Richard Bernabe
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Zach,
The most important benefit of digital, I would think, is that you know relatively immediately if you got the shots you need. Otherwise, you gotta bracket the crap out of everything and hope you didn’t screw anything up. Then you wait for the slides to find out if you’re right.
Not to mention quality. A digital capture is a much cleaner file than scanned film. A digital file (particularly the RAW image data) is more pliable and has much more editing headroom than scanned film. Then there is the dynamic range. Film is not only constrained by a relatively narrow range of exposure latitude, but so is the scanner. Double whammy. Digital RAW files have 5 to 7 stops of DR. Most folks don’t know this either, but scanning film is an art as well. Even a very good scanner in the hands of an amateur will result in a bad image file. Viva la technology!
Richard, OUCH you smacked my hand! Phil thank you for your thoughtful response.
People believe what they want to believe or whatever suits their purpose or makes them money.David, that comment was certainly not directed toward you. It was commentary on those who believe the open exchange of ideas on forums such as this are killing working pros. That’s just crazy. I don’t recall you saying anything about that.
Working professionals who have relied on traditional stock photography as their primary business model are hurting, no doubt. But as in any business or business sector, markets and buying habits change. Opportunities and the appetite for images are still there, stronger than ever.
Ditto Photogrpahy.Luminous Landscape, Fred Mirandas, Nature scapes are just 3 I routinely visit and read. PS tutorials abound and on and on and on.
Really when you think about it there virtually no need at all to buy print anymore.
🙁Don’t forget naturephotographers.net, of which i am the editor-in-chief.
I have one too. Publishable-quality images, files accepted by all major agencies. Suburb image quality at ISO 200 or lower. GREAT in-camera image stitch feature that will knock your socks off. Certainly not a substitute for a dslr rig, but amazing little camera.
15″ MacBook Pro with 4G of RAM, 23-inch Apple Cinema Display, Adobe CS3 Suite (Photoshop, Bridge, ACR), Capture One, (2) 1 Terabyte external drives RAID+1, iView Media, Spyder 2 Pro.
Was just reading the release.
With Nikon seemingly holding out on their new FF and Canon not delivering on the much rumored 5D replacement, this certainly sounds like a shot across the bow.
Zach, I thought I read somewhere that Nikon was producing their own chips for the D3s dont quote me though) ;D
The 5D replacement is the 5D Mark II – 17.2 MP, still full-frame, 14-bit data, weather/dust-sealed body, $3000. Thats enough for me, personally.
Here is what i am going to pick up for some underwater photography this summer…
Canon G9 (12 Megapixels!, RAW shooting capabilities, superb image quality) wide angle adapter (24mm) and Canon underwater housing. Total cost, about $600. I’ll let you all know how it goes.
I would look at a good ballhead (I would buy the Kirk BH-3, if I were starting out right now, http://www.kirkphoto.com/ballheadbh3.html/url%5D) and the arca-swiss QR system. The pistol grip is fast and convenient, but is much too unstable when flopped over to the vertical position. The “3-way setup” I assume is the traditional pan/tilt head? Much much too slow and cumbersome for most outdoor photography situations unless you exclusively do landscape work.
Carter,
There are no fast and hard rules regarding this.
Your personal taste will be the biggest factor as will the viewing distance of the print. 35mm images can (and are) enlarged to billboard size and look great as we are driving down the highway, but get any closer than 20 feet and they look horrible.
Neal,
That’s great. Glad you’re enjoying it. I have owned and read dozens of books on Photoshop and this is the only one you will ever want or need, IMO.
As for calibration, I had to upgrade from Colorvision’s Spyder2 Suite to Spyder2PRO, which allows for the calibration of multiple monitors from the same computer. (aprox. $169)
I now use my MacBook Pro as my only machine (upgraded to 4G of RAM) with an apple cinema display. I still like to calibrate both so I went his route.
I particularly don’t like the lens creep when the tensioner isn’t tightened. When you do tighten it, its too difficult to extend the lens all the way out, so you have to untighten to use. Just another mechanism to have to fool with as you’re trying to get the shot.
It is also much more prone to dust and dirt than the zoom that doesn’t extend. If I had not gotten such a good deal on this lens, I would have bought the Sigma 80-400 instead.
They only think they’re striking back…..
Richard how do you find that 100-400?
Morsie
It’s certainly not the perfect lens, but it’s darned good. I love the focal range, USM focuses very fast, and the IS works well. It’s super sharp as long as its not stopped too far down and its relatively small and easy to handhold. What I don’t like is the push-pull zoom design.
Nahhh, I was a Nikon shooter for 15 years now shooting Canon for the past 2.
Canon 5D, 20D
17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200L 2.8, 100-400L, 24mm and 45mm tlit/shift lenses.I sold my large format gear several years ago.
Aperture and f-stop are not the same thing, even though everyone uses the two terms interchangeably. An f-stop is a ratio. Aperture, focal length, and the physical size of the sensor or film all contribute to DOF. What makes a point-and-shoot so difficult to attain shallow DOF is the tiny sensor. There is too much inherent DOF in those cameras to achieve that shallow, selective focus style you seek.
When I shot 4×5 view cameras, f64 and f128 were not unusual to get the DOF I needed because of the large film size, while cheap disposable cameras don’t even have a focusing mechanism because there is SO much DOF, focusing is unnecessary. EVERYTHING already IS in focus.
Carter,
Go to Image>Image Size and choose your image dimensions in pixels/inches and dpi. At the bottom of the dialog box there are resampling options.
Bicubic (good, general resampler)
Bicubic smoother (specifically for up-rezzing or enlarging)
Bicubic sharper (specifcally for down-sizing images)Use the specific option for your needs to get the best results. You will be uprezzing if you are going to increase dpi to 300. Printing at 72 dpi will look terrible.
Most inkjet printers work optimally at 240, 300, or 360 dpi. I would suggest in the future saving your images as hi-rez tiffs at 300 dpi or higher. You can always scale down copies to jpgs later.
Oh, and resize your images in Photoshop using Bicubic Smoother for enlargements. You can resize by inches/dpi or pixels/dpi.
