199

4/28/2012 10:22:05 AM

i've got tons and tons from the beach house session but picked out my initial favorite and went with it - 75s / f20 with minor editing to brighten it up mostly

4/28/2012 11:35:51 AM

Nice!

4/28/2012 12:57:28 PM

Igor, i'm not hatin' i'm just being rill with you.

i like the other contestant's pic better...the trees look awesome, and the overall mood is good.

your picture is great, too, but you could be a little bit more gracious in defeat.

4/28/2012 1:02:51 PM

In general Igor I really like a lot of the pictures you have posted in this thread. However, in that specific instance, I like the winner's photo than your own in the same category.

4/28/2012 1:40:39 PM

Can't believe he is still defending that shit. Winner's picture is obviously much better. The sooner you let go of shit, the better.

4/28/2012 1:43:19 PM

Quote :

"the trees look awesome "

WHAT

I hate the trees

4/28/2012 2:04:27 PM

Omar that 2nd photo is badass

Igor I can't stop staring at this one...I mean he's cute, but I think it's a great portrait

4/28/2012 2:13:34 PM

Needs more hair light.

It is a rad shot, though.

I'm getting my Vagabond mini in the mail in the next day or so. Anyone care to do some shooting and play with lights (on either side of the camera)?

4/28/2012 2:53:20 PM

I love the Vagabond mini. If you're free one day when I'm back in NC from the 7th to the 15th or so I'd like to. I can bring my 2 AB's and beauty dish and medium-giant PLM (if it's not too windy)



[Edited on April 28, 2012 at 3:09 PM. Reason : .]

4/28/2012 3:09:15 PM

yeah it's actually a crop of a larger portrait that only looks right in a full page or a spread size:



Ronny is right, it ultimately needed more hair light or a rim light on the left side, and also the right side of his face is overexposed, I should have changed the flash ratio. We were running out of time and took this photo one on the way back from the dirt jumps to the parking lot before he had to take off so didn't get much time to dial it in. 580EXII to the left of the camera firing through extra small octodome and 430EXII with a 25 degree grid behind the first column, both firing 1:1 for those interested. Didn't gel them for the lack of time, but there was not that much ambient light left anyhow.

4/28/2012 4:06:25 PM

Took some pictures for thees keeds today (HS theater play)















These are unmolested (images that is) other than fixing orientation by a few degrees to get a perfect horizontal

4/28/2012 4:45:22 PM

The girl in the fifth one looks like she's blinking.

And there's no shame in "molesting" photos, are you saying that as a point of pride or just that you haven't edited them yet? A few of them would benefit from a little bit of post work imo.

Also, watch the shadow lines on the face created by backlights hitting shoulders(I think?). Happens in the last one here and the biker portrait earlier on this page.

But overall they're nice. I like the third one, good expressions from the kids.

4/28/2012 5:01:26 PM

^Good call on the shadows, I'll try to raise the rim light higher. I specified that the photos are unedited to assure TWW that I can in fact expose photos in full manual mode without the use of photoshop

MisterGreen, skokiaan, and CalledToArms, I was tongue-in-cheek in my last comment regarding the winner. I just found it ironic that after accepting (rightful) TWW critique of my submission and agreeing that it was too overprocessed and overcrowded, I find that the winning photograph took those those two characteristics even further while otherwise being very similar to my photo in terms of location, subjects, and lighting (compared to other submissions) I am not saying that he did not have a better composition or better exposure overall, and I certainly respect his vision and his own style of photography. But as soon as anyone posts an HDR like this on TWW, everyone cringes and flames the poster for some reason. It highlights how subjective judging photography is, which I something we discussed on the last page.

[Edited on April 29, 2012 at 11:07 AM. Reason : .]

4/29/2012 11:05:02 AM

Jesus christ, you keep repeating falsehoods to make yourself look better. Your shots were criticized because they were badly composed, exposed, and didn't feature cherry blossoms.

If anyone mentioned anything about processing and being cluttered, those were secondary or general criticisms.

And the subjective nature of photography doesn't matter when everyone agrees the winner was far better. You have to at least be in the same ball park for subjectivity to come into play.

[Edited on April 29, 2012 at 11:16 AM. Reason : .]

4/29/2012 11:16:01 AM

Yea Igor I like a ton of the other shots you have made, but the winner had the cherries as a central piece of the shot, which yours did not. They dominated the entirety of the top half of the shot, whether you agree or disagree with how the photographer processed them. However you only made the cherry blossoms a slight afterthought in the top part of the frame, and they were so blown out that they could have been any sort of tree honestly. The story your shot told me said almost nothing about cherry blossoms. The other one was a clusterfuck of activity, but above it all you had the cherry blossoms in their full glory.

[Edited on April 29, 2012 at 11:34 AM. Reason : ]

4/29/2012 11:34:09 AM

any of you got before and after pics of pullen park?

4/29/2012 11:40:29 AM

^^^troll, troll, troll your post. no need to run the guy into the dirt.

Quote :

""

lol, the fuck is this?

[Edited on April 29, 2012 at 11:41 AM. Reason : ^]

4/29/2012 11:41:42 AM

He's asking for it because he's the one who keeps trying to call you and me out in order to defend a few mediocre photos.

It's so stupid, he's the one who is more likely trolling. Maybe he is just ESL

[Edited on April 29, 2012 at 11:57 AM. Reason : The guy can obviously take better photos, but he keeps focusing on the shitty ones.]

4/29/2012 11:51:08 AM

I will drop this subject from here on, although I am not defending my photo at this point but merely pointing out how much of a factor is difference of opinion. I had a few dozens of properly exposed photos from that same day that more prominently featured cherry blossoms, but I chose that one because I felt that timing made that photo. You did not think so. Some of you guys thought that post processing should make a photo should not be admissible or at least not competitive with properly exposed in-camera submissions. Judges did not think so. [user]MisterGeen[/user] thought the trees in the winning photo looked awesome. Bweez did not think so. There are quite a few submission that I thought were better than both mine and the winning submission. They did not win. Again my photo was not taken specifically for the competition, but I glad I entered because of all the feedback I received here and also because it showed me that no one can accurately call out in advance if a photo would be in a run for a win or not.

Yes, I am ESL. No, I am not trolling.

4/29/2012 12:29:38 PM

To change the subject, plz wolf webs help me with picking a strobe.

The issue: I have been thinking about getting a monolight as a fourth light source. My three speedlights (580EXII and 2x 430EXII) are awesome and do most everything I need, are controllable from the camera menu, portable, and capable of HSS which I need quite a bit for sports pics. The only shortcomings are that they are unable to overcome bright daylight unless they are ganged all together in the same location or very very close to the subject, the recycle time on the 580EXII could be better, and it requires a battery swap more often than I like to do (430s are OK in both of those respects). Also I sometime need a fourth light to illuminate or accent background with the classic three point setup when sun is not serving as one of the four lights.

My only real requirement is that the thing has to be usable off-the grid with a portable power source.

So here are the options I am looking at:

This 400W Cononmk light+ DC power kit http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/G-4-0-400w-Wireless-Controlle-Portable-Studio-Mobile-Flash-Strobe-Light-Kit-bh28-/280861573331?pt=Digital_Camera_Flashes&hash=item4164a780d3#ht_6079wt_1392

Pros:
-Super light and portable for a strobe
-Supports HSS
-Remote controllable and comes with a wireless trigger
-battery pack can be also used to simultaneously power my 580EX, fixing my above mentioned issues
-efficient energy use (350 full power shot on one charge)

Cons:
-only 400W
-kinda expensive for 400W
-Limited support (although tubes are available from B&H, it is made by same people that make B&H-branded Impact Lite Trek 4.0 kit
-Comet mount and kind of recessed flashtube

Second option:
AlienBees B800/1600 or X800/1600 + Vagabond mini + possibly some A/C power adapter for 580EX if someone knows of one?

Pros:
-Double or four time the power of the first option
-US-based support/warranty
-Battery pack can power up to four strobes according to the website (although it only has two sockets, how does that work? A power strip?)

Cons:
-Heavier/bulkier than the first option
-No HSS
-No remote control option for changing power level (unless I buy the Einstein, which is out of my price range right now)
-Remote triggering MAY require another wireless transmitter for the system I already have, unless i can plug it into sync cord one of the existing receivers and it will trigger both the speedlight and the strobe)
-Does not fix my 580EXii issues unless anyone knows of an A/C adapter for the speedlight that can be plugged into Vagabond


[Edited on April 29, 2012 at 1:25 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2012 1:18:06 PM

I personally like alienbees but I don't have too much experience with anything else.

4/29/2012 6:59:38 PM

went to the zoo today and messed around with my 70-200 lens.

4/29/2012 8:14:48 PM

I personally like White Lightnings but I don't have too much experience with anything else.

4/30/2012 6:40:20 AM

^which 70-200 was that? I am thinking aout renting a Canon F/4 or F/2.8 for upcoming film festival. It's either that or getting a couple of long primes. If you happen to have one of the Canon lenses, do they have a noticeable focus breathing (lens zooms in and out slightly while you focus)?

4/30/2012 10:17:02 AM

Its the canon 70-200L f2.8 (non-IS version). I got it used off the intarwebs for $650. It was def worth the investment. It is a solid piece of glass and easy to work with.

All the above pictures were taken using that lens except for #2, that was with a Tokina 11-16 f2.8.

5/1/2012 9:47:43 PM

^^ i have the 70-200 f/4L non-IS and it's an awesome lens as long as you shoot when there's plenty of light out. probably the sharpest of all 70-200's

i've recently started getting into astrophotography. here's the moon from last night (waxing gibbous phase):



[Edited on May 2, 2012 at 1:53 PM. Reason : ]

5/2/2012 1:49:47 PM

Before I post this up on craigslist, is anyone interested in a lightly used Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6?

Comes with lens caps, hood, box, and everything else that originally came with the camera.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/449088-USA/Nikon_2161_AF_S_VR_Zoom_Nikkor.html

5/2/2012 7:06:21 PM

random:









my little buddies:





[Edited on May 3, 2012 at 2:13 PM. Reason : s]

5/3/2012 2:10:47 PM

Rush what you asking for it? I was looking at this today:

http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/73570/abes-of-maine-tamron-sp-af70300mm-f45.6-di-vc-sp-af-zoom-lens-canon-nikon-or-sony?token=AAcBBQAAAAAGOkHn7g

Dad has the one you have, which I really enjoy using, but that is a helluva deal for a lens that is arguably better. $334 is a very good price for that lens brand new and I may do it before the end of the day.

5/3/2012 2:31:32 PM

Specter That's a awesome picture of the moon. Thanks for sharing

5/3/2012 2:38:54 PM

thanks man!

5/3/2012 3:16:09 PM

^What did you have it set on to do that shot? I was going to try and do some supermoon shots with my dad this weekend.

5/3/2012 3:18:32 PM

i have a 6" schmidt-cassegrain telescope with a Canon EOS T-adapter for my camera so the scope acts like one huge ass prime lens (i think 1500mm effective focal length).

for the supermoon, i guess it depends on how much detail are you looking to get? without a telescope or a long zoom (300mm+) it's going to be tough getting the craters and stuff.

5/3/2012 3:28:36 PM

Quote :

""

I'll catch you Lois Lane!

5/3/2012 3:30:43 PM

^^We will have a pair of 300mm lenses. Hence why I was asking how you did that awesome shot. I did some with my 200 but it was a pretty boring little moon at the time. Hoping supermoon + longer telephoto might give me one or two decent shots, even if I have to crop.

5/3/2012 3:32:17 PM

I love that turtle picture haha

5/3/2012 3:36:21 PM

^^ yeah, it's going to be a battle of ISO vs. shutter speed.

need ISO as low as possible so you get cropping power.
need shutter speed as fast as possible so you're not affected by the earth's rotation (my telescope has a tracking mount so it can follow whatever i'm viewing)
also if your camera has live view and you can zoom in on the preview, it'll help you nail the focus

[Edited on May 3, 2012 at 3:40 PM. Reason : ]

5/3/2012 3:36:32 PM

Igor itt

5/3/2012 3:57:59 PM

I'm looking for $400 on the 70-300mm Nikon.

5/3/2012 4:21:04 PM

I give up on posting photos. How do you post from flickr on TWW?

[Edited on May 3, 2012 at 5:42 PM. Reason : damn it]

Let's Try Again. This is a pic of my kid jumping through Hoola Hoops at a fair downtown.



[Edited on May 3, 2012 at 5:56 PM. Reason : Thanks Specter]

5/3/2012 5:40:40 PM

click on the picture
in "lightbox", click on "view all sizes"
choose a size, right-click on the photo, view image
copy and paste browser URL into tww

5/3/2012 5:52:21 PM

Speaking of zoom shots, here are some stuff from the telephoto end of my Canon 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 ultrazoom, which functions as my all-in-one travel lens






















I booked the rental of Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS for the weekend, and since we probably wont be filming on Sunday, I will put it through its paces with some still pics.


[Edited on May 3, 2012 at 9:05 PM. Reason : .]

5/3/2012 9:01:59 PM

Found this old photo that I liked, reminds me of much better times.

5/3/2012 11:45:15 PM

Quote :

""

I LOVE this one

GG!

5/3/2012 11:57:47 PM

I did some coverage of the primary races the other night, as well as Etheridge's campaign party.
http://ronnynause.com/may-8























[Edited on May 10, 2012 at 1:46 PM. Reason : Sorry they're so big.]

5/10/2012 1:44:06 PM

anybody have any experience in real estate photography? we're thinking about hiring someone before putting our house for sale... pm me if interested

5/10/2012 2:49:51 PM

I'm thinking about a Nikon 3100 or a Canon T3. The Nikon has better specs but I am curious what some of you would suggest for a starter DSLR.

5/10/2012 2:53:28 PM

^^^Considering how the Amendment 1 issue was blowing TWW, twitter, and FB, that polling place looks very quiet. Maybe it was just that precinct, or maybe people that run their mouth on the Internetz need to step up their game.

5/10/2012 3:06:04 PM

The dude with the Vote for God sign looks like he touches little boys.

5/10/2012 3:09:51 PM