- 8,443
- 2,143
- Joined
- May 4, 2011
Dope pic. Did you use any lighting equipment for this one?
The Official Photography Thread - Vol. 3
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by rap sizzle,
- Start date
- 624
- 241
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
it really depends how much & what type of editing you want to do; i think the the analogy of nikeid vs. nike bespoke more or less works except i'd maybe even say its more like footlocker vs. nike bespoke in terms of the detail you get into. raw files contain much more data to manipulate, you have to have a raw file editor, and you will likely convert into a jpeg anyway...in the same way if you go to get some bespokes there are going to be a good deal more options available, you will have to come up out those pockets much more for those options, you have to make an appointment, & there is only one location; alternatively you could just go any footlocker and get a really nice pair of steps for waaaayyy less effort, money, & time.
this is where the analogy falls apart really, because there is a real difference between a bespoke shoe & an off the shelf joint you'd get from ftl (granted their obviously both shoes with the same basic utility) but with jpg vs. raw, the potential exists, if you know what you are doing, to get GREAT pictures straight out of the camera from jpegs (which again, you'd eventually be converting the raw file to anyway). now because i still often overexpose/underexpose pictures or overexpose/underexpose for the wrong things i just set my camera to record both the raw file & the jpeg as insurance (i do just like editing pics tho) to salvage those if possible, i recommend this because it does show you how powerful raw files are but i think the goal is to get to a point where you know your camera well enough to get quality images regardless of jpeg or raw.
all this to say yes raw files are more robust for editing, but it doesn't necessarily mean better pictures, and you don't 'lose' anything by taking jpegs because you could very well like the way you camera process jpegs, and indeed there may be modes exclusive to jpegs that would be difficult or require alot of effort to duplicate in post processing...
cant wait til spring:
It really comes down to what his intentiions are as far as editing. He could use the extra flexibility because of the lost info in the shadows
- 1,820
- 61
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
Southbound Sun Days
Last edited:
- 573
- 650
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
Preview for another shoot I had today. I have a ton of editing to do now.
- 4,024
- 876
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
Some photos of the Washington Auto Show here in DC.
- 3,472
- 3,196
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2002
good eye! yup, 08 cbr 600rr!!
thanks, not at all...i was leaving from work extra late in the summer and noticed that the lights in the parking gararge (which was pretty much empty at this time) created these cool spotlights underneath them and i had my camera with me so...#impromptuphotosession probably my favorite pics of my bike in that iteration i got on that night, it was fun #goodtimes, sidebar i wish i would have shot this in raw
no doubt, intentionality is key (point being a well exposed/shot jpeg is probably better than a poorly shot raw pic)...while sometimes the fun of taking pics is not knowing what exactly you will get, most times you're going to want to setup your camera and the subject(s) you are taking a pic of so that you have a good idea what to expect (especially given we're mostly shooting digital with lcds that give a preview that would allow for readjusting settings in the moment rather than waiting to develop a roll of film). that is the thing that is most challenging/frustrating/rewarding for me, as a person that does this for fun, is trying to get the camera get the images i want from it...
which goes back to the point of intention, if you can get the image(s) you want in jpeg, do you need to shoot raw? can you get the necessary info by balancing aperture/exposure comp/iso/shutter time so that editing isn't really needed? or so that editing serves to accentuate the details in that great photo you took rather than recover them? is the camera & scene setup appropriately to allow you to capture those details? those are technical questions that get in the way of just taking pictures
- 4,477
- 480
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2005
- 8,443
- 2,143
- Joined
- May 4, 2011
I need to get a polarizer. Any recommendations? I was looking at hoya on bhphoto. A dumb question but let's say I have a 18-135mm or a 24-70mm lens, how do I know what size filter I need?
Lamborghini Aventador by Mayank4585, on Flickr
The shot of the clock is pretty cool
SVNTI
Lamborghini Aventador by Mayank4585, on Flickr
The shot of the clock is pretty cool
SVNTI
Last edited:
- 624
- 241
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
I need to get a polarizer. Any recommendations? I was looking at hoya on bhphoto. A dumb question but let's say I have a 18-135mm or a 24-70mm lens, how do I know what size filter I need?
The shot of the clock is pretty cool
Get a filter for the larger size, and buy a step down ring for the the smaller lens thread. The step down ring costs about $5 or so.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Step-Down-Rings/ci/421/N/4026728360
Misread... I thought you meant if you have both then what you should buy...
Last edited:
- 5,932
- 3,581
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
The lens cap has the size on it. You'll see the number in small print on the back.
- 8,443
- 2,143
- Joined
- May 4, 2011
I need to get a polarizer. Any recommendations? I was looking at hoya on bhphoto. A dumb question but let's say I have a 18-135mm or a 24-70mm lens, how do I know what size filter I need?
The shot of the clock is pretty cool
Get a filter for the larger size, and buy a step down ring for the the smaller lens thread. The step down ring costs about $5 or so.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Step-Down-Rings/ci/421/N/4026728360
Misread... I thought you meant if you have both then what you should buy...
So lets say I have both lenses. I get a 24mm polarizer for the 24-70mm, are step down rings made for going from 24-18mm? Didn't see any on the site.
So for the 18-135mm a 18mm polarizer filter should be what I'm looking for correct?
- 5,932
- 3,581
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
No, it would be the size of the lens thats stated on the back of the lens cap. For the 18-135 both Nikon and Canon use 67mm filters for that lens.
- 5,932
- 3,581
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
For the lens where this cap came from I'd be using 72mm filters on it.
- 624
- 241
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
For example i had a 50mm f1.8 and a 35mm f1.8. Say the 50mm has 56mm threading and the 35mm has 52mm threading, I would buy the 56mm polarizer and a step down ring that converts 56mm to 52mm threading.
- 573
- 650
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
Couples of shots from a short walk the other night:
Bayroo Burner
Stanley Ipkuss
Bayroo Burner
Stanley Ipkuss
- 8,443
- 2,143
- Joined
- May 4, 2011
Thanks for clearing that up guys. Appreciate it. I've never owned filters before so all of this is new to me
- 122
- 85
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2013
Heres a few shots, any feedback would be appreciated. positive or negative.
- 4,024
- 876
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
^Dope flicks. Do you have a lens filter on there?
- 4,024
- 876
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
I highly recommend getting a pair of these. With these, a new door to creativity is opened. If you haven't tried off camera flash, I encourage you to do so. Even if it's just slave or commander mode.
Just some test shots.
Just some test shots.
- 1,314
- 326
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
i hate lighting so much cause i just dont get it 
the iso, aperture, and speed.. i just cant seem to put everything in place
def something i want to get into more
the iso, aperture, and speed.. i just cant seem to put everything in place
def something i want to get into more
- 1,644
- 6,257
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2012
- 624
- 241
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
i hate lighting so much cause i just dont get it
the iso, aperture, and speed.. i just cant seem to put everything in place
def something i want to get into more
It's really not that hard. You expose the same way for ambient light and then just worry abiut the power of the flash. Other things like quality and direction of the light play a role but it sounds like exposure is where you have difficulty. It depends on what you are shooting but overall your goal is to shoot at the lowest ISO, your shutter speed determines the amount of ambient light you let into the camera so the faster the speed the less light gets in. Aperture controls the amount of flash that is going into the lens. If you have your flash at it's lowest and it overpowers your pic and your aperture is 2.8 then close it down to 4.0 and notice the flash is not as pronounced in your shot. It's just practice at that point.
- 13,033
- 7,205
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2007
Got back from my trip to Iceland and slowly editing them all out. Sort of frustrating with what I came out with but I didn't come out totally empty handed. I went on a ton of tours which didn't permit a lot of shooting time. At most we had an hour to shoot at each spot that consisted of walking to the location to shoot and walking back. And worst of all is I didn't get to see the Northern Lights.
I have a ton of more pics but I'll just throw them on my respectable blogs to show all of it. Here is just a couple.
I have a ton of more pics but I'll just throw them on my respectable blogs to show all of it. Here is just a couple.
Last edited:
- 833
- 110
- Joined
- May 5, 2005
great shot!
Similar threads
