@ennuipoet
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
ennuipoet
ParticipantMy field trip up north was a success, I have entries that I can post with honor, though they may not stand up to everyone else who has had snow all winter. At least it’s better than the frost on a frozen TV dinner…
I would trade (almost) all of my shots this winter for some freaking warm weather!
ParticipantI tend to use my 70-200L for most of my street/performance work, by far the best lens I own and the only L glass I have. In the interim I am going to switch my EF 20-35 as a walk around lens. It is not as fast as the Sigma but I think it gives better shots and on the crop it’s close to a standard 50mm. I’ll put the Sigma back on the 20D and use it for a back up.
ParticipantAh yes..the lovely Sigma 24-70. I have the same lens. On my 40D or my A1 film camera it was wonderful, but on the 50 it was god awful. Don’t be afraid to crank the ISO’s on the 50. You should be able to get reasonably clean shots at 1600, and if you are just posting online there is no reason not to reduce the image size to the point that the noise is invisible. As I said before, good noiseware is a blessing! I use Topaz DeNoise and Noise Ninja, depending on the shot. Noise Ninja is good because it can be used standalone if you don’t have Photoshop.
Which sucks because the 24-70 is my primary walk around lens! While it doesn’t go wide on the crop it goes wide enough to work and the at 70 it’s close enough to catch faces and expression. I just downloaded the Topaz plug in and used it clean up some noisy night shots, it’s amazing!
You know, I really thought I was done lens shopping for a while, now I’m back in the market…again…why didn’t I pick a cheap hobby like knitting?
ParticipantIt’s not that the 50D is noisier than the 20D. It is the fact that the files are twice the size. So when you look at them full size you say GAH! I would bet if you reduced the photos down to 25% and ran them through Topaz DeNoise you would be much happier with them. Other than that I see some user error, too slow a shutter for hand held maybe? Since there is no EXIF data I cant say for sure. What lens were you using?
Ahh! That makes a lot of sense! I was shooting on my Sigma 24-70 DG, which doesn’t really like the 50D. It’s an old lens that someone thought was broken because they didn’t know how to use it, so I got it free when I bought my 20D (which has nothing to do with anything, but I really think it’s cool I got a $700 lens for free) The lens isn’t as crisp as I would like but I don’t have the change for the Canon 24-70L yet. Yeah, there is a lot of camera shake in them I was really shooting to slow for but I didn’t want to crank the ISO because of the noise, which is ironic because I bought the 50D because of the extended ISO.
ParticipantCan you show us some of your shots for a friendly critique?
Here’s the Flickr set
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ennuipoet/sets/72157625963032079/
I shot at high ISO and no flash. Also, I’m really not happy with the noise in the 50D, these were shot at ISO 800 and they are noisy as hell. I could shoot without worry at 800 on my 20D! I’ve got to dig around to see what’s up.
February 19, 2011 at 6:04 pm in reply to: 02-16-11 – Farktography Classic: Software Hootennany 2 #37490Participantmucho congrats to the top finishers. vibrant, wild, unique, stellar work.
i’m perplexed there weren’t more overall entries…..
I’m not, a most people are intimidated by the complexities of the software. They psyche out at the thought using the GIMP (which can be intimidating) and Photoshop is ungodly expensive (unless ye be a pirate matey!) and Photoshop Elements that ships free is kind of useless for anything other than correcting redeye. So, this was kind of a niche contest.
And don’t even get me started on what most serious photographers think of HDR 😛
February 17, 2011 at 1:10 am in reply to: 02-16-11 – Farktography Classic: Software Hootennany 2 #37455ParticipantLinguine: I bow to your Heamerness! I miss those shops!
It’s early, but the HDR’s aren’t that popular! A lot you dug into the filter kit, good for you! Lovely things in the thread. I might have done something along those lines, but I’ve been sitting on these three HDR’s for months waiting for the chance to use them.
ETA: U-Man your yellow highlighter pic is well…I found some strange moisture in my eye…must be my contacts.
Participant/obligatory ‘buy a Canon’ post.
Personally, I’m hoping my camera lasts long enough to be able to get a full-frame sensor, but…WAY out of my price range right now =
Well, since that is covered: “Buy a Pentax”…No, not really, why would anyone do that?
No seriously, the Pentax DSLR are awesome cameras, I slightly wish I’d bought one, it was lenses that made me go Canon.
ParticipantDamn, good luck, I wouldn’t touch a wedding with a ten foot telephoto.
February 13, 2011 at 7:46 pm in reply to: 02-16-11 – Farktography Classic: Software Hootennany 2 #37429Participanti’m not really in favor of allowing stacks of dramatically different scenes, because then it’s pretty much impossible to determine if someone just cut and pasted various objects from various photos vs simply stacking several photos of the same scene.
No, no, you can tell by some of the pixels and having seen quite a few in your time!
ParticipantI must admit upon handling one of these, I experienced a strong desire to own a Nikon.
ParticipantSeriously, the Liters BROUGHT IT in this thread. I definitely voted harder and heavier at the bottom of the thread than the top. A lot of folks who don’t loiter around these parts gave up stunning work. Not that all you did not not kick some serious ass, but the late entries this week were, as a rule, stunning.
ParticipantI read about that a while back, you’re mad, I tell you, mad!
But I suspect we will be seeing 800mm shots in a few months.
ParticipantDamn nice work in the thread already!
February 7, 2011 at 10:10 pm in reply to: 02-16-11 – Farktography Classic: Software Hootennany 2 #37421ParticipantYes. Several of us did shots like that last time, though usually at full opacity, not partial (but partial opacity shouldn’t be a problem).
You mean there is a way to do it at full opacity? It is one of those layer mask thingies?
Photoshopping is not my strong point.
You can stack your layers and selectively erase the top layer to let the bottom layer show through. It is the Photoshop method of creating a double exposure effect. Here is an example:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ennuipoet/4141601580/
I took four separate exposures, stacked and layer masked the layers to erase to create a multiple exposure effect of me slowly killing myself with coffee and cigarettes. -
AuthorPosts
