PDA

View Full Version : Photographer by trade, latest wedding!



Yoga
13-05-2011, 22:49
Evening! Thought I'd share some work with you guys, nice to see a photography section here...

http://rossharveyphoto.com/photoblog/?p=3265

Great fun :¬)

Alex_UK
13-05-2011, 23:06
Nice style Ross, much more reportage than formal. And some good memories of my home town whizzing though that lot (used to live 2 mins walk from Waterloo Park and spent a lot of time there a few years back.)

Yoga
13-05-2011, 23:13
Nice style Ross, much more reportage than formal. And some good memories of my home town whizzing though that lot (used to live 2 mins walk from Waterloo Park and spent a lot of time there a few years back.)

It's a gem of a place! Stumbled upon it last year and was very impressed - beautiful flowers/tree's everywhere and a lot of character :¬)

Must have been wonderful having that nearby when it was either sunny or snowing.

Alex_UK
13-05-2011, 23:22
Wensum Park was actually a little closer - another nice Victorian park, but probably not as good as a photographic backdrop.

Hopefully I'll never need another wedding photographer but I'll know who to talk to when Mrs #2 finally realises what she did 4 years ago! :)

Yoga
13-05-2011, 23:26
Wensum Park was actually a little closer - another nice Victorian park, but probably not as good as a photographic backdrop.

Hopefully I'll never need another wedding photographer but I'll know who to talk to when Mrs #2 finally realises what she did 4 years ago! :)

Can't recall visiting Wensum park. Will have to have a gander.

AOS photography discount! :¬)

The Vinyl Adventure
14-05-2011, 08:34
Brilliant stuff ... Fantastic style!
Why havent you joined my forum yet? ;)

Fi-Wi
14-05-2011, 08:42
Nice wedding reportage. I like the lightning and the spontaneous "non-posing style" and the angle many shots were taken.

Macca
14-05-2011, 08:45
Nice wedding reportage. I like the lightning and the spontaneous "non-posing style" and the angle many shots were taken.

I'm guessing they got a discount by agreeing to their photos being used to advertise the business.

Great pics:)

Yoga
14-05-2011, 08:56
Brilliant stuff ... Fantastic style!
Why havent you joined my forum yet? ;)

Thanks Hamish :¬)

I'm trying to keep my 'internet time' controlled, as it's easy to lose hours/productivity. The more forum's you're on, the more time you spend not working! Very busy time atm.


Nice wedding reportage. I like the lightning and the spontaneous "non-posing style" and the angle many shots were taken.

Thanks! We do take a few formals, but they are quickly disappearing (trend-wise), and are usually only kept in for the older generations who are used to that kind of picture.


I'm guessing they got a discount by agreeing to their photos being used to advertise the business.

Great pics:)

Thanks! It's in the contract that they can be used for marketing. Only one couple has specifically requested privacy, the rest have been happy to have them online.

Techno Commander
14-05-2011, 18:46
Excellent work, very original.

Jac Hawk
14-05-2011, 22:22
Great pics Ross, can i use them for my next ebay sale:lolsign: only joking, up here in the north east I get the photo's of my kids done by a guy called David Lawson, he uses a similar spontaneous style to great effect.

Jonboy
14-05-2011, 23:38
very good Ross, i really like your style nice and natural if thats the right description

macvisual
16-05-2011, 21:35
Lovely Ross, hard to beat quality!

Excellent photography!

MartinT
17-05-2011, 07:06
Very nice pics, Ross, really good to look at.

Yoga
20-05-2011, 13:53
Great pics Ross, can i use them for my next ebay sale:lolsign: only joking, up here in the north east I get the photo's of my kids done by a guy called David Lawson, he uses a similar spontaneous style to great effect.

Thanks Mike! It's all about getting those moments :¬) Not really a fan of formals!


very good Ross, i really like your style nice and natural if thats the right description

Natural is the term I use too - thanks dude :¬)


Lovely Ross, hard to beat quality!

Excellent photography!

Thank you Pete. Good luck with your digital endeavours :¬)


Very nice pics, Ross, really good to look at.

Cheers Martin :¬)

vinylspinner
21-05-2011, 18:38
Nice work Ross,

Looked like a real fun day, great memories for years to come I am sure.

Nigel

Yoga
23-05-2011, 15:28
Nice work Ross,

Looked like a real fun day, great memories for years to come I am sure.

Nigel

Thanks Nigel, it was indeed great fun!

Spur07
24-05-2011, 12:08
Great shots Ross, that's some of the best wedding stuff I've seen in a while. I used to be a hand printer in the days of film and even though we were almost entirely geared to pro studio, editorial and mainly architecture we used to see a fair bit of wedding stuff coming through. You wouldn't believe some of the rubbish I had to print :) I often felt sorry for the bride and groom!

It's all modern, jaunty angles these days, much more preferable to the old style formal stuff imho. I wouldn't call it reportage though, it's more in keeping with the Sunday supplement lifestyle genre. Lovely quality to your images - what camera are you using? Seem to be using a lot of natural light - Do you use reflectors or fill-in flash?

Haselsh1
24-05-2011, 20:13
Well done, I love your modern approach to what is, and some may disagree, a very difficult subject. I have photographed a few weddings but prefer to leave it to those who can do it true justice which, I can't. I like a relaxed approach to photography which I suspect you have in no negative way as it shows from your work.

Because I am a dinosaur and work almost entirely in warm toned monochrome I only photograph weddings by very special request. Once again, well done...!

Yoga
24-05-2011, 20:17
Great shots Ross, that's some of the best wedding stuff I've seen in a while. I used to be a hand printer in the days of film and even though we were almost entirely geared to pro studio, editorial and mainly architecture we used to see a fair bit of wedding stuff coming through. You wouldn't believe some of the rubbish I had to print :) I often felt sorry for the bride and groom!

It's all modern, jaunty angles these days, much more preferable to the old style formal stuff imho. I wouldn't call it reportage though, it's more in keeping with the Sunday supplement lifestyle genre. Lovely quality to your images - what camera are you using? Seem to be using a lot of natural light - Do you use reflectors or fill-in flash?

Thank you Paul :¬)

All natural light and fast primes. I have an 85/1.4 on the D3s, and the 35/1.4 on the D3. Saves all that lens swapping malarky - jumping from telephoto to wide is invaluable. The D3 is an awesome camera, but the D3s, blimey, you would not believe how clear the images are even at ISO's over 6400.

Edit: Thanks Shaun, and you're spot on, I am very relaxed at weddings. Quite a few brides have said it helped them stay calm, which is nice :¬)

Reid Malenfant
24-05-2011, 20:23
Hi Ross, to me it just looks like you were as good as damn it 'invisible' & the couple just got on wth their important day...

Lovely pictures, i'm sure anyone would be proud of them as wedding photos!

Nice work :)

Tim
24-05-2011, 20:28
Well I'm not much for looking at other folks wedding photographs, as they always seem to be similar - these are definitely not. I would have been very proud of that collection for sure, wonderful pictures which really portray what looks like a memorable and fun packed day.... great stuff Ross :)

Yoga
24-05-2011, 20:45
Hi Ross, to me it just looks like you were as good as damn it 'invisible' & the couple just got on wth their important day...

Lovely pictures, i'm sure anyone would be proud of them as wedding photos!

Nice work :)

Cheers Mark. I do try and blend in and roll with the day, rather than interfere or direct it. You're there to capture it as naturally as possible!


Well I'm not much for looking at other folks wedding photographs, as they always seem to be similar - these are definitely not. I would have been very proud of that collection for sure, wonderful pictures which really portray what looks like a memorable and fun packed day.... great stuff Ross :)

Thanks Tim :¬) It was a fantastic day, the couple, and in fact everyone, were friendly, welcoming and in good spirits. Beautiful location and weather too, which really helps!

The Vinyl Adventure
24-05-2011, 21:27
Thank you Paul :¬)

All natural light and fast primes. I have an 85/1.4 on the D3s, and the 35/1.4 on the D3. Saves all that lens swapping malarky - jumping from telephoto to wide is invaluable. The D3 is an awesome camera, but the D3s, blimey, you would not believe how clear the images are even at ISO's over 6400.

Edit: Thanks Shaun, and you're spot on, I am very relaxed at weddings. Quite a few brides have said it helped them stay calm, which is nice :¬)

Great set up too then ... I use a d3 with (amongst others) the older 85 1.4 afd ... Haven't yet had the balls to do a full paid day with just primes ... But did these http://www.realphotographersforum.com/threads/1349-Alice-and-Ben-s-Wedding at a mate of hannahs (sponging off the paid photogs poses) with just the 85 ... So that's the plan for the next one ... ... ... If I can get the balls to do it ... ... Not even sure why I worry really ... ...

Again, really great shots, make me feel I need to practice more :)

Yoga
24-05-2011, 22:26
Great set up too then ... I use a d3 with (amongst others) the older 85 1.4 afd ... Haven't yet had the balls to do a full paid day with just primes ... But did these http://www.realphotographersforum.com/threads/1349-Alice-and-Ben-s-Wedding at a mate of hannahs (sponging off the paid photogs poses) with just the 85 ... So that's the plan for the next one ... ... ... If I can get the balls to do it ... ... Not even sure why I worry really ... ...

Again, really great shots, make me feel I need to practice more :)

Nice shots dude.

I have the 85/1.4D too, my fave lens by a considerable margin (especially for outdoor portraits). A close second is the 50/1.4G, which surprised me. It's been invaluable in low light during the evening. Great focal length on a full frame body too.

Check this out, 50/1.4 on the D3s, 1/160, f1.8, 12800 ISO (with LR noise reduction)

Full

http://www.rossharveyphoto.com/tmp/crop.jpg

Crop

http://www.rossharveyphoto.com/tmp/full.jpg

The freedom it (D3s) gives you is amazing. Countless people have asked me how I'm shooting in such dark places without a flash. For a £350 lens, thats stellar low light/wide open performance.

From what I've seen so far, the £350 50/1.4G is optically, and performance wise, VERY close to the newly acquired 35/1.4 (£1.4K). So much so, I might return it for a refund as it has some focus issues.

The Vinyl Adventure
24-05-2011, 23:26
I have and love the 50mm 1.4d too ... People complain of the flare from shooting into light on that lens would you believe?? Never had any pro

The Vinyl Adventure
24-05-2011, 23:39
I have and love the 50mm 1.4d too ... People complain of the flare from shooting into light on that lens would you believe?? Never had any problems my self ... At least not flare that I would consider detrimental... I might be just used to it's limitations and use them to effect I suppose ... But like I say, I personally have never had any issue with it!?

The 85afd is a gem! Its been my carry round lens on and off since i got it ... Either that or a 50mm 1.2 I got cheap of eBay which is lovely for "arty" (very selective focus) stuff, even if it's not the sharpest of lenses

Been so tempted to fork out for a d3s ... But gonna hold fire and see what the d4 brings the autumn ... I also find that the noise the d3 creates at 4000-6400 iso is more than manageable and quite attractive with b&w conversion .... That's not to say I wouldnt love the ability to shoot clean shots that high!!!
How well does it focus in low light? Any better than the d3?

Focus issues?
Have you tried the AF fine tune in the setup menu?
There is a chap called Pete on my forum who is also a member here who is well up on focus adjustment in the d3 I'll draw his attention here if you like ...
That said I'd be pretty annoyed if I'd spent all that cash to have to adjust it ... Have you thought about a straight swap ... I'd love to have a go with that lens! I have the 35 f2 afd ... Which I find, if I anything is slightly sharper than the 50 1.4 (but I think that might be more down to how and when I use it ... I've not really made any sensible comparisons)

Just ordered 16-35 f4 ... Should be here next week! V excited!
What other lenses you got in the bag?

Spur07
25-05-2011, 08:11
Thought so, pro prime lenses make a huge difference and the extra speed is invaluable, (but not cheap!)

Just like Shaun I've been asked to do weddings over the years but always refuse. It's a specialist subject that requires experience to do properly imo.

The Vinyl Adventure
25-05-2011, 08:54
People skills are the most important thing for weeding photography I think ... Obviously being able to take photos better then uncle bob with his new aquired DSLR is an advantage ... But the biggest thing is making the couple feel like they can be completely relaxed with you ... And beyond that making the guests either comfortable with you or not notice you or both... The one I most enjoyed I kept on being asked how I knew the couple ... The couple wrote to me after thanking me saying everyone thought I was a guest they had roped in to doing photos ... I don't think all photogs take that approach, but that's the approach I tell my clients about before they book me and it's the one reason (other than photos) I get booked! It's a lot of fun that way ... Just like going to a wedding ... Just one you have to be 100% on the ball for the whole time your there ... Which is fairly exhausting

Yoga
25-05-2011, 09:45
I have and love the 50mm 1.4d too ... People complain of the flare from shooting into light on that lens would you believe?? Never had any problems my self ... At least not flare that I would consider detrimental... I might be just used to it's limitations and use them to effect I suppose ... But like I say, I personally have never had any issue with it!?

Me neither, I love shooting in to the light with this lens (and any other actually)!


Been so tempted to fork out for a d3s ... But gonna hold fire and see what the d4 brings the autumn ... I also find that the noise the d3 creates at 4000-6400 iso is more than manageable and quite attractive with b&w conversion .... That's not to say I wouldnt love the ability to shoot clean shots that high!!!
How well does it focus in low light? Any better than the d3?


Very similar to the D3, I've not noticed any difference. Have you tried the Nikon 24-70/2.8? The low-light (i.e. nearly pitch black) focus on that lens is absolutely stunning. Magical, in fact. Nothing comes close in my experience!


Focus issues?
Have you tried the AF fine tune in the setup menu?
There is a chap called Pete on my forum who is also a member here who is well up on focus adjustment in the d3 I'll draw his attention here if you like ...
That said I'd be pretty annoyed if I'd spent all that cash to have to adjust it ... Have you thought about a straight swap ... I'd love to have a go with that lens! I have the 35 f2 afd ... Which I find, if I anything is slightly sharper than the 50 1.4 (but I think that might be more down to how and when I use it ... I've not really made any sensible comparisons)

Just ordered 16-35 f4 ... Should be here next week! V excited!
What other lenses you got in the bag?

Focus tracking rather than still. Shooting a still subject = tack sharp. When walking alongside a couple and using continuous focus (i.e. on their eyes), it would lose focus and I'd get a sharp shot of the background. Very disappointed, as this is a lens issue.

I have indeed made a straight swap, this new copy will be tested at tomorrows wedding (another beautiful location, and the weather is looking good!).

I love the 35/2! Fantastic walkabout lens for getting up close. It's the reason I wanted the 35/1.4 so bad, as the 35/2D is not up to par for weddings (soft and distorted blur/noise with low light).

Enjoy the lens!

Kit bag:

24-70/2.8 (so versatile)
35/2D (fun)
35/1.4G (trial)
50/1.4G (awesome)
85/1.4D (yum)
105/2.8 Macro (ridiculously sharp)
70-200/2.8 MKI (never use this!)


Thought so, pro prime lenses make a huge difference and the extra speed is invaluable, (but not cheap!)

Just like Shaun I've been asked to do weddings over the years but always refuse. It's a specialist subject that requires experience to do properly imo.

Prime lenses force you to think on your feet about composition (positioning especially), which is a great way to hone your stealth/hunting abilities!


People skills are the most important thing for weeding photography I think ... Obviously being able to take photos better then uncle bob with his new aquired DSLR is an advantage ... But the biggest thing is making the couple feel like they can be completely relaxed with you ... And beyond that making the guests either comfortable with you or not notice you or both... The one I most enjoyed I kept on being asked how I knew the couple ... The couple wrote to me after thanking me saying everyone thought I was a guest they had roped in to doing photos ... I don't think all photogs take that approach, but that's the approach I tell my clients about before they book me and it's the one reason (other than photos) I get booked! It's a lot of fun that way ... Just like going to a wedding ... Just one you have to be 100% on the ball for the whole time your there ... Which is fairly exhausting

Agree 100%. On all points. "How do you know X and Y then?"; a very common (and welcome) question :¬)

It is exhausting, you have to concentrate/move for sometimes 14 hours straight (last but one wedding was 9am to 11:30pm). Pretty slow the next day!

The Vinyl Adventure
25-05-2011, 22:21
Similar lens set up to me

I have

16-35 4 afs (on the way)
24-70 2.8 afs
70-200 2.8 afs (I also have and rarely use the mk1... Do you find it a little scatty at focusing on the d3 ... Mine has a habit of hunting quite a bit...)

Tamron 17mm 3.5 mf (adaptall ii) ... Not so great on digital - nastly purple flare when shot into light
20mm 2.8 afd
35mm 2 afd
50mm 1.4 afd
50mm 1.2 ais
60mm 2.8 afd macro
85mm 1.4 afd
135mm 2.8 ai

The problem with all these afs lenses is they are useless on the f3 ... So I'm pretty much forced by my desire to shoot the odd roll of film to hold on to lenses I might have other wise sold ... I have an f4 ... But I can't get on with it ... Shooting film is an escape from superfluous controls and features of digital ... The f4 has just too many switches and buttons to give me the pleasure of use I'm after ...
I'm my own worst enemy when it comes to this kit ... I find so much of it far to hard to let go! If I sold all the stuff I don't use often I could put it into kit I would use ... Just can't let my self do it ... Madening it is!


I'd agree with your comments on primes ... They are just more enjoyable and satisfying to use ... But as you rightly say the 24-70 is an absolute beauty! I'd say, from the minimal experience of them it's better than the 24mm and 28mm 2.8 afd's ... Certainly quicker to focus (obviously) but sharper too edge to edge I think... Says a lot for it as a zoom lens!

A shame about the 35 1.4 ... Have you read similar reports from others on it as a lens??


We have done the odd 14 hour job too ... I got a migraine half way through one where we were also doing a video ... It was an absolute nightmare!!

Yoga
27-05-2011, 13:14
Migrane on the job - damn! Can't imagine how hard that was to cope with.

Yeah same here, I can't bring myself to sell the 70-200/2.8 'just in case'. Had no focus issues with the D3 or D3s though (using the focal length toggle switch).

Used the new copy of the 35/1.4 at yesterdays wedding. Again, the odd focus issue. Great lens, but for £1.4K you'd expect it to nail it every time (like the 28-70/2.8). The added two stops is rather handy though. I think I can make do with the 50/1.4G and 24-70. I'll shoot tomorrow's wedding without it and see if I miss it :¬)

Regarding digital - yes it can be over complicated, but only if you choose it to be. I only use aperture control and exposure compensation (auto ISO on the D3(s) is literally a godsend for ambient light photography). So, in effect, it's far more simple than film :¬)

I couldn't capture the key moments of a wedding without the intelligence fo the camera (with my shooting style anyway), there are simply too many lighting/focusing variables and surprises. It's too fast to be manually controlling the camera, you'd miss 85% of it!

The Vinyl Adventure
27-05-2011, 17:34
Haha, yeah, I used to use auto iso but keep it on the download thinking it was cheating ..
I set mine to minimum shutter speed 1/60 (1/80 with the 85 to be on the safe side) the max iso 3200 (6400 in really low light) then stick it on aperture priority an shoot away without a thought to settings really ... Focus set to single point in the centre ... White balance auto... The only concern after that is the odd time a bit of spot metering or centre weighted when it comes in handy!

It's not so much how simple film shooting is ... But like i said how simple film cameras are ... I tought my self photography using the sunny 16 rule, and focusing by distance and zone on a 1950's Voigtlander vito b ... Using a nikon f3 (for Eg) just gives me a bit more of that type of experience ... And that type of experience makes me think ... It's not the simplicity of automation, but the simplicity of a few controls that I need to think to use ... Does that make sense? But like you say, it's not practical for work ... It's just more fun for personal shooting ...

Yoga
29-05-2011, 09:53
Got you. I tried the spot metering for a while too but found it to be unreliable with smaller subjects against lighter/darker backgrounds. Haha yeah, I also thought I was cheating at first, then realised that in fact it's just a technological progression (like a metering system in the camera was) that lets me shoot faster and easier. Fantastic piece of functionaity!

I keep the auto ISO max at about 1/250, as I tested with lower values (i.e. just above focal length) but would get blurred shots of people talking and moving.

The Vinyl Adventure
29-05-2011, 11:35
I also thought I was cheating at first, then realised that in fact it's just a technological progression (like a metering system in the camera was) that lets me shoot faster and easier. Fantastic piece of functionaity!

That's exactly what I ended up realising ... Although it took reading about it from a chap called Larry over on RPF to realise it ... Funny isn't it it's so intrenched in photography convention that doing everything manually is the "right way" that taking the logical and easy route seems to be frownd upon ...
The fact that photography style has moved on along with automation (as you mentioned before) seems irrelevant to some people ... The same is said about cropping ... People seem to argue that cropping an image is cheating ... I disagree, get the shot, that's the most important thing, if it needs a crop then so be it! As I was saying on another slighty more heated thread tother day ... The most important thing is the end result ... That end result is entirely dependent on catching the moment in the first place... How you capture the moment, and the process to get to the end result are actually pretty irrelevant ... Especially in our trade where moments are fleeting, but of great importance in peoples lives ...
The photo of newly wed duke and duchess of Cambridge kissing that was on the front of pretty much every newspaper in the country is a good example ... I can't imagine many people questioned camera settings, or if it was cropped etc ... Just that the photog got the moment, it was sharp, and correctly exposed
The fact is, the only real "right way" to take a photo is to do it the way that you know will get the results that you and your client want ... And sometimes, these days to achieve those results consistently automation is pretty much a requirement IMO!
Where my view slightly deviates from the above is that I don't think automation should be relied upon entirely ... I think a good photographer should know how to use a camera properly before switching on the auto modes ...
For example, I have done weddings receptions in very low lit rooms, often lit by candles ... In those circumstances it is often counterproductive to use auto modes ...
If there was a candle on a table the light shining from the candle on to someones face would be enough to light the persons face for a nice shot, if that flame gets in the shot the metering will knock the face into shadow... (especially considering the reduced DR of the high iso probably being used in those circumstances)
Because everyone will be lit by the same light, or close enough, In those curcumstances it is much more reasonable to set the camera to manual based on the reflected light from a face! Blown out highlights in candles are better than lost shadows in faces ... The level of automation in my kit doesn't know that ... Although with face detection it can't be far off even in slrs! :)



I keep the auto ISO max at about 1/250, as I tested with lower values (i.e. just above focal length) but would get blurred shots of people talking and moving.

I guess that's probably quite sensible ... I'll give it a bash ... I suppose a bit of underexposure is a lot more fixable than motion blur!!

Haselsh1
31-05-2011, 11:38
As an example of simplicity, I'd love to know how many people buy a digital SLR and just leave it on 'P' for 'Program'. At least with my Pentax MX I actually have to think about what is going on and react and make judgements accordingly. To a large degree I also have to do that with my Nikon F3 and I definitely do with my Bronica SQ. It's nice to know that some of us can still think and make mental calculations.

Yoga
31-05-2011, 14:07
Yeah absolutely, you need to know all the nuances of lighting, regardless of the shooting settings :¬)

Post processing is part of the creative process, and that includes cropping. When using primes at fast events (such as weddings), you don't have the luxury to take 3 steps in to get the perfect framing. Many consider the digital RAW the artist's canvas, in which to 'paint' (process). I like that analogy :¬)

For the record, the 35/1.4 is going back, same focus issues with this copy. After a few minutes research, it seems I'm not alone, and it's had a lot of problems since it's release. Boooooo!

The Vinyl Adventure
31-05-2011, 16:09
Yeah absolutely, you need to know all the nuances of lighting, regardless of the shooting settings :¬) yes, better put than my meandering nonsense ;)


Post processing is part of the creative process, and that includes cropping. When using primes at fast events (such as weddings), you don't have the luxury to take 3 steps in to get the perfect framing. Many consider the digital RAW the artist's canvas, in which to 'paint' (process). I like that analogy :¬)

a lovely analogy indeed ... and quite a literal one in some cases
there are a couple of us on the forum who have been doing some fairly abstract stuff ... just for fun really ... its quality is hugely subjective, but it's been a lot of fun tinkering with things an ideas I'd normally dismiss ... part of this for me has involved selective colouring ... and in the case of this shot, literately painting colours over the photo ...

http://i728.photobucket.com/albums/ww282/hamish_gill/DSC00212-3.jpg



For the record, the 35/1.4 is going back, same focus issues with this copy. After a few minutes research, it seems I'm not alone, and it's had a lot of problems since it's release. Boooooo!

boooo indeed ... money back then ... what about spending the case on a 24 1.4 ... thats what id do ... go for a focal length further away from what you already have... opens more doors of possibility!

Alex_UK
31-05-2011, 20:13
As an example of simplicity, I'd love to know how many people buy a digital SLR and just leave it on 'P' for 'Program'.

Well, as an amateur photographer from the past, with a grounding in exposure, understanding aperture and depth of field, metering etc., I often use Shutter Priority or Aperture Priority, though rarely full manual, if I'm honest. On the other hand, my wife just uses "Full Auto" - and I often find myself amazed at how good the results can be... The technology really has moved on in recent years, IMHO.

Yoga
31-05-2011, 23:15
Love that photo Hamish, mysterious and engaging. Awesome.

I also like to fiddle :¬) "Terra Forma"...

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1364/5190225078_f2d732f549_o.jpg

Alex: I use Aperture Priority all the time (along with Exposure Compensation - EC). When doing so, using EC is essentially +/- the shutter. The benefit over manual is that I don't have to worry about changing the ISO (automatic).

The Vinyl Adventure
01-06-2011, 07:28
Cameras have been capable of choosing correct exposure for years ... As long as the user of the camera has an eye for compo the results should be good!
It's the extra creative control that aperture priority gives that I think should be embraced where possible ...
If you look at more recent high end compacts like the panasonic g series and Sony nex series they have actually tried to simplify aperture priority by calling it "backgound defocus control" ... Which I'm not entirely sure I agree with really ... It helps people gain creative control but I personally think is not going to help people learn photography properly in the long run ...
Apart from anything "defocus control" by most photogs standards is something you do with a lens this bad boy http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/225-nikkor-af-135mm-f2-d-dc-review--test-report ... Which should someone more to a DSLR could mean some very interesting conversations with sales staff should they go into a shop and want to by a camera with a "defocus control lens"???
Maybe I'm being silly ... :)

Ross, that's stunning!
Do you do a lot of composite stuff?
I'd love to see some more!

Yoga
01-06-2011, 08:25
Agreed, it doesn't make sense to confuse people with new terminology. I was soooooo close to getting that 135 DC at one point. So close :¬)

Thanks! No not really, only when I feel like having a play - usually keep photography and design separate (although thinking about it, might change that).

Spur07
01-06-2011, 13:12
Hamish,

I really like that - that's a great image. It doesn't look like its had a great deal of manipulation which is probably why it works for me.

The Vinyl Adventure
01-06-2011, 22:37
Agreed, it doesn't make sense to confuse people with new terminology. I was soooooo close to getting that 135 DC at one point. So close :¬)

Thanks! No not really, only when I feel like having a play - usually keep photography and design separate (although thinking about it, might change that).

I'd like a play with one ... Just to see the effect!

There is so much fun to be had messing with computers and photos ... Just doing the stuff for work isnt enough... Tinkering with random blurry stuff just keeps those creative naggings better at bay :)

The Vinyl Adventure
01-06-2011, 22:39
Hamish,

I really like that - that's a great image. It doesn't look like its had a great deal of manipulation which is probably why it works for me.

All about the balance .. I do have a habit of over pp I'm trying to break so that's a nice compliment to read! :)

Yoga
02-06-2011, 09:47
I'd like a play with one ... Just to see the effect!

There is so much fun to be had messing with computers and photos ... Just doing the stuff for work isnt enough... Tinkering with random blurry stuff just keeps those creative naggings better at bay :)

You have the 85/1.4D right? I do too, which is why I never bothered with the 135DC. The bokeh is so damn smooth with the 85 that defocus control became negligible, and in fact negative (since it needs to be manually changed each shot) for fast paced shooting. Saying that, I agree, I'd like a fiddle with it :eyebrows:

Ashmore
02-06-2011, 22:16
Love that composite image - very atmospheric. Since discussion has moved to manipulation thought I might offer one of mine taken recently at a German cemetery at Ypres...

I shant try to compete in terms of kit though - some of you guys must be minted!

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5105/5625795572_92360a7bcd_z.jpg

The Vinyl Adventure
02-06-2011, 23:53
Love that composite image - very atmospheric. Since discussion has moved to manipulation thought I might offer one of mine taken recently at a German cemetery at Ypres...

I shant try to compete in terms of kit though - some of you guys must be minted!

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5105/5625795572_92360a7bcd_z.jpg

oooo i quite like that...

you do a lot of this sort of thing?

.... money well spent if you ask me ... for reliability if nothing else! (and low light performance) ... but really its not a case of being minted ... id have to spend more money on my kit if my business was a ... i dunno ... farmer??

Ashmore
03-06-2011, 05:57
I guess you're right - bet a tractor costs a fortune. I've been deliberating over a NIKON 10-24 for so long now it's untrue. I've also been debating whether to stay with DX or go FX. So many decisions. Just like hifi! but my conclusion is that the kit matters less than I sometimes think.

Cheers Hamish - yes I've been having a lot of fun with textures and isolating areas of colour.

Yoga
03-06-2011, 07:26
Like that a lot Simon, as with Hamish's pic, it gets you thinking.

Regarding kit - it's different when it's a business expense, it pays for itself over time. As a hobby, I had a D700 (fantastic camera). I upgraded to the D3, then D3s, after turning semi professional then full-time professional respectively.

The Vinyl Adventure
03-06-2011, 08:18
I was saying this to someone yesterday ... There is a very frustrating line with nikon kit (and canon I'd guess) where going full frame seems logical, but is just out of reach financially...
You get a d700 for Eg and all of a sudden you need to spend out on a new lens... Which because of the jump in camera to "pro" not forking out on a very nice lens (24-70 for eg) feels like your doing things the wrong way round (ie better camera than lens, when better lens than camera is surely the better way to do things) ... So you kind of get put off the step up ... but because you stick with dx, every lens you buy that has those little dx initialls by it seems to sting a bit as it's one step further from the dream of goin fx!

My advice is always the same ... Where possible spend less on dx lenses and buy fx ones when you can ... So look at the tamron 10-24 (at half the money) or sigma ...
Wait until September(ish) this year ... Hopefully (if the earthquake didn't set them back) they will be announcing a replacement for the d3 and d300s ... See what that does to the price of the d700 ... Next year, d700 replacement comes along ... That too will bring d700 price down! (speculation of course, but nikon has patterns and those predictions are based on those patterns) ...
The d700 (like canon 5d is now) should end up around the £700 mark within a year ...
When your spending £700 you might feel less inclined (if you do already- just going on how I felt) to buy such mental expensive lenses and can go for perfectly good older afd's or the 24-120 f4 (which is still expensive, but not as expensive as the 24-70)
Apart from anything have you seen the second hand prices of nikon pro kit at the mo?? 6 months ago a d700 new was about £1750 sh £1350 ... New £1900 if you can get one. S/h £1750! Demand, but no supply!
So yeah .. One way or another going fx right now would be costly ... But if you wait a bit, that should change a great deal... In the mean while ... Buy third part dx for half the money ;)

Just my HO of course ;)

Yoga
04-06-2011, 09:39
Good advice. Always better to invest in quality (non-DX) glass to start with, it holds it's price.

The Vinyl Adventure
04-06-2011, 10:12
Had a play with the low shutter cut off with auto iso yesterday ...
Had always just set it and left it ...
Firstly noticed it doesn't do thirds of stops ... So my comment at setting it 4000-6400 was obviously nonsense ... Must have got confused with somthing else ...
I also notice that once it gets to 6400 it pushes shutter speed below 100 ... Never noticed that before ... Very clever that ...
So it's not a limit, it's just a line where the camera will keep raising shutter iso as opposed to adjusting shutter speed...
I'm sure you know that ... But how clever!!!

Oh and I can't do weddings with one or two focal lengths ... I'm just not quick enough it seems ... A zoom for me it seems, is the only logical solution for a wedding for me!

Spur07
04-06-2011, 11:08
Love that composite image - very atmospheric. Since discussion has moved to manipulation thought I might offer one of mine taken recently at a German cemetery at Ypres...

I shant try to compete in terms of kit though - some of you guys must be minted!

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5105/5625795572_92360a7bcd_z.jpg

That's another great shot. A lovely illustrative feel to it - could easily see that on a book jacket or album cover.

Tbh, if you're working as a pro in the majority of instances you need to buy pro gear. Your equipment will take such a hammering and that's what pro gear is built for. Unfortunately there's no short cuts - it can be an expensive business to be in!

The Vinyl Adventure
04-06-2011, 12:07
have you heard about the new hassleblad h4d-200ms ... thats were it gets really expensive

http://www.hasselblad.co.uk/products/h-system/h4d-200ms.aspx

a meagre £35,000 body only ...

Spur07
04-06-2011, 15:26
No more expensive than the latest Phase 1 or Leaf MF digital backs I wouldn't imagine Hamish. I've always hankered after one but even now I can't justify the expense of something like a used P25, one of the first digital backs to reach 5x4 quality. They've gone way beyond that now! I bet those hassleblad lenses are good though. The closest I get to Phase 1 is their raw conversion software - Capture 1 :)

Yoga
05-06-2011, 00:09
Mmmmmmm MF goodness. You only really need one if you're printing high resolution at very large sizes, or ridiculously high resolution stock photography. Saying that, the D3x was compared to a top Blad model and it held its own very well.

Hamish: not so fond on zooms, I find even the 24-70/2.8 too slow. I'm an f2 shooter :)

Yeah, Nikon's auto ISO is invaluable to me. You set the maximum ISO and preferred minimum shutter and then forget about it. I have a mate who's also a wedding photographer and he is green with envy over it (he uses Canon 5D MKIIs at the moment). Nikon auto focus is also top notch :cool:

Spur07
05-06-2011, 08:48
Yeah, the big DSLR's compare favorably with the MF backs in most respects - they don't lack in sharpness which is after all just contrast, but they lack the depth. Of course, once you start printing large the difference becomes much more noticeable.

The latest MF backs have gone beyond 10x8 sheet film, all in the convenience of a unit the size of roll film back :) Some people believe the chip size will never move beyond the current 645 though. The square 6x6 is considered too much of a niche format that wouldn't justify the expense and a leap up to 6x7 would be too expensive to manufacture and sell.

The Vinyl Adventure
05-06-2011, 09:18
Yeah, the big DSLR's compare favorably with the MF backs in most respects - they don't lack in sharpness which is after all just contrast, but they lack the depth. Of course, once you start printing large the difference becomes much more noticeable.

Lens contrast and how it relates to sharpness and that lark ... Yeah, that's where my eyes glaze over and I start shaking my head with confusion ... Bit beyond me ...



The latest MF backs have gone beyond 10x8 sheet film, all in the convenience of a unit the size of roll film back :) Some people believe the chip size will never move beyond the current 645 though. The square 6x6 is considered too much of a niche format that wouldn't justify the expense and a leap up to 6x7 would be too expensive to manufacture and sell.

Your asking for trouble saying something digital has gone beyond something film ...
Not with me mind ... I wouldn't have the experience of comparison to comment ... :)

Chips will get cheaper, technology will improve and change ... I don't think any predictions that limit size of sensors are particularly well thought through ...
Some people though we would never need more than a few mb of hd space in computers ... Yet you can now buy 32gb sd cards for what £50 ...
I'm not saying it will happen ... But ... ... You get my point ...

The Vinyl Adventure
05-06-2011, 09:24
Mmmmmmm MF goodness. You only really need one if you're printing high resolution at very large sizes, or ridiculously high resolution stock photography. Saying that, the D3x was compared to a top Blad model and it held its own very well.

Hamish: not so fond on zooms, I find even the 24-70/2.8 too slow. I'm an f2 shooter :)

I think I might manage it with 2 cameras ... But I have an assistant (my business partner) who uses the back up body... he's very keen to learn more about photography in the same way as I am about web design ... So we work together ... He gets the fun job of walking around with a prime lens :(
It also means we get to be in two places at once ... Which is useful for prep shots and the like ... So for now ... Until we can afford another camera ... Zooms it is!

Spur07
05-06-2011, 11:50
Lens contrast and how it relates to sharpness and that lark ... Yeah, that's where my eyes glaze over and I start shaking my head with confusion ... Bit beyond me ...



Your asking for trouble saying something digital has gone beyond something film ...
Not with me mind ... I wouldn't have the experience of comparison to comment ... :)

Chips will get cheaper, technology will improve and change ... I don't think any predictions that limit size of sensors are particularly well thought through ...
Some people though we would never need more than a few mb of hd space in computers ... Yet you can now buy 32gb sd cards for what £50 ...
I'm not saying it will happen ... But ... ... You get my point ...

Yes, I guess your right in the sense that not many people could afford to shoot 10x8 even in the days of film - so how do you make a comparison!! When I was working as an assistant in the 90's I worked with a few advertising photographers that shot 10x8, but I've never had the opportunity to compare back to back with the latest digi back. I'm only going along with the consensus, even though much of that is driven by marketing and pro retailers. Architectural photographers were the last to abandon their 5x4's for the Phase/Leaf digital backs. I remember speaking to Richard Bryant after he purchased his first Leaf back 3 or 4 years ago and he felt it was huge leap forward over sheet film. I trust these guys and their opinions, I worked with them and their LF set ups for many years. They have the same exacting standards as studio/advertising photographers. They use the best german LF lenses; before digital they had to colour balance their film - what a massive pain in the arse that was!! People like Richard and Dennis Gilbert were the fussiest buggers I ever worked for. If anybody's qualified to comment I think they probably are.

The manufacture of a digital chip is slightly more complex and expensive than HD storage to be fair. It was just an opinion, often expressed by many that work with these backs. Whilst it remains as expensive as it does to build these chips things wont move forward much. But as you say, technology may change, they may find a way to do it cheaper. I hope so because one day I might get a chance to own one. A digital back with a 6x9 chip of unimaginable quality on a lovely little Arca Swiss - Yes please thank you very much!!!

The Vinyl Adventure
05-06-2011, 14:22
I hope that didn't sound like I was acusing you of not making comparison Paul ... It wasn't meant that way ...

Anyway, sounds like you had an pretty interesting job!What do you do now ... Anything related?
I personally have no doubts about the capability of digital ... I Champion it over film often ... It's not me that needs convincing by any means ... There may be pitfalls of digital, but it's my opinion also that the benefits of digital outweigh them ...

They said similar about computer chips and costs ... There is always boundaries on tech that make things cost prohibitive and hard to do... It invariably changes ... It might not happen over night ... But these things will exist despite the opinion of those that use the kit ... Tech markets are more dictated by supply than demand IMO

Spur07
06-06-2011, 13:48
I hope that didn't sound like I was acusing you of not making comparison Paul ... It wasn't meant that way ...

Anyway, sounds like you had an pretty interesting job!What do you do now ... Anything related?
I personally have no doubts about the capability of digital ... I Champion it over film often ... It's not me that needs convincing by any means ... There may be pitfalls of digital, but it's my opinion also that the benefits of digital outweigh them ...

They said similar about computer chips and costs ... There is always boundaries on tech that make things cost prohibitive and hard to do... It invariably changes ... It might not happen over night ... But these things will exist despite the opinion of those that use the kit ... Tech markets are more dictated by supply than demand IMO

No worries Hamish

I must admit I can get a bit tetchy when it comes to film/digital debates. There's so much nonsense spoken about it (always accompanied by some dreadful willy waving), usually from 'serious amateurs' who hold a grudge mainly because they can't afford LF digital. There was one of PFM recently, I always vow to not get involved but never learn.

The Vinyl Adventure
06-06-2011, 15:55
im the same ... did you see me fall out with marco over digital the other day ... i still dont think hes talking to me ;) ... no doubt this wont help ... hehe

you should join rpf ... id be interested to hear more about your work(even if it isnt what you do now???), im sure others would too ... and you wont find anyone who will argue with you ... just people who are generally interested in this sort of thing!

Marco
06-06-2011, 20:32
did you see me fall out with marco over digital the other day ... i still dont think hes talking to me ;) ... no doubt this wont help ... hehe


Fall out? Shut it, ya dafteeee! :lol:

Marco.

The Vinyl Adventure
06-06-2011, 20:36
well it did touch on the heated ;)

Marco
06-06-2011, 21:09
Lol - not with me, dude... Merely a difference of opinion and a robust exchange of views. No harm done :)

Marco.

Tim
06-06-2011, 21:34
:grouphug:

;)

Alex_UK
06-06-2011, 21:44
I think I got a bit "heated" in that debate, too - but like you say Marco, "no harm done" - it hasn't changed my view of you at all, I thought you were a big daftee before, and I still do! ;)

:kiss:

johnbriner
07-06-2011, 01:07
Very nice shots! They all look very happy, I like the quality of the pictures, the exposure is very good! Keep on posting your shots!

Yoga
07-06-2011, 08:32
Thanks John! :¬)