Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 »
 1 
 on: Today at 07:15:26 AM 
Started by Slobodan Blagojevic - Last post by PeterAit
Funny! I would add a 9th: The price makes your jaw hit the floor.

 2 
 on: Today at 07:10:57 AM 
Started by IcelandAurora - Last post by MarkL
I've used a Gitzo 1325 for years on beaches and in seawater with no issue. The Gitzo leg locks are annoying but a total strip down for a run under a tap takes seconds. Are the new ones somehow different?

 3 
 on: Today at 07:03:58 AM 
Started by bjanes - Last post by LesPalenik
Quote
My other “secret”  weapon plug-in is Vertus Fluid Mask

Do you use both Vertus Fluid mask and Remask on one image? And if so, what is your workflow?


 4 
 on: Today at 06:59:37 AM 
Started by fotostudio.nl - Last post by StephaneB
Be aware that the dyes in the filters of colorimeters degrade with time.  You might find that your Eye-One isn't as accurate as it used to be.  Also, the Eye-One doesn't have a wide enough colour space to calibrate/profile accurately wide-gamut monitors.  You might want to think about replacing it at some point. 

I have an Eye One Pro Rev. A I bought in 2004. This week-end, I started to explore ArgyllCMS to create printer profiles. This has showed me that my old Eye One is working fine. With it and ArgyllCMS I can produce profiles that are marginally better then an Epson one (Premium Luster) and visibly better than an Ilford one (Fiber Gold Silk), especially for B&W printing. In both cases, shadow separation is better with my profile. I also successfully profile Hahnemühle Baryta Fine Art, again marginally better than the profile from Hahnemühle.

So, after 10 years, I see no reason to replace it. I recently acquired an i1Display Pro 2 for display calibration and profiling, though. The provided software is a real let down, including for the quality of the profiles, but with DispcalGUI the result is fantastic.

I am returning a Datacolor SpyderStudio that I wanted to test against my new and old X-Rite units. For screen profiling, there is not much between the 2 solutions. Both work much better with DispCalGUI, giving results I cannot distinguish. For print, the Datacolor solution is workable, but very tedious in the measurement phase. You have to be extra careful and measure spot by spot to get enough precision. ArgyllCMS with my old Eye One Pro is more convenient and produces better profiles.

 5 
 on: Today at 06:56:12 AM 
Started by LanceX - Last post by LanceX
Sony Carl Zeiss Planar  T* 85mm f/1.4 ZA *MINT* SAL85F14Z  - USD 1240
Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm F/1.8 ZA *LikeNew* SAL135F18Z - USD 1410

Boxed. Full set.

Price Includes PayPal tax and EMS shipping!

my ebay account ( http://www.ebay.com/usr/lance_a_lot )
portfolio ( http://500px.com/Lance )

I will add some pictures soon... And list it on ebay =)

 6 
 on: Today at 06:33:14 AM 
Started by BartvanderWolf - Last post by NicolasRobidoux
Wish:
Users: Instead of just giving thumbs up or thumbs down, could you describe what you like or don't like, and specify which of the three main options you use, and possibly the context of your use?

 7 
 on: Today at 06:27:57 AM 
Started by ramblinlamb - Last post by torger
To make MF worth it you need to adapt a shooting style that make use of its strengths and minimises the impact of its weaknesses. Modern wildlife photography often make use of the progress in 35mm AF, speed and reach. Many photos you see published would be much more difficult to capture with MF gear.

However there are alternate styles. Animals that sit relatively still and allows the photographer to be close opens up for MF.

In the film days I guess MF was used more, but then 35mm was more primitive too. If you compare yesterday's wildlife shots with today's you can see that standards have been raised. To make wildlife with MF today one need to adapt a style that does not rely on AF and speed.

 8 
 on: Today at 06:05:07 AM 
Started by IcelandAurora - Last post by Paulowen
Hi Tony
I've been lucky enough to visit a few times! In 2013 I visited in March/April and conditions at Jokulsarlon were exceptional. I visited same time of the year this year and conditions were the complete opposite with next to no ice on the beach and the lagoon was full of slushy stuff and few bergs  Huh
Prefer your tripod snake if I'm honest - but my tripod has flip-lock legs which would make them difficult to apply?
I used your magic cloth technique this year too - awesome!!

 9 
 on: Today at 05:47:43 AM 
Started by Isaac - Last post by Dave (Isle of Skye)
Street photography is the most difficult genre of all. By comparison, landscape is an afternoon tea party.

I hope you are still kidding me Russ and even though I do realise how this discussion could so easily have us all disappearing up our own arses, or reverting to child like arguments such as my dad is better than your dad etc, but I do have to say I find that statement a little OTT. I mean come on, more difficult in what way? More difficult than flying to the moon and taking a shot of the earth rising above the eclipsing shadow of the moon? – a landscape shot if ever I saw one and probably the most famous single image of all time.

I am no good at street photography I will happily admit that, I tried it and I just don’t get it, it didn’t move me emotionally, but this doesn’t mean I think it is more difficult than landscape, just that I am rubbish at it. But from my experience of the genre, I can conclude that street is a submissive type of photography, you just wait or wander around aimlessly in the hope that something happens or comes towards you and that you notice it in time to capture it, a bit like fishing. Landscape on the other hand is the complete opposite, you have to go out and hunt down your quarry, it is an active type of photography where the results are totally up to you and your abilities, your eye and your skill. Good landscapes shots do not walk into your frame, you have to actively seek them out and know what you are doing (usually in a blur of heart pumping activity) when you find something meaningful to extract from everything else that surrounds it, because it is you and only you that makes and designs the picture and everything you choose to include or exclude within it. Street on the other hand is happening right now and right outside your front door, and every image you take is based on happenstance, in fact you don’t even really know what you have until you scroll through your images later.

But let us argue no further Russ, HCB was as good as it gets in his genre and will probably never be rivalled and so was AA in his, each one head and shoulders above everyone else in their field and I think we would both be very happy indeed if we were even half as good.  Wink

Dave

 10 
 on: Today at 05:35:40 AM 
Started by rgs - Last post by Walt Roycraft
Seems like a great place to hike and photograph, I can only be envious. My favourites are #'s 1 and 2: a good general view with added mystery from the fog; and an intimate study of texture on the bark/tree.

#3 for me does not work, the light is poor and washed out in the sky.

Agree'd

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 »
Ad
Ad
Ad