Official Photography Thread: Vol. ICan'tFindTheLastOne
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by ebayologist,
- Start date
- 468
- 12
Sup_
Thats an ill pic of your daughter John.
Only if it wasn't blurry. But you are getting better.
Peace.
realizethetruth.net [email protected]
Thats an ill pic of your daughter John.
Only if it wasn't blurry. But you are getting better.
Peace.
realizethetruth.net [email protected]
- 2
- 10
man i want to do an HDR with my cam.
can i just change the white balance instead of the exposure?
can i just change the white balance instead of the exposure?
teammaximal
T R A N S F O R M E R S
- 1,290
- 10
I need to like impregnate a woman or adopt a child so I can take pictures of it. Other than whole caring for it and it costing lots of time and money, seems way good... Seriously, though they're like the ideal subject.
- 2,009
- 108
Word I'd literally take a million pictures of my kids. My parents barely had a hundred 
April 23 1848
Rebecca died of typhoid.
EVERYONE IN YOUR PARTY HAS DIED. MANY WAGONS FAIL TO MAKE IT ALL THE WAY TO OREGON. DO YOU WANT TO WRITE YOUR EPITAPH?
Rebecca died of typhoid.
EVERYONE IN YOUR PARTY HAS DIED. MANY WAGONS FAIL TO MAKE IT ALL THE WAY TO OREGON. DO YOU WANT TO WRITE YOUR EPITAPH?
- 1,086
- 10
- 231
- 10
Haven't taken a lot of pictures in a while.
- 446
- 10
thanks Jimmy. I was on the bed and in a weird position so i had a hard time keeping my hand steady.
yeah, kids are the best subject. they're so innocent and you can get the best candid shots.
by the way, make sure to read my sig...
yeah, kids are the best subject. they're so innocent and you can get the best candid shots.
by the way, make sure to read my sig...
ebay Auctions To Come
- 298
- 36
^^^ is your friend a hypebeast? haha.
AY BAY BAY
- 761
- 13
thank's kd an ebay. yeah i'm a noob, i'm still firguring things out. so i just take the same picture with atleast 2 different exposures then merge to HDR in ps?
teamdecepticon
T R A N S F O R M E R S
2 people using this screen name.sole lovely/mjbetch/a filipino
TEAM MAC
- 298
- 36
^^^ download photomatix.
And make sure you have a tripod.
Or you could take 1 raw image and change the exposure, I think.
And make sure you have a tripod.
Or you could take 1 raw image and change the exposure, I think.
AY BAY BAY
- 468
- 12
Sup_
John you probably busted out one of these poses huh.
I was kinda bored so I HDRed your pic Solelovely
realizethetruth.net [email protected]
John you probably busted out one of these poses huh.
I was kinda bored so I HDRed your pic Solelovely
- 3,317
- 27
finnns2003
He's havin heaven on earth, will his wings still fit him?
- 761
- 13
thanks j2o!
teamdecepticon
T R A N S F O R M E R S
2 people using this screen name.sole lovely/mjbetch/a filipino
TEAM MAC
- 48
- 10
HDR is overdone xeleventy billion. There are so many techniques out there to get more dynamic range without the "hey look at me, I'm an HDR photo" look. One of those is good 'ol proper exposure with selective dodge & burn.
Since this is the photo thread...
www.pbase.com/aablog
Since this is the photo thread...
- 446
- 10
- 55
- 10
Quote:
HDR is overdone xeleventy billion.
____________________20-FLAT____________________
- 4,527
- 17
^^ canon 24-70?
TeamS.Carolina
What's a sneaker boutique?
What's a sneaker boutique?
- 55
- 10
^ 24-70mm indeed.
____________________20-FLAT____________________
- 4,527
- 17
I'm planning on buying one myself. Its either that or the 24-105. any thoughts on why the 24-70 would be nicer, except the fact its f2.8
TeamS.Carolina
What's a sneaker boutique?
What's a sneaker boutique?
- 1,290
- 10
- 48
- 10
Really? 24-70?
I got rid of my Sigma 24-70 f2.8. It's far from being wide enough for a general lens. I ended up going with the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.0. Sure I lose 2.8 through the full range, but it goes way wider than my 24-70. I'd perfer a 17-40 and lose a stop over only being able to go down to 24mm.
my take on the arches.
www.pbase.com/aablog
I got rid of my Sigma 24-70 f2.8. It's far from being wide enough for a general lens. I ended up going with the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.0. Sure I lose 2.8 through the full range, but it goes way wider than my 24-70. I'd perfer a 17-40 and lose a stop over only being able to go down to 24mm.
my take on the arches.
- 468
- 12
Sup_
- 4,527
- 17
- 1,290
- 10
^my point was that my guess the other lense as has viturally the same aperture range maybe +/- a single f-stop so f-stops arent really an issue... probably more an issue of what you like or want to shoot than technical specs... technical specs is more of manufacture issue because I think both canon and nikon don't have exclusivity in lense manufacturing than an issue of which lense is better...
Edit: the only reason you need f2.8 is to capture single objects in motion and blur the background. and maybe macro, but that lense doesnt strike me as lense to use for macro, I would probably use the kit lense before it just guessing based on focal lenghts.. So unless you're big on sport photography maybe or something similar. I doesnt seem to me that it would matter all that much. but this coming from just a reasonably sound understanding of focal lengths not having had an experience with either lense or a canon camera for tha matter...
Edit: the only reason you need f2.8 is to capture single objects in motion and blur the background. and maybe macro, but that lense doesnt strike me as lense to use for macro, I would probably use the kit lense before it just guessing based on focal lenghts.. So unless you're big on sport photography maybe or something similar. I doesnt seem to me that it would matter all that much. but this coming from just a reasonably sound understanding of focal lengths not having had an experience with either lense or a canon camera for tha matter...
