Learning Photography
- Started
- Last post
- 215 Responses
- vaxorcist0
does the "white stone" at the bottom look as blown out on your monitor as it does on mine? if so, see if you can use lightroom's brushes to selectively (only on the white rock) tone down the highlights on it, up the contrast and clarity and see what you get....that is ... if you're going for the "ansel adams" look of controlled contrast....
- formed0
I love the Fuji, I love my Nikon D800. Different cameras, for sure.
mp is the big difference. I've grown to enjoy the D800's massive size, just makes the possibilities so much greater. BUT I also love the size/weight of the Fuji (hence why I'll be switching to Sony). There are some differences with Bokeh, too, that you might want to look at (if you care, which I do). I am not sure if that's due to the smaller lenses or smaller sensor (granted, Nikkor glass gets to 1.4, L glass 1.2...I think M43 is only down to 1.8, but maybe there is some manual glass that is faster?).
Try the Fuji. I've only played with it but found it comfortable. My D800, with battery grip and lens weights almost 6 pounds!
- pinkfloyd0
I think i'll hold onto the 5dmii since I just got it recently. Saw these photos and was blown away:
http://www.boredpanda.com/animal…
Photography is an expensive hobby but I love the idea of creating images with a click.
- nb0
^ Exposure guides aren't terrible, if you're using them as a starting to help you learn. But, you could just shoot in aperture priority and get a similar result to this guide (depending on your metering mode).
Most people shoot in auto-exposure, so if you want your pictures to stand out, you'd be wise to get creative with your exposures. You know, break the rules, blah blah blah.
- pinkfloyd0
I'm looking for a 77mm uv filter to have on my lens at all times. The price ranges from $14 to $59 and up. What's the cheapest one I can without sacrificing quality?
- You get what you pay for. Cheap filters offer cheap results. Its worth the investment, but put in what you can afford.inhaler97
- just get b+w's clear filter.
http://www.bhphotovi…jaylarson
- formed0
pink - who knows. I buy based on teh quality of the lens. If I buy Nikkor glass, then I get B+W filters, which cost about.
on another note, I've been singing "Vera, Vera, what has become of you..." all day :-)
- ok_not_ok0
Hoya's are pretty good if your on a budget.
- pinkfloyd0
If a cheap uv filter will affect my image quality, i'm better off just not using any filter. I'm not spending $59 on a uv filter.
- benfal990
Tiffen polirizer are at 80-90% sales on Amazon.
I just bought 3 for my lenses. Just in time before holidays in Italy next week!
- HijoDMaite0
I've been trying to figure this out for a while now and would like to get your opinions on this mystery I can't seem to figure out..
I present to you two photographs. The first is made by a photographer I was introduced to, I am really digging his work. I believe he uses pro Nikon primes strictly and a Pro Nikon Body.
The second photo is a pic I took with my Canon 70D and My Sigma 18-35mm 1.8, shot around 4pm with no flash. Edited in LR5 with simple sliders. lowered contrast a bit, lowered clarity, increased vibrance, sharpened a bit and lowered a little noise cropped and a bit of vignette.
Pic 1.)
Pic 2.)
Why does my pic look so crappy compared to the other? Why does that guys pic "pop" and shine so much? I call it a "metallic look", do you think he used a flash? a few flashes? no flash? is it strictly the light? the lens? the Edtiting??
here is another from him:
I would assume there is PP beyond LR5. I notice most of his pics have 1.) Super sharpened eyes, 2.) very soft silky smooth skin, 3.) Super shallow DOF and 4.) very rich saturated colors.
Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
here is the full site:
- she looks like an angel in #3pinkfloyd
- yeah, there's flash in the first one. and yours isn't cranked up. i like yours better. the last image is way over done though. probably turned the clarity slider all the way to the left/off.jaylarson
- softened up the image then cranked up sharpening around the eyes (#3)jaylarson
- First pic uses Fill Flash. Most likely he's using a Full Frame Nikon body which makes a whole lot of diff...ok_not_ok
- other thing is composition and color, the green dress pops from the darker green background and foreground.uan
- the red/white shirt doesn't with the yellow green background. also the top portion of your background is an additional element in the picture.uan
- slightly changing your point of view and filling the background with just the flowers (or just the sky) would make the model pop out better.uan
- HijoDMaite0
I guess I can't see where the flash is coming from in the first image. I see no shadows of any kind, I see light in fron of her as much as behind her. also I see no halo effect from back lighting.
- pinkfloyd0
What's the difference between a clear filter, haze filter and a uv filter? Thanks
- ok_not_ok0
Check this out!
- Weyland0
I just split the viewer in threes and make sure nothing is in the middle or the middle of the thirds, or fuck it and shoot a hail of angles and wipe the lazy looking ones
- pinkfloyd0
Should I go with this? It's a canon, used at $32
- formed0
Just looks like some basic editing that can be done in Lr. That UV filter is just going to protect your lens (not sure why'd you get a used one, though).
Why would you lower the contrast? Those images, especially the second, have some pretty rich blacks.
Are you starting with raw images? Raw generally look pretty bland to start (vs. jpeg that already have gone through adjustments)
- pinkfloyd0
100