Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

I Wanna Rock and Roll All Night and [PHOTO] Every Day

15758596062

Posts

  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Sarkus if you are doing astral photography I would also definitely look into getting a good tripod unless you have an extra laying around from your telescopes that a camera could fit on.

    I would recommend something like this:
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/480298-REG/Manfrotto__190XB_Aluminum_Tripod_Kit.html

    Also what does your budget look like for camera, lenses, and accessories? Honestly I think you could get the XSi and use that for a good long time and use the extra money on the tripod and lenses. Also I think I've heard of people using adapters to hook up their camera to their telescope so you might want to look into that.

    7521745260_e8e0fc52b8_o.jpg
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    n0 I love the orange shot. You could try having the rim light go into an umbrella thats rather close to you. I've tried doing snoots and grids before but I've never been able to get a quality of light that I like. It is always too harsh and overpowered. In the more recent portrait is that background pasted?

    7521745260_e8e0fc52b8_o.jpg
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • EggyToastEggyToast Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm a beginner with amateur astronomy and I'd like to pair my interest in astronomy with my interest in photography.

    What was said above about looking into adapters for telescopes holds true. I've seem some 600mm w/ a doubling extension tube (so 1200mm) shots of the moon and it literally was like a shot from space. Of course you need to live somewhere where you have clear nights...

    Anyway, for shots of astronomy you have two enemies -- ambient light and camera noise. As such, pretty much all of your night shots will be on a tripod, triggered via remote, and set at the lowest ISO available on the camera. You will probably be looking at exposures of 30 seconds or so, and may very well end up merging multiple photographs together (as the noise from merging four 30 second exposures is much less than from one two-minute exposure). And if you're shooting somewhere with too much ambient light, you may end up with shots that look more like "weird daytime" rather than actual astronomy.

    But really, I would imagine that either Canon or Nikon made recently would fit the bill -- what you're probably more interested in is compatibility with telescopes and other stuff, so you might want to spend some time investigating that. I'm sure there are at least a few photographers out there using both/either camera bodies for astronomical purposes that have some knowledge about hooking everything up for best results.

    || Flickr — || PSN: EggyToast
  • anableanable Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Sheri wrote: »
    So I guess some of you would be interested to know that I now have a (one, 1, singular) tearsheet from Nifty magazine. It's kinda cool. Wish it were for a real magazine, but I'll take what I can get.

    Neato.

  • SarksusSarksus playing tennisRegistered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Sarkus if you are doing astral photography I would also definitely look into getting a good tripod unless you have an extra laying around from your telescopes that a camera could fit on.

    I would recommend something like this:
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/480298-REG/Manfrotto__190XB_Aluminum_Tripod_Kit.html

    Also what does your budget look like for camera, lenses, and accessories? Honestly I think you could get the XSi and use that for a good long time and use the extra money on the tripod and lenses. Also I think I've heard of people using adapters to hook up their camera to their telescope so you might want to look into that.

    Oh yes, when I'm using the camera by itself to shoot long exposures of the night sky I'm going to need a sturdy tripod. And yup, there are adapters that mate DSLRs to the telescope's focuser so in effect the entire telescope becomes the camera's lens. This is what I would eventually like to do.

    Also sorry guys, I know a decent bit about astrophotography already, I was just disclosing that in case it affected equipment recommendations.

    I think I will get the XSi and use the rest of my available budget for accessories (like a strong tripod). Thanks for the help. It will be awhile before I start posting shots of space but in the mean time I'll shoot terrestrial subjects!

  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited April 2010
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm also interested in any book recommendations. I'm interested in taking classes at my community college but I really like learning from books too. I've looked into Understanding Exposure but it seems to be more of an intermediate's guide rather than something for beginners. Maybe The Camera by Ansel Adams is a better idea?

    Books I have read (at least partially read) and benefitted from: http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?p=8162711#post8162711

    Books recommended in the first post of this thread:
    Lots of people recommend Understanding Exposure or the first Ansel Adams book. Don't bother buying any book that tells you how to use your specific camera model. All of that information can be found in your user's manual.

    I hope those help some! The best advice ever is to take as many pictures as possible, post lots and get crits, and also offer crits on other peoples' work.

  • Jake!Jake! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    No: loving your strobe work too.

    Does anyone know a good, single web page I can give to a beginner who wants to learn composition?

  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited April 2010
    Jake - check this one out: http://asp.photo.free.fr/Composition/photoProgramCompMainClass.shtml The site is pretty cheezy but it covers the following topics in separate lessons: Simplicity, Lines, Framing, The Rule of Thirds, Balance, Avoiding Mergers.

    NeedO - Love it. Your post-production is pretty cool, too.

  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    CCow - thanks, yeah, I'll have to try to snoot to an umbrella. Some "unnaturalliness" is sometimes good, but I agree, too harsh is not cool. Yes, the last one has a texture added to the BG, but the background is still the same brown.

    Anable - thanks, thats very kind of you!

    Jake - thank you sir!
    Some other resources for composition one can use are art related since same principles apply:
    http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3275
    http://photoinf.com/
    http://website.lineone.net/~peter.saw/ctutor/cmpsitn1.htm

    Pope - thank you!

  • mtsmts Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    N.Optic
    I really dig the lighting on those shots. though it seems like the second one got some weird textures on his forehead. though the smoke is slick.

    for those who care. I went out this weekend with the intent of securing a new camera bag. saw the lowe pro sling back and while nice it kind of screamed camera bag to me and it seemed limited in it being only a camera bag. no room to throw a light layer or something. I like my bags to be practical and serve a purpose.

    I am into whitewater photography and had made myself a drybag liner to pad my camera and decided to do the same thing with a shoulder bag. ended up picking up a small timbuk2 messenger bag. its black and pretty waterproof, plus it doesn't scream camera bag and has some flexibility to it. i will be able to use it for carry on and throw my laptop in it too, big enough to toss a layer in etc.

    I need to sit down and actually build the liner which i am hoping to do this week though it will depend on how much foam i have and if i am in a lot of pain. Probably going to model the camera block after some of the domke bags in terms of padding organization. if anyone is interested i can take some pics of the process. my drybag one turned out nice so it should be nice.

    camo_sig.png
  • Jake!Jake! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    I always walk around with my 200mm out, a shirt that says "P0ot0graph3r", and a screaming camera bag. That's how I roll.

  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited April 2010
    For the record, nO has an mp3 player hooked up to speakers in his camera bag and has looped a recording of someone literally screaming. Don't do this yourself, he has the idea patented.


    4515694770_e1b62e5f1e.jpg
    for a larger copy, click image to go to its flickr page then click "all sizes"

  • muninnmuninn Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Can anyone recommend a decent monitor calibration tool that wont break my bank?

  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    muninn wrote: »
    Can anyone recommend a decent monitor calibration tool that wont break my bank?

    This does the trick 95% of the time.

    http://epaperpress.com/monitorcal/

  • SarksusSarksus playing tennisRegistered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm also interested in any book recommendations. I'm interested in taking classes at my community college but I really like learning from books too. I've looked into Understanding Exposure but it seems to be more of an intermediate's guide rather than something for beginners. Maybe The Camera by Ansel Adams is a better idea?

    Books I have read (at least partially read) and benefitted from: http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?p=8162711#post8162711

    Books recommended in the first post of this thread:
    Lots of people recommend Understanding Exposure or the first Ansel Adams book. Don't bother buying any book that tells you how to use your specific camera model. All of that information can be found in your user's manual.

    I hope those help some! The best advice ever is to take as many pictures as possible, post lots and get crits, and also offer crits on other peoples' work.

    You rock! These will help a lot. It might be a little while before I can buy the camera but I'll definitely come back to post my work and try my hand at critiquing others. I wish I had it already, I went on a bike ride today and I had to settle for my phone's camera :(

  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    needOptic wrote: »
    muninn wrote: »
    Can anyone recommend a decent monitor calibration tool that wont break my bank?

    This does the trick 95% of the time.

    http://epaperpress.com/monitorcal/

    If you have any photoshop installed you can use adobe gamma which is found in start>settings>control panel.

    Unless you are doing shit tons of printing that should be good enough. Also when you get things printed you can sometimes get the printer color profile from the lab and throw that in PS to see how it will look.
    On the down side TN-panel LCDs can have rather vast color/brightness shifts from moving your head up or down / side to side. If you really care about color correctness, and I think everyone doing photography work should, then you should use a CRT or IPS LCD.

    7521745260_e8e0fc52b8_o.jpg
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    Suggesting someone use a CRT is the equivalent of suggesting sticking a penis into a sister. While I agree with you on the TN panels, this why people should be buying the dells we have. MWHAAHAHHAHHA!!!! (Which are IPS)

  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    So now i've got all these ideas I want to try out... and here's one from Sunday:
    "Those bastards got Mandy!!!"

    4516722176_537a33cb9c.jpg

  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    The light lines are a little too cartoony and excessive I would try doing a gaussian blur on them to make them a little bit more subtle.

    I really need to get off my ass and try and learn how to do product photography.

    7521745260_e8e0fc52b8_o.jpg
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    I agree, and I said it on flickr - even the juice is cartooney, I kinda settled for a cross between illustration and photo, too lazy to fuck with it.

  • Jake!Jake! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
  • Jake!Jake! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    It's the lack of transparency I think NO. Looks nice though.

    Pope: Beautiful. Not really into Macro, but you can't half do it.

    Went to Scotland at the weekend;

    4519354724_473d9217a2_o.jpg

    4519354430_8e4706950a_o.jpg

    4519354180_a73d0511aa_o.jpg


    ps. please vote for my shameless plug on threadless.

  • VirumVirum Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    A frame grab from the senior film I DP-ed. This was color corrected on my terrible laptop monitor so I really don't know if the colors are good or not. I got tired of waiting for the color corrected stills from the DI house, so this will do for now!

    4519367915_3920dd162f_o.jpg

  • rfaliasrfalias Registered User
    edited April 2010
  • KAJedKAJed Registered User
    edited April 2010
    rfalias - That looks like a very disturbing Gonzo

  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    Jake - very nice. Your shots have a distinct look.
    Rfalias - those are way too big. Shrink them down.

    Something a little different from me:

    4519894488_646e95a18a.jpg



    And some orange studies / strobe practice:


    4519651542_ceecb00147.jpg



    4519009931_f4da0bbe60.jpg


    I took more pics yesterday, particularly my attempt to create a levitation shot... but haven't gotten to processing them.

  • Mr ObersmithMr Obersmith Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Jake! - Love the shirt. Reminds me of Insanely Twisted Shadow Planet.

    Battle.net - Obersmith#1709
    Live - MrObersmith
    PSN - Obersmith
  • rfaliasrfalias Registered User
    edited April 2010
    needOptic wrote: »
    Rfalias - those are way too big. Shrink them down.

    Better? 8-)

    1036440-1.png
  • Pinch-a-LoafPinch-a-Loaf Registered User
    edited April 2010
    A while back someone here gave a tip that was something like...photograph women from slightly above the eyeline and men from slightly below. I've spent the last 20 minutes or so looking for it, to no avail.

    Could I get a refresher course on what those tips were and what the reasons are for them? Much appreciated!

  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    I think it's to
    a) portray authority and domination in men
    b) show humility and submissiveness in women.

    Not sure those are universal rules you want to go by.

    I would focus more on light / angle of face to the light source and less on generic rules such as that.

  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    A while back someone here gave a tip that was something like...photograph women from slightly above the eyeline and men from slightly below. I've spent the last 20 minutes or so looking for it, to no avail.

    Could I get a refresher course on what those tips were and what the reasons are for them? Much appreciated!

    It really depends on what lens you are using and how much space you have. If you have the appropriate amount of space and (50-85mm)lens then what I'm about to say doesn't apply. When I shoot I use a 35mm for full body pictures due to lack of space. This lens causes distortions so I try and shoot from around mid chest or a little lower on men and women to even out the distortion so it isn't noticeable. If I stand straight up and shoot a person with that lens their feet end up getting distorted and looking too small.

    I could guess that they say shoot men from a lower angle because shooting from that angle makes someone "look more powerful" and this technique has been used over the years in many propaganda films. As for shooting women from above the eye line I don't really know why someone would suggest that but I could guess wildly.

    wild guess:
    Spoiler:

    7521745260_e8e0fc52b8_o.jpg
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    I suggest shooting women with an 8 gauge.

    Sorry, couldn't resist.

  • muninnmuninn Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    So does using a cellphone camera as a fake polaroid count as the next level of lomography?

    4521383673_f20968c36f.jpg

    4522017976_164e4532f8.jpg

    4521384403_2728c62995.jpg

    4521384779_cb92acba49.jpg

    4521384553_75f86acfcf.jpg

  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    As long a they're as interesting as yours - you can call them anything.


    Not really happy with the result, but meh...


    4522273798_48c17a2f56.jpg

  • saltinesssaltiness Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Shadows are confusing on that one. I like the idea though.

    XBL: heavenkils
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    On the shirt or background?

  • saltinesssaltiness Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    On the shirt.

    XBL: heavenkils
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited April 2010
    Yeah, stupid grid...should have just skipped that.

  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    saltiness wrote: »
    Shadows are confusing on that one. I like the idea though.

    I thought the same thing. The way the light is hitting you and hitting the background is inconsistent. The drop shadow or whatever it is from you to the wall doesn't look right. Admittedly its probably better than something I could do but it still doesn't look right.

    This person has a fair number of levitating photos if you look around their portfolio. The page linked in the last sentence has a few in the middle of the page. I think the way she does it is take a photo of her laying/sitting on something and then take another photo without her or the object she is on there and then merge it that way. Hers are quite a bit less surreal than what it looks like you were going for so I'm not sure if that will help.

    7521745260_e8e0fc52b8_o.jpg
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
This discussion has been closed.