Don Thompson
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
That is a tall order. Photoshop is a huge program. There are many very thick books written on the subject. I think you would better serve yourself to get one specifically for the subject you are most interested, such as nature, and read it.
In general though, if you pull your pictures into photoshop and adjust the levels, contrast, possibly saturation then apply, not over apply, a bit of sharpening that will suffice for most well taken photos.
I hope that helps.
While all my serious experience with photography has been digital, it has to be sort of sad for those, particularly professionals, who have used Kodachrome in the past to see it disappear. Many great photos have been shot using Kodachrome.
Hi
Having looked at the sites of a number of photographers whose work I enjoy- that a common componant seems to be a section/list of the equipment they use/favour. Will
I don’t think it truly matters, but I like knowing what equipment was used. That way when the equipment is better than mine, I can blame my bad photos on “cheap” equipment. 🙂
Seriously, I do like it when the equipment is listed.
I have the 40D and love it. I do not see the color cast that Eric is refering to. Without upgrading to one of the XD bodies, which I cannot afford, I cannot think of a single reason for me to consider upgrading to the 50D.
That being said, whenver I have upgraded, I buy the latest technology in the class I am buying, it has been the XXD so far, knowing that I will be keeping the body for 4-5 years.
I just recently bought the Manfrotto 055XPROB. I paired it with the Manfrotto 488RC4 Midi Ball Head. I found different opinions on the different rapid connection options but settled on the RC4. You can go to Manfrotto web page and decide for yourself which is best for you.
The new 5D was officially announced and it has the new sensor.
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=17662
I have a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX. It is about 4 years old so it is not exactly the same one you would be buying. The picture quality is good, but about two years in, the matte coating under the tripod collar began peeling off. It has continued to peel and no spreading to other parts of the lens. I understand finances but with 20/20 vision, I wish I had spent the extra money and bought the Canon.
Just something else to consider.
Now I really need to get that 400mm 2.8…….just need to convince my wife……
Good luck with that. If it works out let me know your arguments. My wife bought me the Canon 40D and the 100-400, but she drew the line when I brought up the 400mm f2.8. :'(
Congratulations Aaron.
I’m not a mother but as a parent I know that they only thing that changes when you children grow up and leave home is that they don’t sleep in your bed anymore. You still worry the same and still take pride in their accomplishments.
Again congratulations.
No pictures to share but I fish mostly warm water and I always start with a Clouser of some sort.
On a trip to PA where heavy rains spoiled the fishing, I visited his shop. Very nice man. It was slow in the shop, so he sat and talked as if we had known each other for a long time. He gave me a salt-water version that he had personally tied along with his autograph on a shop business card. I have the two of them hanging in my home office. Great fly, great man.
I am not sure I understand your position. From what I have read, the D700 is a substantial upgrade from the 5D. Yes it is 1/3 more cost, but I don’t think you are comparing apples to apples. From what I understand, the D700 is a SLIGHTLY defeatured D3. In order to compare to the Canon, it would seem to me that you would have to take the 1DS Mk III or the 1D Mk II, and remove some features, both which are considerably more than either the D3 or the D700. I doubt that Canon could/would defeature them and offer it at $3K. I do agree that $3K is a lot for the average freelancer, but is that the intended user.
As to the issue with the lenses, I shoot a Canon 40D. I have one L lens and the rest are 3rd party, either Sigma or Tokina. If I were to make the jump up to either of the 1D series cameras, it would be with the understanding that I would want to upgrade my lenses too. Otherwise, I would be shooting a pro camera with consumer lenses.
Rather than this indicating that Nikon is behind Canon on the design curve, I see it as the exact opposite. In my mind, Canon has nowhere
I don’t disagree with anything John said, but I would add that if you don’t have $4,000 or $8,000 for one of the MK III bodies, you will get better pictures with one of the lesser DSLR than you will with a P&S. Jump in at the price point you can afford, buy good glass, then continue saving your money to upgrade your body as John stated he had done.
Unfortunately, from what I know, there is no way to 100% protect your pictures when you post them anywhere on the internet. If I have anything that I think may be of value, either for local competitions, magazine submittals, etc. I don’t post them, it’s that simple. If I post it, I mark it copyrighted, reduce it in size to make it all but useless for anything but the web, but I assume that someone will download it. I even have friends and relatives copy photos, when all they have to do is ask, I would give them the a copy of the full file.
