If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
"David J Taylor" writes:
Prints without margins don't frame well at all, and don't provide any safe handling area. They're basically unsaleable. Fortunately, I'm not selling prints. I have seen block-mounted prints, and to me these look more like how I would expect "photos" to look. Print collectors and museums have REALLY strong preferences in favors of considerable border, and not attaching the print to anything else in any permanent way. (Not that I'm selling into that market either; so arguably their strictures shouldn't matter to me. But when I think in terms of a photo being of long-term value, I think of treating it so it lasts for the long term.) I certainly shot a huge number of slides over my history (I bought multiple 100-foot rolls of slide film for a 1987 trip to England, plus at least a brick of Kodachrome, for example), but I also did a lot of darkroom printing in B&W. Slides were easy and cheap, but they were much harder to get prints from. And they were pernicious in that they taught some people to think that getting it just right out of the camera was a moral virtue. It isn't, it's merely expedient in certain workflows, and it has a large artistic cost. I don't agree that "slides were easy and cheap". It was harder to get the exposure and dynamic range correct, and they didn't seem that cheap to me. My photos are more about capturing the event or the moment, not to produce a work of art. They were cheaper than negatives-plus-prints by quite a lot. They were also better-understood by most printers, so they were specified for a lot of commercial work, magazines generally. As Ansel Adams said, the negative is the score, the print is the performance. If you're thinking of any of your shots as "good", presenting them without post-processing is being drastically unfair to them, not giving them their best chance to shine. (For snapshots, the numbers are too high and the potential gains too small to be worth it, generally, I agree.) -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ I do crop and adjust brightness levels on some of my pictures, but I would regard it as a failure if I had to do that with the majority. My pictures are not a be-all and end-all in themselves, but often taken to illustrate other hobbies and interests. Of course, others' needs and aims will be different. Sure, we do this for a huge range of reasons. Very broadly, my own interest is largely documentary also, whether it's people at a time and place, or doing a thing, or an event, or a piece of art or craft, or whatever. Particularly when capturing events going on around me, I often simply don't have time to do ideal in-camera work. Delaying will lose me the shot. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
Sure, we do this for a huge range of reasons. Very broadly, my own
interest is largely documentary also, whether it's people at a time and place, or doing a thing, or an event, or a piece of art or craft, or whatever. Particularly when capturing events going on around me, I often simply don't have time to do ideal in-camera work. Delaying will lose me the shot. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Mine is also documentary rather than artistic. Where I differ is in trying to have the camera set to produce images which require minimum post-processing. I would get the shot first, and worry about camera settings etc. second. A quick glance at the LCD will show whether exposure is in the right range. Sometimes I have more time, and can play with the camera settings. Cheers, David |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
"David J Taylor" writes:
Sure, we do this for a huge range of reasons. Very broadly, my own interest is largely documentary also, whether it's people at a time and place, or doing a thing, or an event, or a piece of art or craft, or whatever. Particularly when capturing events going on around me, I often simply don't have time to do ideal in-camera work. Delaying will lose me the shot. Mine is also documentary rather than artistic. Where I differ is in trying to have the camera set to produce images which require minimum post-processing. I would get the shot first, and worry about camera settings etc. second. A quick glance at the LCD will show whether exposure is in the right range. Sometimes I have more time, and can play with the camera settings. The four-part histogram is my default review display, to make that kind of quick exposure check easier. But also, I take post-processing for granted, so I don't always bother with small adjustments. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
The four-part histogram is my default review display, to make that kind
of quick exposure check easier. But also, I take post-processing for granted, so I don't always bother with small adjustments. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ My default is usually the flashing highlights, which suits the type of photos I take and helps avoid the worse issues with the JPEGs I use (i.e. clipped highlights). I have the Nikon "Active D-Lighting" set to auto, which expands the dynamic range when needed. I do sometimes use the histogram - perhaps for more awkward subjects, although I may then switch to manual exposure to get the desired effect. Perhaps the most awkward image was this one: http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2009/An...51-21-size.jpg at a Tango Evening in Buenos Aires. The lighting was very variable, and the fraction of the stage which was lit was also variable, so metered exposure for every shot was out. I also needed to compromise with the shutter speed and aperture, as a high shutter speed would have been needed to freeze movement, and a small aperture to provide large depth of field so that focus wasn't critical. This with my carry-round lens (18-200mm at 200 mm) and my Nikon D60 set to ISO 1600. And a large element of luck! Cheers, David |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
"David J Taylor" writes:
The four-part histogram is my default review display, to make that kind of quick exposure check easier. But also, I take post-processing for granted, so I don't always bother with small adjustments. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ My default is usually the flashing highlights, which suits the type of photos I take and helps avoid the worse issues with the JPEGs I use (i.e. clipped highlights). I have the Nikon "Active D-Lighting" set to auto, which expands the dynamic range when needed. I do sometimes use the histogram - perhaps for more awkward subjects, although I may then switch to manual exposure to get the desired effect. I'd use P a lot more if there were a quick easy way to switch to M and pre-set the exposure to the value P was picking. As it is, I find it's better to just run manual, and have to chase the light by hand; otherwise I find myself stuck with a fairly slow changeover at what might be a key moment. I did a lot of work in the 70s with a Leica M3 and B&W film. No meter built in at all, I used a separate meter (not a hot-shoe meter). So I got used to monitoring the lighting around the room and adjusting as I walked, and pre-metering and memorizing the main areas of the room (to avoid the delay of re-metering later). But I also got used to fairly approximate exposure; this wasn't too hard to print in B&W, and it isn't too hard to post-process today. Perhaps the most awkward image was this one: http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2009/An...51-21-size.jpg at a Tango Evening in Buenos Aires. The lighting was very variable, and the fraction of the stage which was lit was also variable, so metered exposure for every shot was out. I also needed to compromise with the shutter speed and aperture, as a high shutter speed would have been needed to freeze movement, and a small aperture to provide large depth of field so that focus wasn't critical. This with my carry-round lens (18-200mm at 200 mm) and my Nikon D60 set to ISO 1600. And a large element of luck! Stage lighting when the design is dynamic/variable can get really tough. And Tango can require fairly high shutter speeds for some things. Sounds like a fair amount of trouble! That shot looks rather under-exposed to me (easily in the range that's recoverable for serious use, though, not close to lost). -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
In article , David J Taylor
wrote: snip Perhaps the most awkward image was this one: http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2009/An...51-21-size.jpg at a Tango Evening in Buenos Aires. The lighting was very variable, and the fraction of the stage which was lit was also variable, so metered exposure for every shot was out. I also needed to compromise with the shutter speed and aperture, as a high shutter speed would have been needed to freeze movement, and a small aperture to provide large depth of field so that focus wasn't critical. This with my carry-round lens (18-200mm at 200 mm) and my Nikon D60 set to ISO 1600. And a large element of luck! Luck or not. What an excellent picture! 1/30 sec f 6.3 at 200mm. Where did you get such steady hands? -- To de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$ PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810 E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248 |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
"Elliott Roper" wrote in message
... [] Luck or not. What an excellent picture! 1/30 sec f 6.3 at 200mm. Where did you get such steady hands? Thanks, Elliott! It was either a glass of wine, or (more likely) Nikon's excellent image stabilisation (VR) in the 18-200 mm lens! I may well have had my elbows resting on the dinner table, which will have helped, of course. Cheers, David |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message ... [] I'd use P a lot more if there were a quick easy way to switch to M and pre-set the exposure to the value P was picking. As it is, I find it's better to just run manual, and have to chase the light by hand; otherwise I find myself stuck with a fairly slow changeover at what might be a key moment. That would be neat - an excellent suggestion. I did a lot of work in the 70s with a Leica M3 and B&W film. No meter built in at all, I used a separate meter (not a hot-shoe meter). So I got used to monitoring the lighting around the room and adjusting as I walked, and pre-metering and memorizing the main areas of the room (to avoid the delay of re-metering later). But I also got used to fairly approximate exposure; this wasn't too hard to print in B&W, and it isn't too hard to post-process today. I also did a lot of B&W in the late '60s and early '70s. Perhaps more outside than in, but mostly with built-in metering which worked well. I much preferred TV cameras, where you saw the exposure immediately with no post-processing! Stage lighting when the design is dynamic/variable can get really tough. And Tango can require fairly high shutter speeds for some things. Sounds like a fair amount of trouble! One of the occasions where you are grateful for digital, and the low cost of taking 100 photos to get a few good ones.... That shot looks rather under-exposed to me (easily in the range that's recoverable for serious use, though, not close to lost). -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ May be your monitor adjustment, but it looks OK to me as it captures the atmosphere of the event. I'm viewing on a PC, not a Mac (whether than makes any difference these days I doubt). Cheers, David |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
"David J Taylor" writes:
"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message ... [] I'd use P a lot more if there were a quick easy way to switch to M and pre-set the exposure to the value P was picking. As it is, I find it's better to just run manual, and have to chase the light by hand; otherwise I find myself stuck with a fairly slow changeover at what might be a key moment. That would be neat - an excellent suggestion. I think I've been told that some Pentax models have something like that feature. (Maybe "exposure from the last shot" would be even more precisely what I want.) I did a lot of work in the 70s with a Leica M3 and B&W film. No meter built in at all, I used a separate meter (not a hot-shoe meter). So I got used to monitoring the lighting around the room and adjusting as I walked, and pre-metering and memorizing the main areas of the room (to avoid the delay of re-metering later). But I also got used to fairly approximate exposure; this wasn't too hard to print in B&W, and it isn't too hard to post-process today. I also did a lot of B&W in the late '60s and early '70s. Perhaps more outside than in, but mostly with built-in metering which worked well. I much preferred TV cameras, where you saw the exposure immediately with no post-processing! Did some of that. But more with 16mm motion picture cameras, which had the worst of both worlds -- needed precise exposure (since the final projected image was GREATLY enlarged), couldn't immediately tell if you had it. I guess I was the person in the film program in college most interested in production issues, so I ended up getting assigned to the directors doing technically challenging projects that had a chance of succeeding. I.e. I got to work with all the good people. It was great fun. Stage lighting when the design is dynamic/variable can get really tough. And Tango can require fairly high shutter speeds for some things. Sounds like a fair amount of trouble! One of the occasions where you are grateful for digital, and the low cost of taking 100 photos to get a few good ones.... Very much so. I now happily do things that have about a 10% chance of succeeding; I just do them a few dozen times, and take the time to check I really got the shot. That shot looks rather under-exposed to me (easily in the range that's recoverable for serious use, though, not close to lost). May be your monitor adjustment, but it looks OK to me as it captures the atmosphere of the event. I'm viewing on a PC, not a Mac (whether than makes any difference these days I doubt). I was at work, so not the calibrated monitor; could well be. Or could be different preferences on how to show it; plenty of room for people to have different preferences. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Sony's design for the 24mp APS
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
"David J Taylor" writes: The four-part histogram is my default review display, to make that kind of quick exposure check easier. But also, I take post-processing for granted, so I don't always bother with small adjustments. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ My default is usually the flashing highlights, which suits the type of photos I take and helps avoid the worse issues with the JPEGs I use (i.e. clipped highlights). I have the Nikon "Active D-Lighting" set to auto, which expands the dynamic range when needed. I do sometimes use the histogram - perhaps for more awkward subjects, although I may then switch to manual exposure to get the desired effect. I'd use P a lot more if there were a quick easy way to switch to M and pre-set the exposure to the value P was picking. As it is, I find it's better to just run manual, and have to chase the light by hand; otherwise I find myself stuck with a fairly slow changeover at what might be a key moment. Some DSLRs (e.g. at least some Sony Alphas) drop into manual while preserving whichever of aperture or shutter was last deliberately set in a previous mode. -- Chris Malcolm |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sony's design for the 24mp APS | Rich[_6_] | Digital Photography | 1 | December 14th 11 06:27 AM |
Told you Sony's 24mp sensor was noisy | Rich[_6_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 10 | October 29th 11 08:26 PM |
Told you Sony's 24mp sensor was noisy | Chris Malcolm[_2_] | Digital Photography | 2 | October 29th 11 03:07 PM |
Told you Sony's 24mp sensor was noisy | Bowser | Digital Photography | 1 | October 28th 11 11:32 PM |
12mp vs 24mp - so what? | missfocus | Digital Photography | 80 | September 21st 08 07:49 PM |