Analogy

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 274 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Analogy
    Participant

    Sensor dust. It’s not on the sensor itself, it’s on the low-pass/infrared filter in front of the sensor.

    The reason it only shows up at the more closed apertures is because the light from the lens to the sensor isn’t parallel. Take the lens off the camera (don’t forget to put a body cap on your camera to keep dust out =D) and look through it with your eye at about the same distance as the sensor would be. You should see a big circle of light. That circle of light is what an individual pixel on the sensor is gathering light from. One piece of dust in that circle, even fairly close to the sensor, isn’t going to block that entire circle of light, so at larger apertures dust won’t affect the picture much (remember with the lens off the camera the aperture will be wide open).

    However, at smaller apertures that circle gets smaller, so a piece of dust is covering up more of that circle and affecting the picture more.

    I’ve got a boatload of dust on my sensor, but I do all my shooting at f/8 and larger so I never see it. Macro photographers who stop down a ton for depth of field tend to need to worry more about dust.

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9192
    Analogy
    Participant

    Well I can’t see a guy armed with a huge tele lens aiming it at high school cheerleaders coming across as un-creepy, so I try to avoid it. =D

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9185
    Analogy
    Participant

    I remember in the Booze theme the point and shoot snapshot of a couple of asian lesbians was WAY up there in votes, ahead of a lot of much better photos. Till it got deleted. =D

    EDIT: AND…IT’S…GREEN…

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9183
    Analogy
    Participant

    My prediction is that some hot cheerleader or fan in the stands is going to get more votes than most of the shots of actual sports. People vote for boobies. But you can exploit that by posting a pic of a hot cheerleader I guess. I mostly shoot high school sports though, so no go for me. =(

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9176
    Analogy
    Participant

    Oh, that’s pretty nice. No more farkbacks necessary!

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9174
    Analogy
    Participant

    So when is it going green?

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9171
    Analogy
    Participant

    Okay, I got an actual good softball shot today, but since the copyright terms are working again I’m gonna save it for the thread. But rest assured it kicks ass.

    Analogy
    Participant

    Yeah, I have a license from the people I shoot for to reproduce my work, mostly for the purposes of my portfolio and demo reel.

    Analogy
    Participant

    Sweeet, I was worried about not being able to participate in this one since my sports shots are technically for hire so I can’t give the copyright away.

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9160
    Analogy
    Participant

    Heh, I was trying to get three different sports. Plus, I thought the lead runner’s face in the pic looked kinda weird. Oh well.

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9158
    Analogy
    Participant

    Success! Whether or not I post these depends on whether Fark.com’s copyright terms are fixed by then, so just in case I’ll let you guys see them here. Click for larger.

    I can’t post these under Fark’s current rules because I shot these for hire so the copyright’s not mine to give.



    Not as happy with the third one as I am with the other two, it’s a tossup between that one and this, or I might try and shoot something else tomorrow if I have time.

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9157
    Analogy
    Participant

    I’m shooting a sports highlight package today for the TV station I work at, I’ll bring my camera and tele lens along and see if I can’t get something.

    in reply to: Will you send me some food? #9466
    Analogy
    Participant

    pardon? isn’t it the smaller the aperture the greater the depth of field? and the higher the ISO the greater the light gathering?

    Meh, yes that’s what I meant. I think I was thinking something like “Open the aperture for more background separation” or something like that and “depth of field” slipped in there somehow.

    but if you’re shooting RAW, 100 lets you dig a lot deeper into the shadows for detail.

    when i first got into B/W photography i was taught to shoot tri-x at 250 then under develop slightly to get shadow detail w/o getting too much noticeable grain. is this similar? i really don’t understand why letting in less light would produce more detail. with film the actual media (the film coating) is different for different ISOs. or is there something in the software that produces the same results.[/quote]

    Shooting at ISO 100 means you’re letting in more light.

    You could get away with pull-processing (i.e. shooting 400 ISO film at 250) with film because it’s amazingly tolerant of highlights, but it’s lacking in shadow detail so you’d pull process it to get those shadows back. With digital it’s the opposite, highlights clip a lot faster than film but you’ve got easily a good couple stops of detail in the shadows, especially at a low-noise ISO setting like 100. A lot of times if I’ve got a highlight-heavy scene I’ll intentionally underexpose a couple stops to preserve the highlights and bring the mids and shadows back in post.

    I shoot with glasses too. I tried getting one of those eyepiece extenders to help but I didn’t like it, made the viewfinder look too small and added a little bit of barrel distortion to it too. Now I just put up with it.

    What I do to avoid smudgies on the LCD is put one of those plastic protecting sheets over it.

    “Rear button focusing” is custom function 4 on the 30D. I’ve honestly never had a problem with accidentally taking a shot while holding the shutter down halfway, there’s a definite “click” in the button that requires positive pressure to go further. When I have it set to the high speed drive mode I know I have trouble taking just one shot (I leave it in single shot mostly anyway, even for sports). I know when I tried my friend’s 5D the button felt very mushy and I could definitely see someone taking shots accidentally with that. It’s strange because the 30D and 5D are built on the same basic body design, they even take the same battery grip.

    in reply to: Will you send me some food? #9450
    Analogy
    Participant

    My split prism got a bit dodgy after a few years, so I learnt to pick the focus from the whole screen so that kinda helped me with the DSLR.

    That’s incredible to me. The amount of detail that the camera captures is way more than my eye can see in the viewfinder, so I would never trust myself to be bang on, especially if I’m shooting quickly. A video camera will enhance sharp edges in your viewfinder so you know you’re in focus when the edges pop out at you, but no such luck with film…

    Never had problems with autofocus myself… As long as I manually select the focus points. I generally leave it on center, focus using that point and recompose. If the camera is in “auto select focus points” mode I agree it is way too squirrely. I’ll use that mode for sports though because in AI Servo mode it does a good job at keeping track of which points are covering the subject. I’m also using my bigass tele lens so the subject pretty much covers all the points anyway. =D

    in reply to: 5-2-07 – Sports #9152
    Analogy
    Participant

    If your definition of a sport is “You can watch it on ESPN” then yes. =D

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 274 total)