Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Get the new ON1 Photo 10 and Save $100 Today. Use Code: GetPhoto10 View Offer

Connect to User


Overread's Forum Comments

Overread > Overread Recent Activity > Overread's Forum Comments
TopicRepliesLast Post
Apple Thunderstruck By Firmware Worm

Quote: anti virus guys dont want to be too on the ball.theyd have nothing to do soon be out of work Smile

Haha I doubt it. Any major software these days is too juicy to pass up an attack on.

Also in the past wasn't there (I think German but I might be wrong) someone who wanted to boost work for his mothers computer repair company so made a supervirus that turned out way more powerful and which was put into widespread use for a period of time. So in theory any anti-virus company down on its luck could always just make the virus first (of course if they got caught they'd be decimated).

9 24/08/2015 - 8:07 PM
By davewaine
ISO: How High Can You Go?
Personally I know what you mean about shots not up to standard - but I tend to hold onto them. Noise reduction software improves all the time and even a few adjustments to workflow can result in a very big differences. Sometimes it means that sure you' get a nice web-sized shot out of the deal; other times you might get a really good print (remember in both those formats the noise levels reduce by the nature of the medium - unless you're also cropping significantly or in the case of prints blowing up to very big sizes).

33 06/08/2015 - 4:35 PM
By Andy_Curtis
ISO: How High Can You Go?
The sensor is certainly only one part; the manufacturer/camera maker can use different tweaks and software to adjust the end result; which is why you get differences between, say, Nikon and Sony cameras even though both are using Sony sensors inside (and sometimes the same base model or at least very similar).

As for ISO choice, everything I've read and learned says the same "the higher the ISO, the more noise; BUT a higher ISO at a correct (expose to the right) exposure will give less noise than if you underexpose and then brighten up in editing.

I think if ISO were purely a function of post-image-capture processing then we'd never have seen the rise of expose to the right exposure theory at all. What I think is happening is that sensors and software are getting to a point now where for many lower ISOs (a good fwe of which were once high ISOs) the difference in noise between correct exposure and underexposure brightened up is getting so small as to be a null issue outside of pixel peeping and test-shots.

For myself I started with the mantra "keep the ISO low" and these days whenever newbies ask about it I tell them to forget that mantra totally. These days I'm confident and happy to choose my aperture and shutter speed and then base the ISO off what the light gives me; within reason of course. If I feel that I can reduce the depth of field - still get the shot I want - then yes I'll use a wider aperture (where possible) to get the ISO lower. Otherwise I feel that if you need a high ISO for a shot then you need it. One I think is better to be aware of what will happen; but not to let "high ISO" strike fear into one's heart.

Indeed starting with higher ISOs early on I would consider a benefit as its likely to lead to the user learning good post-processing methodology with regard to sharpening and noise reduction. I know when I started doing some indoor show-jumping I suddenly had to deal with ISO 3200 being a low ISO! And pushing up to 6400 and 12800 not uncommon; which meant learning a few new things (and I've still much to learn honestly) to try and deal with ISOs so high; but where my shutter speed and aperture were at the limits for the shot and my equipment

In Digital imaging | Page: 1, 2, 3
33 06/08/2015 - 4:35 PM
By Andy_Curtis
what is your pet hate
Bricks make great pets; you just have to learn how to live with one to get the most fun out of it

In Off-topic discussion | Page: 1, 2, 3
162 01/08/2015 - 9:54 PM
By Paul Morgan
Clarkson, May and Hammond Back On Screen

I'll just have to wait for the BBC to buy it from Amazon (like they've done for Ripper Street)

In Off-topic discussion | Page: 1, 2 ...10, 11
22 21/08/2015 - 11:45 AM
By mikehawthorne
Lion Killer

Quote: [quote]As for hunters motives = who cares, as long as they pay and the money properly directed

of course it matters, its what drove him to pay a large amount of money to kill not just any lion. And as far as we know the money paid was going straight to the two that were in court today, not into National Parks.

In my view its only by understanding the motives that one can have any chances of:

1) Controlling
2) Providing
3) Preventing.

You can't control hunters unless you know what they want - you can't control them if you don't know what they are after. If you do then you've got a big step in understanding how to prevent such actions where they would be harmful and to allow such actions where they would be beneficial. As said above, there are times when animals; even rare endangered ones, have to be culled or removed, or where their removal would not harm the existing stock (eg removal of a significantly old and non-contributing member of a group). Such situations would allow for a hunter to take out the subject so if you can then charge someone (instead of just paying a ranger) and thus profit whilst at the same time taking action that you would otherwise do for conservation then everyone wins.

You also can't stop or prevent something from happening if you don't understand the motives and motivation. Once you start to understand the motivation you can start to counter or prevent such events taking place, or reduce the uptake of people new to wanting the hunt or activity; or find ways for them to undertake it or get their "reward" another way.

Take the medical desires of many who want animal medication for its magical properties; much of that can be countered by effective medication coupled with improved awareness of documented proper medication as well as improving the image of proper medication. Where its an element of cost it about ensuring that normal medication is more easily accessible than the animal.

57 07/08/2015 - 7:54 PM
By mikehit
Lion Killer
MGJ expands well on the point I made.

Interestingly in the UK, outside of reserves its often land which has bird shoots upon it that is often higher in avian diversity; again its all about the economics of the situation. Land has to make a profit and income for the owner as few people are in a position to do nothing with the land and simply let it be wild.

Game shooting is one such avenue and whilst there are conflicts it at least gives a viable reason for land to support wildlife other than for moral or aesthetic reasons.

Of course you've also got a rise in eco-tourism. Just as someone will pay 50,000 for shooting a lion with a gun; others will pay 5000 to go on holiday with a camera. Again you've got a potential income and there are quite a few new schemes where local peoples in these countries are now encouraged to promote wildlife and then do tours. It's a more healthy option all round of course; but we can't ignore those who want to hunt.

If one can tap into that market, provide for it and ensure that hunts conducted are controlled and sensible (eg targeting sick/injured or rouge-animals that present a danger to human life directly) then both sides can profit from the experience. Of course it can get too commercial - it can get poaching problems - a whole host of issues.

It's a complex situation but this one sounds like the guy loves to hunt and for a hunter hunting rare game is just the same as to a photographer; even if the end result is very different. Considering that he's shot rhino in the past I've a feeling this hunter likely wan't too concerned about the legality of the hunt itself; however it might be that putting down that kind of money he thought it was legitimate - he's the only one who will know the truth on that score and in the current light he likely will only say one side of the argument no matter the truth.

In ePHOTOzine discussion | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4
57 07/08/2015 - 7:54 PM
By mikehit
Lion Killer
The biggest problem is often not only the hunters - its the loss of habitat and the fragmentation of what is left into isolated pockets. Habitat loss and fragmentation means that animals can't easily mingle with each other which leaves isolated pockets which can be then put under individual pressure; unable to leave the area they are in and unable to breed or mingle with others - thus their gene pool gets reduced as does the number of potential mates.

When you add hunters on-top it further increases the pressures the animals are under.

The whole idea of fragmented habitats is still fairly new in being dealt with; "green corridors" are the new big thing in many conservation groups as they try to link up reserves. Already many have been darting and transporting males and females around reserves to try and keep the gene pools mingling; so building corridors between reserves is the next big thing - sadly crossing roads and skirting urban dwelling and farming land is very hard; even in developed countries with an interest in conservation. In new developing countries the push to urbanise and modernize is insane and as such conservation is very much under pressure.

It's quite honestly a mess and with rising populations everywhere its not something that will go away.

Interestingly I'd honestly support big money game hunting - to an extent. I'd support it in the view that when there is big money there is actual financial interest in keeping land "wild" which would otherwise be converted to other uses for economic gain. Of course this requires that the money paid for the hunt is then fed back into the system that promotes the target animal and the environment to provide more hunts - sadly many poachers and such are not interested in furthering the "stock" they hunt and instead act in a much more childish manner of simply getting as much as they can - its a small world view and one time it did work. These days its self defeating as the poacher will soon run out of animals to hunt.

In ePHOTOzine discussion | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4
57 07/08/2015 - 7:54 PM
By mikehit
Capturing the future
In Off-topic discussion | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4
27 12/07/2015 - 6:11 PM
By whatriveristhis
Capturing the future
No no no people always think that to look ahead you have to go faster, but that's just silly because it only means you arrive a lot sooner and thus by the time you get there its already happening.

In order to see into the future you have to think of time like an infinite circle; so to see the future, which is ahead of you going one way, you have to realise that its behind you not in front. Thus to see into the future you must move slower than time so that you can look back and see what is to come.

27 12/07/2015 - 6:11 PM
By whatriveristhis
Wedding togs - how much editing do you do?
Subcontracting editing appears to vary - there are high and low ends of that market too and sometimes a higher end option can be a very valid tool for a photographer. Typically high or low most of this market is focused around taking solid shots and "polishing" the basics up - its typically not aimed at imposing artistic direction.

That latter point is why many oft won't use such services because they consider and have the editing phase as a key part in their workflow and artistic process.

Really its like using a lab to do the prints as opposed to doing them yourself; each has its advantages and disadvantages.

In Digital imaging | Page: 1, 2
6 29/06/2015 - 4:05 PM
By thewilliam
Wedding togs - how much editing do you do?
I'm not a wedding tog but I suspect it varies a LOT in this market depending on the photographer and what they deliver.

Some are going to deliver the whole wedding on a CD and will be done in around as long as it takes to copy the photos from the camera to the computer and burn to CD. Others are going to spend ours on each photo of the 10 or so they will deliver in print.

So its going to vary a lot - different groups will have different workflows; styles; standards - even the team size will vary both in the on-site team and in the editing off-site team. More photographers on the day might mean a lot more shots to work through - but might not if most of them were posed "arrival/attendance" photos and thus only in need of minor adjustments.

I think the key is to establish your style and workflow; get it as refined as you can and then make sure all details are agreed on in the contract before; giving yourself more than enough time to complete each wedding based upon your current workload and timescales. I think so long as you meet agreed deadlines and your processing time isn't obtusely long you should be fine.

6 29/06/2015 - 4:05 PM
By thewilliam
Photographer gets run over by the army
It's unlikely - google and you can find the guards running people over all the time and I doubt that they'd accept a HS statement saying that they must pause for passers by. The most is that they'll be told to shout "make way" a little earlier than they did here.

53 26/06/2015 - 5:49 PM
By chairman_bill
Focus stacking software recommendations?
Helicon Focus
Zerene Stacker
Combine ZP (freeware)

Each can stack with the top three being dedicated stacking software options. However each (certainly of the first three, I've not used Photoshops) also has several parameters and stacking codes to choose from. This can significantly vary the result. Furthermore each one works a little differently as well; this combined effect means that one can fail and another work so the difference is night and day in some cases.

As a result its one of the few areas of editing where using multiple software options is viable, valid and will give a very visible real world result.

PS stacking is resource intensive so yes it can take a while if your system isn't a mid to higher end machine. I think most make extensive RAM use so boosting your RAM can make a big difference

In Group Chat | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4
6 22/06/2015 - 12:40 PM
By markst33
Far as I know there is no distance recording info what so ever; I don't think it even stores info on the distance on the focus that was set to give a rough idea (though it does show what AF point(s) were active at the time).

So distances is basically not mentioned; you have to infer from the focal length and type of shot as to roughly what distance it might have been; baring in mind that cropping will make this more complex.

Sometimes a comment and just asking can get you some answer as to distances.

If you mean for macro work then you can often if not nearly always assume "darned close!"

15 22/06/2015 - 9:20 PM
By PatrickElsender
Sanyo Eneloop batteries
The charger you use is just as important, if not more so, than the batteries. Some cheaper charging units just keep pumping power into the batteries without stopping; even once full the batteries are just discharged and recharged at the same time; which wears them out.

Many charge in 30mins or an hour; which is find if you recharge that battery once a year to go in the clock; but for flash batteries which can be drained in a few hours its a very bad setup for their long term lifespan.

I use a C9000 from Powerex from Maha and its a very good unit which can even recondition older rechargeable batteries and get new life out of them However from a practical viewpoint I'd now get a Powerrex model that has 8 cells as opposed to 4 cells for recharging. A good unit like this costs money; but its well worth it in the long run as it means that your rechargeable batteries last a LOT lot longer
The Maha C800S is probably the one I'd say go for - variable modes, 8 cells and does what you need. The pro 8 cell I would say is overkill since photographers typically only use AAA and AA batteries most of the time.

6 20/06/2015 - 12:10 PM
By Overread
Complete beginner - not getting good results - confused about everything I read :-(
Welcome to printing - its torment.

My, limited experience in printing has told me that a print, typically has less dynamic range than a computer screen. As a result whites and blacks that look good on the calibrated screen can look over and under exposed in a print. The general solution is to thus edit the shot to reduce the whites and highlights and boost up the dark areas more so than you would normally do for a digital display.

It is a nightmare and I've honestly not done enough myself to have a standard "working" workflow that works each and every time. But I would say focus on the highlights and claw them back much more so for when you want to print something.

24 21/06/2015 - 3:45 PM
By Tianshi_angie
My thumbnail images don't look right
Honestly I just use the edit-in option and then first step change the colour space - I've gotten used to it an then I work through and save as a PSD from Photoshop.

Either way will work; you end up with the same net result so whichever you prefer (it is possible via my method to forget to change the colourspace - so using the export command has a bonus there

15 15/06/2015 - 9:50 PM
By Nick_w
My thumbnail images don't look right
Jester - yes but it works internally with its own colourspace - you'd notice this readily if you use the "edit in" command such as jumping into photoshop (and thus not using the export command option and page). If you're only working in and then exporting from lightroom then yes it should have a setting on the exporting page to select/change the colourspace.

15 15/06/2015 - 9:50 PM
By Nick_w
My thumbnail images don't look right
The problem is your colour-space.

It's likely not set to sRGB and is instead set to another - if you're working with lightroom it uses its own default colour-space so when saving or after exporting to photoshop you have to change the colourspace and assign a new one if your end-target is going to be the internet.

15 15/06/2015 - 9:50 PM
By Nick_w
Do you Have Phobias?
Spiders, heights, very tightly enclosed spaces, pure darkness.

That would sum up mine I think, that I can remember and think of as things that really instil me with general fear. I would also say that I'd have a healthy level of fear if encountering a snake within striking distance or any large creature determined to eat/maim/kill me (so that covers your lions, tigers and such).

Spiders I've actually got a tiiiny bit better with - however I reserve the right to return to totally fearful as soon as they get out of the cameras sights and move closer (and those jumps - GAH!) Bigger spiders are even more scary - smaller ones I can generally tollerate and the harvestman style spiders I can tolerate so long as they stay nice and away from me in their webs (actually got a good few in my room - a nice distance away). Those big fast hunter ones though - totally petrified of them!

Generally very uneasy with high heights when looking over the edge.

Tightly enclosed spaces I'd equate to something like pot-holing or any other similar situation where one is very constricted on movement. So lifts and such I'm fine with.

Pure darkness I've never ever been any good with. Blindfolds or rooms with no windows/super thick curtains being plunged into darkness I can't stand. Caves without any lighting - basically any situation where there is no light at all or so little that its impossible to see anything at all. General out-side darkness I'm fine with; you can still see something.

I believe that it is possible to overcome most fears and phobias; however its generally takes time, practice, experience and some knowledgeable guidance combined with an actual desire to overcome the fear. Of course some phobias might, at a personal level, prove harder to overcome than others and some might even defy any attempts.

In Light-hearted chat | Page: 1, 2
27 15/06/2015 - 7:34 AM
By StrayCat
Canon 300mm f2.8 IS USM
Exchange companies or retailers that do exchanges will ALWAYS give you less than the market value. That is because they will not buy anything that they cannot then turn around and sell for a profit. The bonus you get is that its a quick, easy and generally safe sale to make; you don't have to do any legwork or worry about independent selling etc... all the work is done for you.

So you take less but its easier; and sometimes retailers will do a deal if you're buying at the same time as exchanging so you get a good price on what you buy too.

You can use ebay - the classfields on EPZ - Gumtree - local ads - local camera clubs etc.. as ways to sell items as well. Of course this can take longer, can have some additional risk, but will give you the ability to specify the price point.

In Lenses | Page: 1, 2
12 08/06/2015 - 7:41 AM
By cheddar-caveman
best Macro lens for D5200
Pretty much any macro prime (single focal length) lens is going to be good. They are all outstandingly sharp and well made so really in truth there is no best; optical differences are minor and you really have to get into nit-picking to tell them apart.

I would say that anything 60mm or longer in focal length is a good choice (anything shorter becomes quickly impractical and much much harder to use; although often good for close distance close up work; just not full macro).

I would say that 90 to 100mm is a good starting focal length range- so go andp ick one that suits your budget and has features you like.

16 18/07/2015 - 10:39 AM
By thewilliam
Is exposure to and study of good photography a bad thing?
I think clubs struggle for ideas. Lectures can be interesting but not always interactive and can be quite a dry thing if you get too many; photo trips depend upon the weather a lot and upon transport, travel and often longer time slots (so many can't take part); competitions are a neat way to let everyone get involved.

But at the same time its a competition and unless its a very big group chances are there won't be enough of each skill level to allow for varied skill/age brackets to exist (and of course trying to assign skill level to photography to group people fairly is an impossible nightmare)

25 09/06/2015 - 4:27 PM
By TanyaH
Is exposure to and study of good photography a bad thing?

Quote: We talked a bit and we got around to talking about flickr. "I don't go there to look anymore," he said " the place frightens me to death. Some of the work by amateurs is out of this world, and I'm just talking about the motoring photos.

I must admit this was what also part inspired my post because I still use flickr; but I've honestly not viewed by "watched" list for ages because I always chose to follow those who were inspirational; ergo who's work I really do enjoy seeing. But yes after a time it becomes very scary - intimidating would be a good way to put it. One feels very disconnected rather than as part of the social structure, even though many are very friendly and approachable people

25 09/06/2015 - 4:27 PM
By TanyaH
Is exposure to and study of good photography a bad thing?
A while ago I tried to join into a gaming group, they were a fun friendly group of players of a decent number and a whole spread of ages. However despite their friendly nature I didn't stick it out with the group and there was a reason for that - they were too good and a touch too focused on the competitive side.

It made me start to think if this isn't perhaps a problem with photography in todays world, especially online. Certainly being around peers who have superior skill can inspire; it can push a person to improve to reach that similar standard. Indeed I would not be one to disagree that exposure to superior works is a beneficial thing and that without it one can end up setting a lower standard than ones full potential.

However I wonder if many of us have gotten too much of this. That we are bombarded by such a volume of quality, of inspiration and of skill that we end up losing focus and that former motivation starts to dwindle away. I feel that many times we lack that contemporary grouping, those who are of a similar skill and experience set of our own. A grouping within which we can rise to the fore within our own niche, where we can see measured improvement in our own work against others and also see their measured changes as well.

Instead we are left still struggling to grasp the slippery rope and pull ourselves up to our peers level so that they might become our contemporaries. That we might "rub shoulders" with them and feel a part of that system; socially contributing and being acknowledged.

Now many might say to this that it doesn't matter, that you shoot for you and you alone. But I don't think that is always true, we do shoot for ourselves (unless we are paid or have other motives); but I think that being social creatures we also like to share and feel that we contribute to the group(s) we are within as well. That we have something to offer, something that makes us stand out, even if just a little.

Thus I put forward the view that we are too bombarded with quality; that we have too much inspiration and not enough building of contemporary networks. We don't have learning buddies; we don't have a class; we don't have a grouping - heck even in tutorials or classes the skill range can be very vast.

25 09/06/2015 - 4:27 PM
By TanyaH
Can anyone recommend a wedding photographer please ? :)
pssst JR top left of every post, go along the icons to the one on the right side and its the flag of the country of the member - least so long as they enter those details in correct in their profile ^^

In Event Photography | Page: 1, 2
20 27/05/2015 - 5:07 PM
By Term
Can anyone recommend a wedding photographer please ? :)
Price would help too - there are low and high ends of the market so some idea of where about you're thinking would help

In Event Photography | Page: 1, 2
20 27/05/2015 - 5:07 PM
By Term
Vaping seems to be the next big thing.
Lots of the big companies into cigarettes are fast investing into it as much as they can because of the huge negative press tobacco smoking has coupled with the positive press vaping has. Plus you can vape outside of smoking laws in most places (because its not smoking so there's no second hand smoke).

Heck I know people who never smoked who are now vaping.

In Healthy Debate | Page: 1, 2
23 29/05/2015 - 11:11 AM
By exposure
Transfer internal images from Canon 6d to PC, can anyone help please

Quote: That is the most likely reason.
I have no idea why there is a 'shoot without card' option, and even less idea why they set it to 'yes' as a default.

I can see a reason for it but I still can't get why cameras don't have any internal memory built into them. I can only assume that memory card manufacturers are tied to DSLR companies behind the scenes. That is to say that there is more potential profit in allowing memory card sales than in having a decent built-in memory.

In Canon Cameras | Page: 1, 2
8 26/05/2015 - 6:28 PM
By JR1
Transfer internal images from Canon 6d to PC, can anyone help please
As the others said the camera has likely been used in "no card" mode and thus will take shots without a card inside. It will even typically show up a view of the photo on the back of the LCD as well for a few moments. But otherwise nothing is recorded as the camera has no internal memory storage at all (the tiny bit it does have is purely used for processing and storing its firmwire).

Generally it should also blink up a warning on teh back that there is no card as well.

8 26/05/2015 - 6:28 PM
By JR1
"The fact, though, is that every digital photographer enhances their pictures."
It's never too late - there are always those new to the hobby who go through many of the same thoughts and steps those longer in it did years ago. Of course this means those of experience have to be wise; they can partake again and share their thoughts (maybe even write and see if with focused thinking their views have changed!) or they can move on and talk in another more interesting (to them )thread

109 26/05/2015 - 6:16 PM
By SlowSong
"The fact, though, is that every digital photographer enhances their pictures."
Chris don't forget
"Gosh that's a fantastic photo, you must have a really great camera"


"I wish I could take photos like yours, but my camera isn't good enough"

The photographers skill was non-existent in the eyes of the unwashed masses of the public long before photoshop.

Still least we have it better than painters and sketchers who work in public and get the "did you paint that"
Line when they are quite literally sitting there, paints/pen/chalk/pencil in hand doing it.

In General Photography discussion | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
109 26/05/2015 - 6:16 PM
By SlowSong
"The fact, though, is that every digital photographer enhances their pictures."
"Am I cheating"

I can't cheat unless I measure my method to another persons standards or to my own chosen standards. Depending what I shoot these will change as well. Cheating in my view is two parts:
1) Using methods to tell a visual story which is significantly different from that perceived visual story presented to the photographer. Ergo by intent you see something and you compose to choose to not show what you see as truthful and instead aim to show that which is not.

2) Telling lies about the context/situation/source of the photo when asked.
It is one thing for the audience to read a photo, to read the potential message(s) it conveys; however when asked its an outright lie and cheat to say other than the truth of the source and context.

The wolfshot is a prime example of failing in both cases. The shot was composed to appear wild and not captive and when asked the photographer lied about the source.

"This shot cheated me"

No photo cheats you; however speaking through a pictorial visual medium allows one to read the same photo in many different ways. As photographers we should be more aware of this and thus more judgemental of our own interpretations of photos. That is to say we should be open to the idea that our estimation of the message is wrong when provided with the proper context.

Then again sometimes the message a photo has isn't important in context. The message said is the one that is found most commonly by those viewing and as such is the intent of the photographer.

so its all nice and complicated Smile

In General Photography discussion | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
109 26/05/2015 - 6:16 PM
By SlowSong
"The fact, though, is that every digital photographer enhances their pictures."
Mikes pointing out an example in relation to what I said (since I couldn't find my example). It was purely highlighting how differences in framing and composition change the message drastically already and that cropping in editing is thus not a "be all" and "end all" to authenticity nor faithful reproduction of a scene.

In General Photography discussion | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
109 26/05/2015 - 6:16 PM
By SlowSong
Paying to be on a recommended suppliers list?
Far as I can tell:

1) The company is asking for payment to provide advertising space for the photographer. This sounds perfectly normal, if you want to advertise then most places are going to charge you to advertise. It's then your choice to weigh up if you think the advert will recoup its investment in more sales. It's also why many companies have that "where did you see our ad/find out about us" in QAs because part of marketing is finding out what does and doesn't really work for you.
That way you can end contracts for marketing which are not generating sales; or change the type of advertising you do there to best market to that market segment.

2) At no point has anything been said about if the company the OP contacted does or does not perform any validation of the services that are provided by those seeking to advertise. All we have is the message that the company will provide X services in advertising space for Y payment. Might be that an evaluation of the photographers skill and product will come later when they show proper interest in advertising; or might be the company is, as its a wedding fair, doing to have a huge number of advertising parties and as such is not really to worried about the skills and is more concerned with the advertising and revenue.

I would honestly say that derailing things to try and argue about how "companies are not vetting advertisers" and "photography is going to the pits because anyone can do it" is either a lame attempt at ranting and derailing the thread or a not so subtle way to snub the OP's photography skill. It's really not needed and honestly its nothing new - there were hacks and rubbish photographers in the film days (I mean heck look at the tonnes of old film cameras sold on ebay - do you honestly think that with that huge volume there were no bad wedding photographers?)

In General Photography discussion | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
23 20/05/2015 - 12:49 PM
By themak
"The fact, though, is that every digital photographer enhances their pictures."
The key is to realise that photography is not two distinct arts but one.

Many get hooked on the idea that photography is split into "capturing the photo in the camera" and "Processing/editing the photo in the darkroom/computer".

Now whilst it is true that photography is a skill which has (for film or digital) two separate skill sets which result in the final output; it is a falsehood to think of them as separate parts which can thus be weighted against each other. You get people arguing all the time about which is the most important, or which one can be ignored or overlooked.

Greatly you see a "fear" of many which is that people will ignore one skill (typically in-camera capture) and focus more upon the latter skill - although they nearly always focus this on digital; as if digital manipulation if somehow inferior to darkroom manipulation. (what it oft boils down to is inexperience on the part of the person as to how the digital area works).

So I don't try to weigh up editing and in-camera capture. It's utterly totally pointless. Both parts of equal value; both parts are critical; both parts HAVE to happen to give you a print or file to show online. (yes jpegs in camera are edited - the camera does it for you - just like if you send your film into the chemists they edit it for you during processing).

As for the authenticity battle the key there is to learn to appreciate what you see artistically; and then to question it factually. For the photographer the key is to be honest. That's really all there is to it.

All the battles of trying to push out editing; or curtail it in general are pointless; you can't do that. You can by all means publish a book and have all shots edited to only a certain point; you can expect newspapers to uphold integrity and publish only shots edited to a certain point. etc.... Through all that we MUST remember that manipulation of a scene starts IN the camera. By choosing what you do and don't frame you can make a vast impact on the message a photo carries (I can't find it but there's a great example showing 3 different messages from a single photo - one appears to be a soldier giving water to a thirsty person; another appears to be threatening a man with his gun in torment and the third was more of the whole scene).

109 26/05/2015 - 6:16 PM
By SlowSong
Building a Personal website - advice needed
Ok so I've had flickr for a long while as my main gallery where I show my photos and its worked well; however its not 100% suitable. For a start the link to it is a bit of a mouthfull of random numbers and letters- fine for a link but a fuss around for real world exchanges.

I've also had a couple of people show potential interest in future purchases (yes that kind of once in a blue moon kind of offer); but most non-photo people don't have a flickr so saying "look on flickr and send me a note isn't a good option either.

I've had a wordpress blog in the past and it was great for blogging style, but not really ideal for a gallery approach (unless one heavily modified it).

So I'm looking for a web-host (since I'm no coder) that would suit as a general gallery display which could at the very least allow for easy contact. I'm not totally looking at turning it into a business of any kind, however I know a good few of the web horses for photography oft have a built in shop-front style approach so I'd be curious to hear any of the ins and outs people have had.

In Computers | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
9 20/05/2015 - 5:33 AM
By Fujiconvert
Award shake up

Quote: When we get more, we get threads on getting less and when we get less you can guess the where this is going........Wink

Clearly the solution to have a random number assigned at random intervals. That way everyone can agree Wink

16 27/04/2015 - 8:42 AM
By StrayCat
Tripod - quick release plate
Those tripods are rather nice in that they are super light - you can keep them clipped to the camera and walk around with them on all day. Heck I recall going to the zoo and would just hold the tripod on the camera mount just like it was a monopod (ergo swinging it forward whilst walking around).

Thing is they are light and cheap.

The cheap part means that parts will wear out (a good common trick is also if you unscrew the panning handle enough its internal nut drops out - and then you can never screw it back in - least in some models of the same type of tripod).

The light part means they are easy to carry and there the bonuses end. See a light tripod isn't weighted to the ground well and even a light DSLR on top you don't want ot be leaving it free-standing.

If you head to ebay you can get some older metal tripods that sell for not too much which are heavier; but much better built and stronger and with more weight lower down will give you far more stability.
Save up a bit more and you can get some very good tripods.

If you just want something light for support then get a good quality monopod instead - sure you can't leave it freestanding, but it will be light, compact and easy to use whilst on the go shooting.

In Accessories | Page: 1, 2
9 26/04/2015 - 5:04 PM
By helenlinda
what is your pet hate

Quote: Drivers who signal at the last minute before turning.

Worst is drivers who don't signal when in town roads because "There's no car around".

hint - pedestrians can see car signals - and we also cross roads as well!

One roundabout/corner (its technically a roundabout but its more a half moon shape and runs around half the ruddy town centre) around our way its pretty much now a case of waiting till there is nothing on the road at all before crossing - because so many take the first left without putting a single signal on.

162 01/08/2015 - 9:54 PM
By Paul Morgan
Choosing a 70-200mm f/2.8 for FF canon
From what I've heard/read the new Sigma/Tamron beat the old Canon whilst the New Canon beats all the others. I would thus say consider the new Sigma/Tamron and read some reviews that compare the two and see which one comes out on top.

In Lenses | Page: 1, 2 ...10, 11
9 17/04/2015 - 1:01 PM
By banehawi
What is more important, the shot or the editing software afterwards?
The concept of conformity has nothing to do with Photoshop - nor indeed any photo-editing software. Conformity or copy-catting or repeating or following ones peers/contemparies etc.. whatever you want to call it has ALWAYS happened and ALWAYS will happen.

The only difference is that today a whole lot more people have the option, equipment and ability to do it and the ability to post it for the world to see.

Otherwise its just more of the same we've had for generations - someone sees something they like and sets out to repeat it and do it themselves. Or will make small alterations to it. The style will shift with generations and with time; sometimes in slow sweeps sometimes in big jumps.
It's also true that those who get bored of it the most are those who are often most keen on the hobby; that's because you expose yourselves to a much bigger range of visual inputs and actually pay attention to them as well. As such you get a huge injection of whatever the current fad(s) are and quickly get bored - thus you either seek out those "rare gems" of people doing something different or you do something different yourself.

And by heck chances are one of those "different" things will catch on and in a year - 3 years - 5 years or whatever everyone might be doing that thing you're doing and loving it (at which point other people will be "bored" of that Tongue)

As for Editing and Capture in camera I view it as a 2 part process.
IN CAMERA - you get the best shot you can in the conditions you're in with the skills you know and the equipment you have. Note that the best shot at the time need not mean that its finished; it means that you get a shot that is as close as to what you desire based upon your processing process toward your output medium(s) of choice.

EDITING/PROCESSING - you take what you got in camera with the RAW and adjust it. For some this happens in-camera with default or tweaked settings on the JPEG; indeed you might not even keep the RAW.
For others it happens in the computer. Doesn't really matter - what matters is that you use the tools you have to get as close to what you want from the shot.

There is no "purity" in the original photo any more than there is purity in editing. The camera and lens can tell whopping lies about the situation; just as you can edit them in in editing.

In the end this is one of those circular debates; everyone puts their bit in and most people agree on the middleground. Then they have a good old fight about the extreme situations.

Oh and neither stage is more important - they are of equal worth; you can't have the latter without the former and you can't do much with the former without the latter (I mean you can I guess enjoy pure RAW shots without any conversion as pure streams of numbers or rolls of negative undeveloped - but it sounds pretty dull to me)

56 14/04/2015 - 9:39 AM
By Evertonian
Taking close ups
If you get extension tubes without the electronic contacts then the lens and camera can't talk to each other. The result is that you will lose aperture control and auto focus.

Now the latter isn't a huge problem; most cameras struggle with close-up focusing and thus manual is often the preferred approach for macro - even with the big top range DSLRs.

Now the aperture control though is a big problem because depth of field is very very thin with macro photography. Now whilst you can most certainly get some fantastic photos shooting wide open; most of the time you will want aperture control. As such a lack of control over the aperture is a critical problem.

Now some older lenses have manual aperture rings so you can change the aperture on the lens - however its a somewhat clunky way to go about things and isn't as fast as the auto-aperture control of electronic lenses.

So I would say yes they do cost more, but get the better quality extension tubes with the metal contacts. If you ever do get a macro lens in the future you can always keep using the tubes - on the macro lens - for even more magnification fun!

In Olympus Cameras | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4
6 14/04/2015 - 4:59 AM
By StrayCat
Resizing results in a loss of sharpness in general. Doesn't matter if you're getting smaller or getting bigger. Now some resizing codes build in a bit of sharpening to correct for this; but its generally safe to say that the best approach is to resize to the size you want to upload and then you can sharpen the photo before you save it and then upload it.

That way the photo gets the right amount of sharpening for your needs (as some shots need more and some will need far less).

6 11/04/2015 - 2:34 PM
By Graham63
Using the separate AF Lock function
I love back-button AF mode and its what I use all the time. The only time I turn it off is if I'm passing my camera to a non-photographer person (because it confuses them Tongue).

It takes a little while to get used to but is so powerful! .

1) If you are using a USM/HSM/all the time manual focus lens (ergo one where even in AF mode you can turn the focus wheel on the lens and shift the focus) you can just not press the back-button and you're instantly in manual focus mode. No hunting for switches, no fiddling with settings - instant in-out of manual to AF mode.

2) You can use the AF to pre-focus on a specific spot (or MF if using a lens like mentioned above) and then you can take a shot at that pre-focused spot when the subject arrives and the AF won't suddenly engage because you pressed the shutter button.

3) You can Spot meter from the scene, move the camera around the scene and take meter readings all without the AF engaging on the half-presss of the shutter button.

4) If you are using IS/OS/VR you can half-press the shutter button to engage it and let it spin up; but the AF won't engage. This is great if shooting a subject where its not yet in the scene, but you know it will be. So you've got the anti-shake already running and ready to go for when the subject is there to focus on and you don't have to tilt the camera or find something at the same distance to keep the AF locked on (ergo faffing around which might mean you miss the subject appearing).
This is important as most anti-shake systems take a few moments to spin up and provide anti-shake and during that short moment they provide their own blurring (its why many sports shooters who are used to a "pointshoot" approach oft don't use anti-shake because its never got enough time to get going).

Yes it takes a little time to get used to; but its very versatile and once you get used to it very very few ever go back.

24 15/04/2015 - 6:57 PM
By StrayCat
x 2 or 1.4 converter
The 7D will af at f8 - actually far as I know most Canon DSLRs will do that now - but only in live-view mode (as it uses a totally different set of AF sensors).

Viewfinder wise I think some are now adding the feature (I think the 7DMII and 5DMIII can af at f8 but double check as I'm going by memory on that and don't own either).

In general though on cameras that don't af after f8 you can "tape the pins" which basically means the camera doesn't "see" the teleconverter which thus retains the AF; however many report that when done AF is slower and more prone to missing (though its decent enough on some prime lenses).

In Lenses | Page: 1, 2
47 05/10/2015 - 8:56 AM
By cheddar-caveman
No professional cameras allowed.
Yeah they are classic catch all rules - they are simple because the people overseeing the event/location are not going to be trained in how to recognise 10001 different models of camera; nor how to recognise a "pro" from a "serious amateur". So its easier to have simple open to interpretation rules that those in charge can use at their own discretion .

If they tried listing specific makes and models they'd never hear the end of "well its a "pro" body but I' not a pro" and "you didn't list the rebel; I mean sure its not listed as pro on the website but it can do some really pro work - I know I'm a rebel using pro!" etc...

25 09/04/2015 - 10:14 PM
By Paul Morgan
x 2 or 1.4 converter
Tomcat - I think the confusion comes because Canon officially calls their teleconverters "extenders".

Rather like how Nikon calls its macro lenses "micro" lenses.

In Lenses | Page: 1, 2
47 05/10/2015 - 8:56 AM
By cheddar-caveman
Using a canon x2 Ill extender
Far as I can tell the main difference in the MII to MIII teleconverters is the AF chip inside them, but that only works with a select range of lenses (from memory its all the new MII L versions of telephoto lenses 300mm or longer - so your 300mm f2.8 IS L MII etc.... (and not the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII)). There is also improvement in the edge details and quality, but on a crop sensor camera that might be a more marginal improvement.

In Lenses | Page: 1, 2, 3, 4
13 07/04/2015 - 1:15 PM
By cheddar-caveman