Photographers' Union Thread

[Mofo]

Do you recommend a good site to help calibrate my computer monitor? as far as the blueish cast I kind of made it look that way? I don't know why?

there's software for that, I use spyder pro and it works greate, don't know if you could download it since you need a...object to put over your montior that does the calibration

 

[ntalwar]

Well I shelled out $50 for the Raynox 250 macro adapter - a great value for the price. I didn't realize I'd have to get only a few inches away though . I still need to figure out what lens to put it on for the best results - might get a real macro lens later if I do more macro.

This flower is really dying.

 

[jets]

I don't know if anyone else reads Mark Rebilas blog, but it is great if you're interested in shooting sports.

Mark J Rebilas Blog

 

[Liesje]

I use the Raynox 150 and LOVE it!! When I used it on my non-DSLR, it helped sharpen the pics. Also great for bugs!

 

[ntalwar]

I use the Raynox 150 and LOVE it!! When I used it on my non-DSLR, it helped sharpen the pics. Also great for bugs!

Nice sharp photos there. I should have gotten the 150 - the 250 is too much magnification.
What focal length do you use with it - does it matter?

 

[ntalwar]

Anyone else do band photography? I do once in a while - it can be a pain to lug the big camera around a club though (and dodging people's beers). A few from last night - a popular local 80s cover band.

 

[Liesje]

Nice sharp photos there. I should have gotten the 150 - the 250 is too much magnification.
What focal length do you use with it - does it matter?

On my old camera which was a point-and-shoot, I got vignetting if the angle was too wide. On that camera I used 2-4x zoom (on 2x I still had to crop out the corners). I'm not sure what that converts to.

On my current cameras, I've used it a few times with the 55-200mm at the lower end of that range. I find though that the DOF is sometimes too shallow. Also I'd need a tripod to improve some of the shots I tried, the handshake blurs it. I haven't really experimented with it on the DSLR. We are *just* getting buds and bugs so there's been nothing to shoot. Now that I have the kit lens for the D90 (18-105 VR) I'd like to try that.

Here's some examples of what I mean, not that great:

(lol you can see the dust in the curio)

 

[Liesje]

Note to self: do NOT post process on old, cheap computer! I did a bunch of dog show and downtown Chicago pics on Phil's old laptop b/c that's all I have at the moment (mine is being repaired). I was eager to see them and get them up. Well now I'm at work on my new iMac and they look terrible, white balance is all over the place.

 

[major_panic]

I do a bit of band photography ntalwar - but I've only just started and am not very good at it yet.

 

[Jive Turkey]

Hey guys, great idea for a thread. i was thinking of maybe starting one myself, but wasnt sure what kind of response it would get. As most of you, I've been shooting for as long as I can remember. I went back to school and recently graduated and have been working in the Toronto photo industry for the past year. I shoot mostly portraiture/narritive style. I'm a little hesitant about posting a link to my site though. I kind of like my anonymity on the internet, but if anyone is interested, shoot me over a PM and I'll send you a link. My site is in a bit of disarray at the moment though. My style has changed recently and theres not enough new style work to give my site a complete overhaul. I didnt get a chance to look through all the pages in this thread, but what are some of the photographers that people are interested in here? Would people be interested in posting links to various photographers and possibly even discussing specific photos? I'll get some links when I get the chance (working right now), but I recommend people check out the work of Gregory Crewdson, Philip Lorca DiCorcia, Jeff Wall, Kurt Iswarienko, Nathaniel Goldberg, Eugenio Recuenco, Corbijn (I really didnt need to post that one), Danny Clinch, Chris Buck....Theres a mixture of fine art and commercial there. There are tonnes more that I'll post another time. I'll have links next time too. Anyway, who are you guys inspired by?

 

[ntalwar]

I do a bit of band photography ntalwar - but I've only just started and am not very good at it yet.

Good shots there. Looks like you had decent lighting and were able to wander freely up to the stage. I find those to be the biggest obstacles. Too often the lighting is red, green, yellow, etc. I sometimes color correct for yellow lighting found in a couple of the ones above (didn't color-correct those). Or there are too many people in the club, and you can't wander freely.

I didnt get a chance to look through all the pages in this thread, but what are some of the photographers that people are interested in here? Would people be interested in posting links to various photographers and possibly even discussing specific photos? I'll get some links when I get the chance (working right now), but I recommend people check out the work of Gregory Crewdson, Philip Lorca DiCorcia, Jeff Wall, Kurt Iswarienko, Nathaniel Goldberg, Eugenio Recuenco, Corbijn (I really didnt need to post that one), Danny Clinch, Chris Buck....Theres a mixture of fine art and commercial there. There are tonnes more that I'll post another time. I'll have links next time too. Anyway, who are you guys inspired by?

Thanks for those names - I'll look into their photos. I do photography only as a hobby and have a lot to learn. I probably can't name more than five photographers. I am inspired more by great photographs I see online. For landscapes, I like Patrick Smith's work (mainly of the Northern California coast). And also Juza (juzaphoto.com) - he tested the huge Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 lens recently.

 

[Liesje]

^ I'm the same, for me it's something I do rather than study. I love Flickr. I have my favorite Flickr people but most of them are just "regular" people, not renowned artists. Also, photographing dogs (for shows) you have to know a lot about the dogs, more about conformation and what angle to use, how to set the dog up, etc than about photography.

ntalwar, I found a more pics where I used the Raynox adapter on my 55-200mm lens.

 

[Jive Turkey]

For landscapes, I like Patrick Smith's work (mainly of the Northern California coast). And also Juza (juzaphoto.com) - he tested the huge Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 lens recently.

Landscapes have never really been my thing, but a great landscape shot can be like a punch right in the gut. I checked out Patrick Smiths work and it is really beautiful. Are you familiar with Ed Burtynsky (www.edwardburtynsky.com) ? His 'Manufactured Landscapes' work and film are fairly well known. Like the title suggests, he shoots man made/industrial landscapes. Its an interesting and refreshing take on the subject.

And of course if you're more into the tradition landscape photography, theres always the original master, Ansel Adams. I've never seen anyone come close to the quality of tones this guy would achieve in his prints. I went to a showing of his work at the Art Gallery of Ontario a couple years back and they are even more impressive in real life

 

[ntalwar]

ntalwar, I found a more pics where I used the Raynox adapter on my 55-200mm lens.

Thanks - I have to try mine out more, but the DOF is shallower on the 250. I want to try f/22 but that may be tough in outdoor, windy conditions if I visit some gardens. I'll play around with settings for it.

And of course if you're more into the tradition landscape photography, theres always the original master, Ansel Adams. I've never seen anyone come close to the quality of tones this guy would achieve in his prints. I went to a showing of his work at the Art Gallery of Ontario a couple years back and they are even more impressive in real life

Yeah - I have a couple of posters and have seen his stuff on exhibit in DC (a long time ago). PM me your link - I'd like to see what you shoot.

 

[Liesje]

Am I the only one that's never very interested in black and white landscapes? Not that they aren't great photos, I would just love to see color!

 

[Jive Turkey]

Am I the only one that's never very interested in black and white landscapes? Not that they aren't great photos, I would just love to see color!

I think theyre both great in their own right. You get a much different reaction when looking at a black and white image than you do with a colour image though. Even down to how your brain processes and interprets the information. What makes the b&w shots interesting would be ruined by adding colour and vice versa. Theres a really good presentation I found online on the subject. I'll see if i can find it again if anyone is intersted in watching it. Its a 50 minute long powerpoint, so the production isnt the greatest, but the information is really good

 

[ntalwar]

Thought this was cool - the White House photostream on flickr released today.
Photos from the 5D Mark II (same camera as mine ).

Flickr: The Official White House Photostream's Photostream

 

[Liesje]

I love black and white, just not wide angle landscapes. I think for my eyes there is just too much texture when the entire landscape is black and white.

 

[Diemen]

I love black and white, just not wide angle landscapes. I think for my eyes there is just too much texture when the entire landscape is black and white.

That's why you have to print big to enjoy it all.

 

[Jive Turkey]

That's why you have to print big to enjoy it all.

woooooord

 

[Jive Turkey]

Since we were somewhat talking about b&w photography, I think i'll post some shots from a few of the really great b&w shooters.

Irving Penn:

Richard Avedon:

Sally Mann:

Those are some of the more well known shots from each photographer, but they are well known for a reason. If you're unfamiliar with any of them, you should check out more or their work.

DISCLAIMER

I also want to post some images from Joel-Peter Witkin. I should include a disclaimer though. If you dont know his work, Witkin is known for his Still Life shots in which he uses cadavers (whole or part). The images can sometimes be disturbing, but they shouldnt be written off as just shock value photos (though if you think that, its just as valid as someone who says the contrary). They are beautifully done and strangely compelling. I'll put them under spoiler tags so if you dont want to look at them, you arent forced to see them. Please dont look if you think you are only going to be offended. Thats not the reason I'm posting them. I'd really like to hear what people think about them. Are they strangely beautiful? Do you like them? Hate them? Do they exploit the subjects? Art or shock value?

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[RedRocksU2]

Do any of you know who Eugene Lally is?

I had the pleasure of talking to him for about an hour today at work.

 

[Justin24]

Avedons work is great. Reminds me of Diane Arbus work the last photos are eerie a little disturbing but done very well. I love B&W it give photos a different perspective from color photography.

 

[Jive Turkey]

Here are a few photos from the photographers in that first list I posted. Gregory Crewdson is probably my favourite photographer (along side Corbijn). I've never had the opportunity to see any of his work in person though, which is unfortunate. His prints are massive! like, 10 feet wide. From what Ive been told ,standing in front of them and having the photo completely fill your field of view is a unique experience. One day....

I'll spoiler tag the ones with artistic nudity because I dont know what everyone's work policies are. Its far pornographic though

Gregory Crewdson:

artistic nude

Spoiler

 

[Jive Turkey]

Philip Lorca Dicorcia is another personal favourite. I really enjoy his stolen portraits work. the concept was that he would set up strobes for a certain spot on the sidewalk in times square. He set up a camera focused on that location. All of this was out of the the sight of passersby. When someone would step into that section of pavement, the shutter would be released and he would have a portrait of an unsuspecting pedestrian. awesome concept and execution. The lighting is gorgeous and the expressions of the people have a sort of disconnectedness to them. If you didnt know any better, you'd swear some of these were set up

 

[bonocomet]

I really like the works by both of those last two photographers

 

[ntalwar]

Philip Lorca Dicorcia is another personal favourite. I really enjoy his stolen portraits work.

Apparently, he was sued for using those photos for commercial gain by one of the subjects, but the statute of limitations had expired. Those photos are great though.

On a slightly different topic, I've seen people rave about Capture One software for RAW processing. What does it do that other tools (like PS) don't?

 

[Jive Turkey]

Apparently, he was sued for using those photos for commercial gain by one of the subjects, but the statute of limitations had expired. Those photos are great though.

On a slightly different topic, I've seen people rave about Capture One software for RAW processing. What does it do that other tools (like PS) don't?

If I'm not mistaken, it was the Rabbi who sued, claiming an infringement on his religious rights. I think it had something to do with it being against his religion to have an image of himself used in a commercial sense (DiCorcia sell his prints, as most artists do). That case, and any others that may have come about, were ultimately dismissed. Because they were on public property, their images are fair game to be used as long as they arent falsely portrayed or it isnt directly for commercial purposes (eg. you cant take a picture of a random person, then use that picture in a newspaper article on mental insanity. Also, you cant use that persons image in an advertisement). the loop hole for DiCorcia was that, as fine art, the original goal of the photo was art and not profit.

Capture One has its advantages and disadvantages. For a lot of the more specific adjustments (anything involving masking, comping images, filters etc) photoshop is much easier and gives you the benefit of being able to go back and turn off layers you dont want. However, for tonal adjustments, curves, exposure correction and especially upsizing files, Capture One is far better than photoshop. I'm not sure the specifics are far as the program code is concerned, but the algorithms Capture One uses to resize are far superior to Photoshop's. It treats colour and luminosity differently, so when you upsize, its similar to upsizing a vector graphic rather than as remapping a series of pixels. You'll find that you can push the files much further. Also, because its not treating the images as pixels, when making colour adjustments you'll end up with smoother transitions and less banding. Capture One also gives you the benefit of being able to shoot tethered to a laptop and then have your adjustments applied in real time. I dont think anyone would ever use only Capture One though. Its a way to get your images as far as possible with minimum destruction to the file before moving it into photoshop.

 

[Justin24]

Some images from last weeks photo shoot.

 

[Justin24]