The Official Photography Thread - Vol. 3

[COLOR=#red]From the Dwight Howard Welcome Rally Yesterday. Absolutely no post processing done, this is straight from my camera...[/COLOR]

1000


1000
 
[COLOR=#red]Pictures from my school Texas A&M. I have buyers for my photos on canvas already. Setting up a Smugmug account to facilitate my sales. My school has a very well-heeled Alumni base that supports its own...and they LOVE anything Aggie related. These photos come straight from my camera, absolutely no post-processing. HDR is an option directly in my camera. I will be presenting one of the canvases to the family of George H.W. Bush who is the founder of The Bush School of Government at A&M. The building in the background is The George Bush Presidential Library on campus.[/COLOR]


1000


1000


[COLOR=#red]President Bush (The first Bush) was credited with helping to end the Cold War. This sculpture show horses galloping over a replica of The Berlin Wall after it was torn down. [/COLOR]

1000
 
Last edited:
[COLOR=#red]Thanks for the compliments guys. Nothing like having your camera pay for itself. A full frame is in my future.[/COLOR]
 
Any DC area heads want to meet up for shooting at some point? I'm gonna try to take shots of the monument and memorials
 
Was wondering, what do you guys think of picking up a Canon 70-200 f4 non-IS? It's fairly inexpensive, especially on my local CL, going around $450-$550. But I feel like even though it's a great lens with a great price, it'll hold me back, as in that IS is nice when shooting lowlight as well as the f2.8. Which would be better (if I had the money) the f4 with IS, or f2.8 non-IS? I'd probably use these for shoots and sports (I've done sports indoor at f4 non IS with the super cheap 75-300 USM III, and it was horrible.) What are your opinions. Thanks guys!
 
Sports and no IS? I'm no expert, but I wouldn't think you'd get pictures you'd be happy with (However, I could be dead wrong).

If you have local areas where you can just rent a lens, you should try that out before pulling the trigger.
 
Sports and no IS? I'm no expert, but I wouldn't think you'd get pictures you'd be happy with (However, I could be dead wrong).

If you have local areas where you can just rent a lens, you should try that out before pulling the trigger.
It was horrible, since I used it inside (indoor basketball court). It was just for experience and it was just bad. And yeah, I'll probably do that.
 
Was wondering, what do you guys think of picking up a Canon 70-200 f4 non-IS? It's fairly inexpensive, especially on my local CL, going around $450-$550. But I feel like even though it's a great lens with a great price, it'll hold me back, as in that IS is nice when shooting lowlight as well as the f2.8. Which would be better (if I had the money) the f4 with IS, or f2.8 non-IS? I'd probably use these for shoots and sports (I've done sports indoor at f4 non IS with the super cheap 75-300 USM III, and it was horrible.) What are your opinions. Thanks guys!

Check these videos out. They helped me a lot.

Outdoor shooting (SPORTS)



Indoor shooting (Sports)
 
IS is good if you have trouble keeping still at the longer focal end, but a faster shutter speed is more import than IS for moving subjects. So indoors with a faster shutter speed would require more light, that's where the 2.8 is going to help. Then again if your camera can handle a high ISOs you can swing it at f4 and bump up ISO on either camera
 
Indoor shots just won't cut it unless the whole damn thing is lit like some NBA courts. I know those guys using those super telephoto all shoot f/4 and such but your average gym in say high school is hardly lit the same.

astronout......sick photos. Right up my ally as far as color and lighting. I swear I need to just shoot at certain times of the day rather then trying to get shots with your average light. I shot some stuff this weekend and everything came out doo-doo.
 
What's up fellows. I've been a follower of this thread, on the low, for a minute. Recently, I started a street style blog. I shoot with a D5100, 35mm f/1.8 and a wide angle, but I'm planning on moving on to a D8000. I'm a Nikon guy, as it is the camera my dad uses, lol. The 5100 is cool and all, but I'm not getting the "pop" that I want in my pics. At first, I didn't want to edit my photos, but now, after looking at other blogs and photos, I think I need to. So, I plan to shoot in RAW and edit with either Aperture or Lightroom. So, that's my question, which software is preferable? All I want to do is basic editing to similar pics that you see in my blog already.

http://www.gothamsurveyor.com/

Feel free to critique the pics. Mind you, prior to 2 months ago, I never used a camera in my life. Had no idea what aperture, shutter speed or ISO were. Some say I have a decent eye, but I hope to improve. Also, none of the pics are edited in any way, not even cropped. Any advice, ideas or critique is much appreciated. Some of the pics in here make me feel so inept, it's not even funny. You guys are pretty damn good.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Editing definitely can help your pictures. When I started out I prided myself on capturing everything in camera with no PP but grew out of that and realized there's no reason not to use the tools at your disposal. You camera is processing the pics to a certain extent anyways so everything has editing to some extent.

I use aperture but it seems most people use LR. I've tried LR a few times but can't get used to the workflow. You should be able to DL a trial of both to see what you prefer. LR5 definitely has some cool features that I wish apple would implement.
 
Editing definitely can help your pictures. When I started out I prided myself on capturing everything in camera with no PP but grew out of that and realized there's no reason not to use the tools at your disposal. You camera is processing the pics to a certain extent anyways so everything has editing to some extent.

I use aperture but it seems most people use LR. I've tried LR a few times but can't get used to the workflow. You should be able to DL a trial of both to see what you prefer. LR5 definitely has some cool features that I wish apple would implement.
What are the features from LR5 that you'd like to see Aperture have? Yeah, and I guess it's like dj'ing, everyone wants to be a purist and use only vinyl, just like wanting to capture everything in camera, ha. Then, you realize Serato, or whatever you use, is a time and back saver.
 
Last edited:
[COLOR=#red]I've done a lot of research and have spoken to some professional photogs I have met and it seems to be a matter of preference regarding less in camera and more post processing and vice versa.

Whatever method suits you the most isn't as important as the end result. Now of there will be some pictures that are going to require extensive processing, but still./COLOR]
 
Last edited:
What are the features from LR5 that you'd like to see Aperture have? Yeah, and I guess it's like dj'ing, everyone wants to be a purist and use only vinyl, just like wanting to capture everything in camera, ha. Then, you realize Serato, or whatever you use, is a time and back saver.

they have selective vignetting where you can put a circle around your subject and darken everything else. also the clone/stamp tool can be pretty useful.
 
What are the features from LR5 that you'd like to see Aperture have? Yeah, and I guess it's like dj'ing, everyone wants to be a purist and use only vinyl, just like wanting to capture everything in camera, ha. Then, you realize Serato, or whatever you use, is a time and back saver.

they have selective vignetting where you can put a circle around your subject and darken everything else. also the clone/stamp tool can be pretty useful.
Ah, ok, thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom