Support NeoGAF

[theepicoftyler]

Haven't bought Photoshop, yet. Mainly been using Lightroom the last few months to process photos.

My biggest challenge with the Tokina lens is the flare. I like starbursts, but the flare can get annoying. I'm learning to work with it, and try to use it to add to the composition.

Edit: Maybe part of it comes in how I dial the sliders? I avoid clipping in this histogram, but not too adept at identifying CA.

I like vivid photos, and hard to achieve a nice balance between vivid and real life; the humidity and haze negate a lot of the eye popping opportunities.

There is a specific tool in Lightroom for removing CA. It's pretty easy to use, and it would really help the image quality of those shots.

It shouldn't effect the vividness of your shot. It will just remove the fringing at the edges of objects.

 

[snaffles]

I've mostly just been taking photos lately to keep my family up to date with where I am at, but still get some I like here and there.
Cats
Kittens
Pig
UnionStationTopeka
Tallgrassbeer

 

[JORMBO]

nudity/*nsfw*: https://1x.com/photo/1144407/latest:user:259638

 

[Übermatik]

Or just let Lightroom take care of it. >_>

I thought the photos were very good, and given that a lot of them were purple and green anyway, I didn't even notice the CA until you mentioned it. I think they look fantastic!

Sure, lens correction utility is very useful!
The composition is nice, like I said! I wasn't being overly critical, just thought I'd mention the CA as it was, unfortunately, the first thing I noticed.

Haven't bought Photoshop, yet. Mainly been using Lightroom the last few months to process photos.

My biggest challenge with the Tokina lens is the flare. I like starbursts, but the flare can get annoying. I'm learning to work with it, and try to use it to add to the composition.

Edit: Maybe part of it comes in how I dial the sliders? I avoid clipping in this histogram, but not too adept at identifying CA.

I like vivid photos, and hard to achieve a nice balance between vivid and real life; the humidity and haze negate a lot of the eye popping opportunities.

No problem man! Like other's have mentioned, the anti CA measure in Lightroom are your friend. Check it out! Good work, though, love the way you handled the bursts/flare in those shots!

 

[Type_Raver]

Hi all, just discovered this thread.

Im predominantly a landscape photographer but have shot events including concerts, weddings portaits.

Now ive been shooting film in the past year exclusively but mostly did digital till then.

Many other film shooters here?

 

[theepicoftyler]

Hi all, just discovered this thread.

Im predominantly a landscape photographer but have shot events including concerts, weddings portaits.

Now ive been shooting film in the past year exclusively but mostly did digital till then.

Many other film shooters here?

I shoot on film sparingly. I have a tendency to buy a new (old) film camera or new types of flim when I feel the itch to buy a new fancy camera. It helps scratch that itch.

I am currently looking into dipping my toe in the water of medium format with a Mamiya RB67 if I can find one for the right price.

 

[Fëanorian]

I have really shaky hands, but I was happy with the results.

summer heat by abrahamsahuayo, on Flickr
Bee about town by abrahamsahuayo, on Flickr

 

[PanicFreak]

I went on a camping trip this weekend.

Here is a panorama of the Lower Cataract Lake in Colorado. It was a really short hike to get to this overlook but given that we had so many babies with us, it was the right lenght.

Green Mountain Camping Trip by Ben Krupka, on Flickr

Green Mountain Camping Trip by Ben Krupka, on Flickr

(I could use some pointers here. I'm trying to get a photo of the night sky as well but it didn't turn out. I still like the photo though.)
Green Mountain Camping Trip by Ben Krupka, on Flickr

Green Mountain Camping Trip by Ben Krupka, on Flickr

Wildflowers
Green Mountain Camping Trip by Ben Krupka, on Flickr

Sunset on the last day. I had to hand hold the camera so I didn't get a chance to take the photo I wanted. I didn't saturate the red AT ALL. It was truly amazing.
Green Mountain Camping Trip by Ben Krupka, on Flickr

This is my favorite photo from the weekend:
Green Mountain Camping Trip by Ben Krupka, on Flickr

 

[brerwolfe]

Opinions and all that, but I think the first photo of the lake is the best in the set. All in all, very pretty photos.

 

[PanicFreak]

Opinions and all that, but I think the first photo of the lake is the best in the set. All in all, very pretty photos.

Thanks! I like that one too. I like that last one a little more because I've been there a number of times and I've never seen the lighting like that. It was pretty special for me.

 

[thespot84]

Green Mountain Camping Trip by Ben Krupka, on Flickr

Wonderful leading lines on that last one. Very nice.

We were just a stones throw away on Greys and Torres near Georgetown yesterday. Unfortunately only had my crappy moto x camera with me. Was a gorgeous weekend all around. It's a busy mountain but I'm still amazed how habituated the mountain goats are to people. They'd mosy along the path a few yards away without giving two shits.

IMG_20160717_143317092.jpg by adamwolach, on Flickr
IMG_20160717_135441949_HDR.jpg by adamwolach, on Flickr
IMG_20160717_120844367_HDR.jpg by adamwolach, on Flickr
IMG_20160717_115859067.jpg by adamwolach, on Flickr
IMG_20160717_115607585.jpg by adamwolach, on Flickr
IMG_20160717_113142201_HDR-Pano.jpg by adamwolach, on Flickr
IMG_20160717_084256244_HDR.jpg by adamwolach, on Flickr
IMG_20160717_084233288_HDR.jpg by adamwolach, on Flickr

Bonus crappy phone concert photo from the denver botanic gardens.

IMG_20160715_195054880.jpg by adamwolach, on Flickr

 

[PanicFreak]

Those Gray's Peak photos are awesome. How close were you to the goats?

 

[thespot84]

Those Gray's Peak photos are awesome. How close were you to the goats?

Probably about 10 yards from the family at the summit. The older one on the way down, I'd guess about 10 feet, which was a blessing since the phone's camera won't go beyond 15mm lol.

edit: here's a short vid of a noisy baby goat and some hiking nuns leaving the summit https://goo.gl/photos/oeNuvZ4VLusajt7t9

 

[Type_Raver]

I shoot on film sparingly. I have a tendency to buy a new (old) film camera or new types of flim when I feel the itch to buy a new fancy camera. It helps scratch that itch.

I am currently looking into dipping my toe in the water of medium format with a Mamiya RB67 if I can find one for the right price.

RB67 is a beautiful medium format camera and would be the camera to get if I was to start over. I currently use a Hasselblad 500c for my medium format photography.

 

[the better twin]

I have really shaky hands, but I was happy with the results.

summer heat by abrahamsahuayo, on Flickr
Bee about town by abrahamsahuayo, on Flickr

The colours in these are fantastic.

 

[Pachimari]

I took a few new photos, I'll just take them off my 500px account. Also, is there any reason to adding the 500px watermark? I just do it out of habbit, but I am thinking of dropping that, and just add my own copyright and name on them photos.

 

[jokkir]

2016-07-19 03.56.28 1 by Carl Sim, on Flickr

2016-07-19 03.56.29 1 by Carl Sim, on Flickr

Quick thing I took at work

 

[Johnny Cage In The Shower]

Hi GAF, a total noob to photography..

I cannot narrow down to the compact digital camera I want for the budget I have for the life of me,

So far I really like these two, but both lack features I really want ...

http://tinyw.in/j43q

http://tinyw.in/2EPS

Tha Canon lacks 4K video among other neat features the Panasonic LUMIX has.

Panasonic LUMIX is almost the perfect camera for my needs, accept it lacks the tilt/swivel LCD for selfies, that seems like a deal breaker to me.

So can anyone recommend me the perfect camera between these two? Is there a Canon model very similar to the G7X that can also do 4K video at 30fps, with decent stabilization, and has cool post focus and burst features?

I may just settle with the G7X and sacrifice the 4K, but I don't know, really at ends here. And I need a camera ASAP for my vacation nest week.

My budget is 550 to 750 US dollars .

Thanks s much for the recommendations in advance.

 

[thespot84]

Hi GAF, a total noob to photography..

I cannot narrow down to the compact digital camera I want for the budget I have for the life of me,

So far I really like these two, but both lack features I really want ...

http://tinyw.in/j43q

http://tinyw.in/2EPS

Tha Canon lacks 4K video among other neat features the Panasonic LUMIX has.

Panasonic LUMIX is almost the perfect camera for my needs, accept it lacks the tilt/swivel LCD for selfies, that seems like a deal breaker to me.

So can anyone recommend me the perfect camera between these two? Is there a Canon model very similar to the G7X that can also do 4K video at 30fps, with decent stabilization, and has cool post focus and burst features?

I may just settle with the G7X and sacrifice the 4K, but I don't know, really at ends here. And I need a camera ASAP for my vacation nest week.

My budget is 550 to 750 US dollars .

Thanks s much for the recommendations in advance.

Just FYI, there's a camera equipment thread: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1165019

Could you list your needs, maybe in order of priority? Sounds like video and selfies are up there, but what about image quality and the like?

I'm always wary of these kind of cameras that have a 'X' zoom. The number there (eg 10x) is just the highest zoom divided by the lowest. Where it gets sticky, however, is that the higher the ratio, the more optical distortion/warp you get in your images. Some post software like lightroom can adjust for this, but the convenience of not changing lenses comes with a price.

Another issue, especially with video, might be autofocus. For a long time DSLRs were king, because they could use phase detection (something to do with the actual mirror/polarity) which provides for much faster autofocus, and just recently higher end mirrorless cameras started getting phase detection. Neither of these compacts have phase detection (only contrast), which might make heavy action shooting and video tougher. However, the lumix as tracking, while the canon does not (http://cameradecision.com/compare/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-ZS100-vs-Canon-PowerShot-G7-X) which might help make up for that.

I take selfies with my old DSLR, frankly you just get used to how to hold it, I get most right on the first try. I would take the higher zoom for a starter camera even though there's more distortion since you can't ever change the lens. Overall I'd lean towards the lumix.

 

[the better twin]

2016-07-19 03.56.28 1 by Carl Sim, on Flickr

2016-07-19 03.56.29 1 by Carl Sim, on Flickr

Quick thing I took at work

How did you do the background out of interest?

 

[Johnny Cage In The Shower]

Just FYI, there's a camera equipment thread: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1165019

Could you list your needs, maybe in order of priority? Sounds like video and selfies are up there, but what about image quality and the like?

I'm always wary of these kind of cameras that have a 'X' zoom. The number there (eg 10x) is just the highest zoom divided by the lowest. Where it gets sticky, however, is that the higher the ratio, the more optical distortion/warp you get in your images. Some post software like lightroom can adjust for this, but the convenience of not changing lenses comes with a price.

Another issue, especially with video, might be autofocus. For a long time DSLRs were king, because they could use phase detection (something to do with the actual mirror/polarity) which provides for much faster autofocus, and just recently higher end mirrorless cameras started getting phase detection. Neither of these compacts have phase detection (only contrast), which might make heavy action shooting and video tougher. However, the lumix as tracking, while the canon does not (http://cameradecision.com/compare/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-ZS100-vs-Canon-PowerShot-G7-X) which might help make up for that.

I take selfies with my old DSLR, frankly you just get used to how to hold it, I get most right on the first try. I would take the higher zoom for a starter camera even though there's more distortion since you can't ever change the lens. Overall I'd lean towards the lumix.

Hey, Thank you so much for all the helpful information. Yeah I like the Lumix too, it is chalk full of features.

 

[JadedWriter]

DSC_2965 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2952 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2884 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2807 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2785 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2974 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2739 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2707 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
More Here:

 

[thespot84]

DSC_2965 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2952 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2884 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2807 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2785 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2974 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2739 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2707 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
More Here:

I dig the framing on the softball shots.

Do you strip the exif out during your post processing? Nothing shows up on flickr, I was hoping to peak at your settings and hopefully learn something

 

[JadedWriter]

I dig the framing on the softball shots.

Do you strip the exif out during your post processing? Nothing shows up on flickr, I was hoping to peak at your settings and hopefully learn something

Thank you. I usually don't strip my EXIF info, this is the first time that's actually happened. What setting gets rid of it when you export out of Lightroom?

 

[Gobias]

Some quick shots around Columbus earlier today:

P1010266b by Jacob Gregor, on Flickr

P1010290 by Jacob Gregor, on Flickr

P1010258 by Jacob Gregor, on Flickr

P1010261 by Jacob Gregor, on Flickr

P1010267 by Jacob Gregor, on Flickr

P1010274 by Jacob Gregor, on Flickr

P1010261a by Jacob Gregor, on Flickr

 

[thespot84]

Thank you. I usually don't strip my EXIF info, this is the first time that's actually happened. What setting gets rid of it when you export out of Lightroom?

It's the metadata setting I think:

 

[Pachimari]

How come some of you can take photographies of single people? Do you ask them beforehand if you can take a photograph? I ask because I also want to take people shots, but it's illegal to take photos of a single person in public here in Scandinavia.

 

[vern]

How come some of you can take photographies of single people? Do you ask them beforehand if you can take a photograph? I ask because I also want to take people shots, but it's illegal to take photos of a single person in public here in Scandinavia.

It depends. If it's a candid shot I don't ask and if I wanna take their posed portrait I ask. I don't advocate breaking laws but what is the worst that could happen to you if you shot a photo on the street of a single person? Cops would tell you to delete?

 

[Pachimari]

It depends. If it's a candid shot I don't ask and if I wanna take their posed portrait I ask. I don't advocate breaking laws but what is the worst that could happen to you if you shot a photo on the street of a single person? Cops would tell you to delete?

Hmmm, I just feel really uncomfortable zooming in on one person without them knowing. That said, I just picked up the 300mm lens so I can zoom in on my subjects.

 

[snaffles]

How come some of you can take photographies of single people? Do you ask them beforehand if you can take a photograph? I ask because I also want to take people shots, but it's illegal to take photos of a single person in public here in Scandinavia.

Where exactly are you? After some quick googling it appears it is legal to take photos of anyone in a public space in all Scandinavian countries. Unless I am missing something.

 

[Pachimari]

Where exactly are you? After some quick googling it appears it is legal to take photos of anyone in a public space in all Scandinavian countries. Unless I am missing something.

Yes that is legal. But you cannot take photos of individual persons, unless that has changed in recent years. I'm in Denmark.

 

[snaffles]

Yes that is legal. But you cannot take photos of individual persons, unless that has changed in recent years. I'm in Denmark.

That is interesting. It appears that it is the publishing part that is illegal, you are free to take the photos just not to share them without the persons consent.

 

[Pachimari]

That is interesting. It appears that it is the publishing part that is illegal, you are free to take the photos just not to share them without the persons consent.

Oh, that is good to know. So I'll just keep them on my hard drive and work on them there without sharing it on my 500px.

 

[JadedWriter]

It's the metadata setting I think:

That's exactly how I have it. Does having the no person info thing selected remove the exif data?

 

[vern]

Hmmm, I just feel really uncomfortable zooming in on one person without them knowing. That said, I just picked up the 300mm lens so I can zoom in on my subjects.

I would feel super uncomfortable zooming in and sniping someone too. I always shoot with 24-70 or 35 mm in the street and almost never zoom (not that 70 is much reach anyway)... I prefer to use my feet and get in close, I feel it makes the photos more interesting, intimate, and alive.

There are a few places in China (Beijing sanlitun, Shanghai xintiandi to name a couple) where photographers like to hide in corners with their huge telephoto lenses and shoot the fashionable ladies, always feels creeper-ish to me. There is also a place in sanlitun where they get in kind of a circle formation and shoot in all directions because it's big and open and lots of hot chicks pass by. You can sit up in the Starbucks and look down on these weird fellas getting their "street fashion" shots. Different strokes... I guess.

 

[JadedWriter]

Hmmm, I just feel really uncomfortable zooming in on one person without them knowing. That said, I just picked up the 300mm lens so I can zoom in on my subjects.

You really learn to stop caring. Granted I've been using my 70-200 a lot more for street stuff lately, but still at the same time I'm a black dude walking around with a big ass bazooka lens and I'm still pretty noticeable. You really just learn to stop giving a shit the more you do it.
DSC_6826 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
18-35
DSC_2660 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
70-200
DSC_2669 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
70-200 as well

 

[Pachimari]

Yeah I guess I'll go sit at a bench today and try zoom with the lens, because I won't be comfortable getting in close on people. Not right now when starting out.

I'm just afraid that when they then look at me taking the shot of them, that they'll be pissed off and it'll create attention toward me in public.

 

[JadedWriter]

Yeah I guess I'll go sit at a bench today and try zoom with the lens, because I won't be comfortable getting in close on people. Not right now when starting out.

I'm just afraid that when they then look at me taking the shot of them, that they'll be pissed off and it'll create attention toward me in public.

Yeah it takes some time to get used to that. I don't think I ever really cared, I just do my best to use some judgement. And if somebody does have a bad reaction don't let it deter you.

 

[Lender]

Still fun to use the Zeiss 135mm as a light macro lens. Those details, sharpness and colors. So goooooood.


Sweet nectar by Bram Van Der Stichelen, on Flickr

 

[vern]

Have been super busy... took this sunset the other night before I took off to Shanghai for a day, no time there to even pull out a camera. Then headed to Northeast China for my friend's wedding, which I wasn't the photographer but I got to stick my nose in at one point and take a couple photos, nothing special because I was kind of intruding lol... then headed to Beijing early this morning to meet with a company about my Crossing China project...they claim they are gonna help me promote my videos so that'll be cool if it works out.

Crossing China - XishuangBanna by Eric, on Flickr

Vivian's Wedding by Eric, on Flickr

 

[thespot84]

That's exactly how I have it. Does having the no person info thing selected remove the exif data?

Shouldn't, those are my defaults and it doesn't strip the exif. Hmmm

 

[JadedWriter]

Have been super busy... took this sunset the other night before I took off to Shanghai for a day, no time there to even pull out a camera. Then headed to Northeast China for my friend's wedding, which I wasn't the photographer but I got to stick my nose in at one point and take a couple photos, nothing special because I was kind of intruding lol... then headed to Beijing early this morning to meet with a company about my Crossing China project...they claim they are gonna help me promote my videos so that'll be cool if it works out.

Crossing China - XishuangBanna by Eric, on Flickr

This one is great, good luck getting your videos promoted.

Shouldn't, those are my defaults and it doesn't strip the exif. Hmmm

I don't see the exif data on anybody's pictures actually.

 

[Lender]

One more from just now. Once again with the Zeiss. MF is still hard, but I've got to say it's also very challenging and a lot of fun to do. Plus the satisfaction of nailing the shot is also great.


Friends for life by Bram Van Der Stichelen, on Flickr

 

[thespot84]

This one is great, good luck getting your videos promoted.

I don't see the exif data on anybody's pictures actually.

You're right, mine aren't showing up anymore either. truly weird.

I went into trending for random pics, some have exif (https://flic.kr/p/rpTutG) some don't.

Are you using the photostream sync plugin in lightroom, or exporting to jpeg and uploading manually?

edit: we're not crazy, the API for exif data is broken, has been for at least a few weeks: https://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157666693360914/#reply72157671238401656

edit 2: i also noticed that old flickr links in last years thread are breaking a lot, the links are correct but the images won't load anymore. Happened to me and a bunch of other gaffers best I can tell, bunch on this page: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1074200&page=6

 

[JadedWriter]

I had another session with the last model and actually fucking tried this time...
DSC_3119 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_3104 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_3093 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_3064 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_3060 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_3042 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
More Here:

 

[brerwolfe]

I see you used your Donald Trump filter in the first two..

I think they'd be better photos if you reduced the orange saturation a bit in those first two. She looks like she escaped from Willy Wonka's factory!

 

[JadedWriter]

I see you used your Donald Trump filter in the first two..

I think they'd be better photos if you reduced the orange saturation a bit in those first two. She looks like she escaped from Willy Wonka's factory!

Lol good point. I do like the effect more in the further away shot. I'll probably tweak it later at some point. In actually like the balance of it in the second and third picture.

 

[Pachimari]

I took a few new photos, I'll just take them off my 500px account. Also, is there any reason to adding the 500px watermark? I just do it out of habbit, but I am thinking of dropping that, and just add my own copyright and name on them photos.

Can I get feedback on my photos? What looks good, and what could be tweaked?

 

[JadedWriter]

I guess they look better now...
DSC_3118-2 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_3086-2 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr

 

[Astral/H3X]

Yeah, your photos in general tend to look a bit saturated to me, but that's purely a subjective standpoint. But those two stuck out haha!

For your wide angle shot, I think they work better if there's something to grab some attention in the foreground, ie; her hand that's closer to the lens. Maybe have her hold something?

For the one in the leaves, I think "in the tree" sort of shots are a really good excuse to have a bit of foreground action. A few leaves creeping into the frame closer to the lens (not enough to significantly obscure the subject, just enough to be noticed) would give it a more "natural" look, IMO.