*Official Photography Thread* (56k warning)

[Ralphie]

Tomi*

These are 6x6 and 6x7 negs that are prolly older then most members here ..
The scanner that I'm using is the Epson 600. AMAZING results from negs that I haven't even seen in prolly 25 years!
With a lil dust spotting, color correction, and some other minor adjustments, I'm receiving incredible results.

Technology today is just blowing my mind. Makes me wonder what my studio of 26 years REALLY could have done, had I had the toys we have today.

And about your 85-210 .. you may find it a very slow lens. And yes, that biotch is heavy. lol!
Lenses today are much faster, lighter, and just all around better.
Some of the older 50's tho, yes, much, much faster!

This thing (below) is to have an orgasam over: Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f/1.0! WoW
Leaf shutter lens ... then again, who has $8600.00 bucks for one of these babies!?
There' of course lenses that are even faster, and much more expensive.
It seems to be all about speed today. But 4.5 you may find a bit slower.
My Tokina 80-400 is 3.5, not much faster but 1 stop, could be a difference when needed.

Yea 4.5 isn't horrible. I have the 50mm 1.8 and the difference is obv night and day lol, but I can deal with 4.5

There is something about color reproduction, I think new lens can't hack. Unless you pay for quality glass, I think the older lens were just better built and seemed to be sharper and better results sooc.

Not all, but the ones I've used.

I also just got the 55-250, so this 85-210 isn't necessary, but it'll be fun to play around with. I like old manual lens.

[PakaloloHonda]

There is something about color reproduction, I think new lens can't hack. Unless you pay for quality glass, I think the older lens were just better built and seemed to be sharper and better results sooc.

See, this is where photoshop, LR4, CS6 .. etc come in.
I know that there alot of *pureist* people that are out there, and claim to do nothing and post images right out of the camera. OOo k.
Whatever .. these software products were made to help and assist.

Back in the day, we had darkrooms .. ask Ansel's brother (who did most of Ansel's printing) how many times it took HIM to get it right.
I love my 5D Canon's, I love Canon's lenses, as opposed to Nikon's.
I believe I get better skin tones then Nikon can offer. I WAS a Nikon guy back in the day.
Then again, I shot medium format Pentax 6x7 also. It's a matter of opinion.
And with today's software, anyone can correct anything, anytime.

All I know is, this Epson 600 is blowing my mind! And I haven't even touched on ANY of my over 2500 SLIDES in 35mm AND 6x6 or 6x7 .. simply blown away!

If I'm not mistaken, that 55-250 is know as the "biggie" lol .. pretty fun lens.
Or so I've heard .. glad to see you playing around with off camera flash also ..

[Ralphie]

See, this is where photoshop, LR4, CS6 .. etc come in.
I know that there alot of *pureist* people that are out there, and claim to do nothing and post images right out of the camera. OOo k.
Whatever .. these software products were made to help and assist.

Back in the day, we had darkrooms .. ask Ansel's brother (who did most of Ansel's printing) how many times it took HIM to get it right.
I love my 5D Canon's, I love Canon's lenses, as opposed to Nikon's.
I believe I get better skin tones then Nikon can offer. I WAS a Nikon guy back in the day.
Then again, I shot medium format Pentax 6x7 also. It's a matter of opinion.
And with today's software, anyone can correct anything, anytime.

All I know is, this Epson 600 is blowing my mind! And I haven't even touched on ANY of my over 2500 SLIDES in 35mm AND 6x6 or 6x7 .. simply blown away!

If I'm not mistaken, that 55-250 is know as the "biggie" lol .. pretty fun lens.
Or so I've heard .. glad to see you playing around with off camera flash also ..

Ya Im in no way a purist. It's just that I like to reserve PP for things I can't help. If I can get a shot perfect in camera, then It's less work for me to do PP.

And this is coming from a guy who LOVES editing pictures in Lightroom. I barely use PS anymore, unless I need to do layering or remove people etc. I love lightrooms setup(except I was pissed they took my recovery slider and turned it into a highlight/shadow slider respectively)

More control, but one extra step LOL.

I honestly don't know how you could do half of the shit you do in lightroom, in a darkroom.


I guess I just want to let the technology do the heavy lifting. White balance is one thing Ill always leave to PP. If im shooting something important, ill usually use auto and shoot RAW. Eventually ill get around to using custom wb, but I have heard people say it's not as good on the rebels as it is on the 5d, 7d etc.

I don't really feel I ever have an issue with wb. Everything else is all on me. Shoot to the right and get the details, and then bring it back PP.

But lately I have been using that manaual 28 2.8 and shooting JPEG and letting the camera do it's thing. Mostly itss been good, a little sharpening here and there, but mostly good.

Yea the nifty 250, as Ive heard it called. I actually was postponing shooting off camera flash because I didn't feel ready to take that step, but a friend got me a yongnuo 560 for my birthay and I already owned a 420ex. For another $100, I can own another yongnuo and wireless triggers. If I include my on camera flash, that's 4 flashes to work with. No to shabby, so I've dove head first into it. Played with it for a few hours and read a blog that SteelblueSleeper suggested(which is a great blog btw)

So im just waiting for a day to go out and setup my stuff, and see what I get.

[PakaloloHonda]

LOL, yeah, there's a big debate going on over at POTN about JPEG vs RAW.
I've always shot JPEG .. I look at it this way, if it's good enough for Ken Marcus of Playboy,
and a few other photograhers at National Geograhic .. yowza, who am to debate it?
If you really, REALLY, need to pull something from a *neg* .. then yeah .. go raw.
But if you have your WB and exposure down (and most old school photographers do)
is no biggie mang ..

This whole, "I ONLY shoot RAW" thing is actually out of control between the old school
and the new generation of photographers. It reminds me today of people who only text,
as opposed to actually TALKING on a phone lmao!

I actually dealt with a model recently that wouldn't call, she ONLY dealt with texting and or emails ..
she said in one of her LAST responses to me, and I ain't lying ..
"When the day gets nearer, I'll call you for voice recognition" WTMF"???? lol lol!
Serious as a heart attack man! I still have the email saved if no one believes but hooollly shiiit!
THEN, when she finally calls, she says that it was her "agent" that was texting and emailing me.
I asked her, "are you a published working model with an agency?" She says "nope".
I went .. "click" .. and hung up her ass .. NEXT! I mean seriously!!!

JPEG vs RAW ain't no biggie. I get better results (faster) with JPEG.
If RAW works for people .. knock yourselfs out .. I like less of a workflow.
Besides, I expose and move pretty fast, so I'll stay with JPEG.
I've never had to PULL something from a badly exposed digital "negative".
I guess because, 99% of my stuff is within a stop, one way or the other.
And with today's software, that's a cake-walk!

Keep shooting shooters!

[SanJoCaF22DrAcc]

I'm jealous of you guys. I have been fighting with low light pics and the color red for quite a while. For the life of me I cannot get away from digital noise.

[PakaloloHonda]

I'm jealous of you guys. I have been fighting with low light pics and the color red for quite a while. For the life of me I cannot get away from digital noise.

Just like our cars .. we always love to see a "sample" of what you're talking about ..

[SanJoCaF22DrAcc]

Just like our cars .. we always love to see a "sample" of what you're talking about ..

Right. Here are 2 examples of the same angle. The first pic is completely non-repairable. Shot at 1/80, ISO 1600 f10.



This second shot of the same image is better but there is still a lot of noise around the red and within the tinted windows. Settings 1/80, iso 1600 f4.



I am hesitant on picking up a new lens mainly because of lack of my own personal skill. I am shooting with a Canon 400d Rebel XTI and it's stock lens of EFS 18-55. My goal is to nail the best shot possible before editing.

[PakaloloHonda]

Your "goal" should be to expose the "film" properly. In this case, the digital image.
Why are you at 1600 iso? Is there a real reason you need to be at f/10?
I can see good DOF at f/5.6, or even f/8 at 55mm on a crop body. Down at 18mm,
I can get to f/4 with out any issues in DOF, in terms of the images you've presented.
I see the deal .. alot of cars, need to have alotta DOF .. wanna get in as much as possible.

Sunny day? A bit over-cast? Drop that ISO to 200, 300, even 400, and you'll get great pictures.
To tell you the truth? I just thought of anywhere I really needed anything past f/10.
I'm not even sure I've even used TEN! lol. Unless of course I'm using multible lights.
But for something like those images ^ drop that ISO .. open up the lens a bit more.
An 80th of a second (IMHO) looks to be a bit too much for you to handle. (too slow)
bump up the shutter speed, and open up a stop or 2.

You're shooting early morning (or early twighlight) right into your main source of light.
You can most certainly afford to give up ISO.

[J-specCb4]

yeah that shot was just underexposed.. any underexposed image when pushed too far will be noisy as heck. im guessing the camera metered for the sky in one of the auto modes?

on to the glass discussion... i coiuld go on forever talking about glass! haha i sort of recently got a canon 24 1.4L II and it almost hasnt left my camera since. thing is INCREDIBLE!

[PakaloloHonda]

i coiuld go on forever talking about glass! haha i sort of recently got a canon 24 1.4L II and it almost hasnt left my camera since. thing is INCREDIBLE!

OoooMG! Nice prime .. very nice! pics later .. please!

[Ralphie]

Yea, Tomi's advice is rock solid.

Can't recall ever using 10 really.

I usually shoot between 1.8 and f8.

As low as possible(I like bokeh LOL)

Definitely drop the ISO, always shoot for 100 200 if you can get away with it. If not, then increase it. The lower the ISO, the less noise(usually)

And again, def speed it up. You could get away with 1/120 etc

Sunny 16 rule man. On a sunny nice day, 1/100, f16 iso100

That is a good starting point. But you can always open it up as light disipates.



Damn dude 24 1.4L
....

That is serious fucking coinage. I wish I had money for that baby.

One can dream.

FF demands good glass though eh?

I really want to step it up to the 7d for the better controls/19 f points/weather sealing...

I haven't really hit limits on my t2i, but I know now what I want in a SLR, and the 7d is it(well besides a 5d classic...but it will make all my old lens look like shit LOL)

[SanJoCaF22DrAcc]

Thanks guys. I have tried many different settings. These were just some of my most recent attempts. I was using the ISO so high because of watchin some you tube clips on photography. I will try your suggestions later on tonight during the golden hour. I appreciate the help.

[PakaloloHonda]

This scanner is fawkin sick! This neg hasn't been seen or touched in 27 years!

Patti during "The Golden Hour"
Pentax 6x7 Fuji NPH 400. 200mm. @125th @f/8 Refletor Fill, Hasselblad Vignetting Box

[Ralphie]

Damn dude, that is nice.

Do you shoot for a living or just on the side? I can't recall.

[PakaloloHonda]

Damn dude, that is nice.

Do you shoot for a living or just on the side? I can't recall.

I used to .. had the studio in hawaii for almost 30 years.
Back then, I had J Walter Thompson, Ogilvy Mather, and Fawcett McDermott as mainstay accounts.
Worked with those ad agencies for like 20 of the 30 years I was in business.
I was also one of the in-house wedding photographers for The 4 Season's.
They have 4 now .. 3 when I was working as a pro. The Grand Wailea on Maui also used me for they're in-house weddings, along with The Kahala Hilton.
So yeah, I stayed pretty busy lol.

Now, I drive a cab .. make great money sitting on my butt. where do think the $$$ comes from for my side business?
Pretty cool tho, I've been flown back to Hawaii about 9 times to shoot weddings.
I had some very, VERY loyal clients. And just because it's a side-job now, I still charge.
Everyone's a photographer now tho, so .. I just sit back and let the new gaurd take-over.
I get stuff thrown my way that's actually worth being behind the lens for from time to time.

I had a lady art director in my cab recently that told me how she missed the good ole days.
They don't pay anywhere near what they used to .. and getting a gig with one agent, let alone THREE
for over 20 years is unHEARD of. There are soooo many photographers out there now.

It's actually kina fun .. I get to pick who I work with now.