speed/s are you shooting at?
Jaydawgz
Likes Dirt
Thought of these to, but not a big enough focal length.
I do need the distance, 30m+ probably.
Tristan23
Farkin guerilla
Do the above. 105mm is a relatively decent length on a 1.6 crop sensor, and remember, in low light even if you've got the reach you won't be able to see much without a flash, and at that distance a flash won't be all that helpful unless it's direct, which looks shithouse anyway...
Jaydawgz
Likes Dirt
Yeah I know what your saying. I think there may be a spotlight on them as the come down the stairs, although dancing, I think it may struggle with the ambient.
saMfish
Likes Dirt
Yeah, wicked. I'll try that next time
I'd be ashamed to show any of you detailed photos of the setup I used to take my rig shots.. I was planning to buy Avenger suction cups plus a proper boom arm plus a Manfrotto Magic Arm, but as you said before, it's more costly than one would imagine. One day I will, I really love taking these kinds of photos!The photos of my golf (blue) were at 0.5".
Alec McJo
Likes Bikes and Dirt
18 - 300? I think that's the length of the lens I'm thinking of, a 3.5 - 5.6 aperture lens I think. L series.
Will be two slow, he is going to struggle shooting at 200mm f/2.8 (ambient light dependent, but i can imagine the conditions), The IS is great on this lens, but really to be safe you need to be faster then 1/160, depending on how steady you are and also if you are taking photos of walking people, that speed is necessary, flash wont do much if your shooting at 200mm on a 1.6 crop.. And you shouldn't need 300mm anyway.
Made up a watermark/logo today. I wanted to keep it simple. Made in vectorworks.
Thinking it is a tad to small.
Thoughts?