Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Hi Tan: just got back to read about your problem. If you haven't resolved it by the time you need to go to the coast, and it helps, my AF330FTZ is yours for as long as you want it. Regards John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 3:43 PM BIG DISCOURSE SNIPPED please offer me an answer, cause I am PACKING it here! tan.
RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Thanks so much for the offer John! My client has actually postponed this shoot for now, and I have my AF360fgz back now, so all should be fine. Also, with my record, I am a bit weary of borrowing other people's equipment! lol, but thank you so much once again for the offer. How was your trip? tan. -Original Message- From: John Coyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 10 April 2004 5:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)... Hi Tan: just got back to read about your problem. If you haven't resolved it by the time you need to go to the coast, and it helps, my AF330FTZ is yours for as long as you want it. Regards John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 3:43 PM BIG DISCOURSE SNIPPED please offer me an answer, cause I am PACKING it here! tan.
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Sure ... nothing wrong with that, either. mapson wrote: just my half thimble-full ... shel I feel what Tanya is going through. I would hate to leave the *istD at home knowing I have it. BUT maybe it is possible to have 2 bodies. One for digital and a film one. Digital for those that want it. And Film to back you up and have this security blanket (just in case). You will have digi for speed and film for quality. Beest from both worlds! ;-) (*)o(*) Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Just my $0.02 (whats that in Aus?, about $0.03?) todays exchange US -- OZ USD United States Dollars 1.32776 0.753147 so US 2c = OZ 2.65c ;-) (*)o(*) Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Thanks Matt and Rob - yep, I had thought about ND filters, and believe that I may have to add some to my list of purchases in preparation for this shoot. Rob - I will most definitely be doing some practice shoots prior to going out with this one. I also have another 4 weddings prior to this fashion shoot, so will experiment a little with those too. I really need to do some more shots of my own kids though, so I may use them for a dummy run and try out the diffusion panels and reflectors etc with them... Many thanks once again, tan. -Original Message- From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 23 March 2004 10:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)... -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] One question though - I am going to have to work with my lens stopped down due to the excess light. Probably in the realm of f16. This totally sucks for portraiture as it increases depth of field. Any suggestions how to fix this? If you put one (or more like a couple) of Neutral Density filters on the front then this will cut the light entering the lens and let you open up the aperture again. This one is pretty simple to fix really. Also, if you are not using flash then you can go much faster shutter speeds which will allow you to open up too. As you say, extra focal length can help too, but if you get the ND's then you wont be hamstrung by having to position yourself so far away all the time. Actually, one more question. Someone touched on this earlier today (sorry guys can't remember who), but didn't really ask it exactly as I need to know for myself. So my question is this - how do the exposure compensation buttons on the AF360fgz and the *istD differ? Do they do the same thing or do they control different things? I am confused by how this works. Does exposure compensation reduce the flash output (if I have it set on -1.0 for eg), or does it simply increase the f-stop/shutter speed to prevent the extra light from hitting the sensor? The way I read it, in any kind of program mode, then the exp comp on the body adjusts the shutter/aperture combo, whereas the exp comp on the 360 will just adjust the flash output. IF you are in manual with the 360 on then I guess both have a cumulative effect on the flash output. tan. (who had a pretty good shoot yesterday and has restored her confidence somewhat) Glad to see you happier and more confident again. Are you gonna get much chance to practice prior to the shoot? There is so much new stuff going on here that I would try and do a complete dry run as often as possible before turning up. Good luck!
Re[2]: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] One question though - I am going to have to work with my lens stopped down due to the excess light. Probably in the realm of f16. This totally sucks for portraiture as it increases depth of field. Any suggestions how to fix this? If you put one (or more like a couple) of Neutral Density filters on the front then this will cut the light entering the lens and let you open up the aperture again. This one is pretty simple to fix really. won't that screw up the AF? mishka
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Hello Tanya, #7 - I'm not sure if you are totally understanding the high speed synch issue. P-TTL or TTL for that matter don't rely on camera modes (AV, TV, P, M), they rely on the amount of light coming into the camera. So you can set the camera manually if you choose and let the flash fire away. Last question - As to the usage between camera and flash (AF360FGZ), set the camera as if you were NOT using a flash, so if you were shooting manually, set shutter speed and f stop, or in one of the automatic modes, set either the shutter speed or f stop. On the flash, when the lower synch slider is all the way to the right (HS), you can push the S button and rotate the dial to set the amount of flash you desire compared to the ambient light. So, if you want 1 stop less flash than ambient, set the flash to -1. From then on the flash will respond with 1 stop less light than the ambient reading in the camera. Basically the flash output is lowered or raised based on the compensation setting on the flash. HTH, Bruce Tuesday, March 23, 2004, 4:36:25 AM, you wrote: snip TMP 7. Gonna put the wind up CR Kennedy and make sure that I have both my TMP AF360fgz AND my FA 28-105mm pz back in time for the shoot. (Spoke to them TMP today and TMP they said they should be fixed by tomorrow, so I should receive them by TMP this coming Monday, all going well!). I will avoid flash as much as I can, TMP but TMP if necessary due to shadows and squinting etc, I will try and make use TMP of the high speed sync on the AF 360fgz. BTW, it totally sucks that you can TMP only TMP use the high speed sync in p-ttl mode. I would LOVE it to be available TMP when shooting manually. TMP Actually, one more question. Someone touched on this earlier today (sorry TMP guys can't remember who), but didn't really ask it exactly as I need to TMP know for myself. So my question is this - how do the exposure compensation TMP buttons on the AF360fgz and the *istD differ? Do they do the same thing or TMP do they control different things? I am confused by how this works. Does TMP exposure compensation reduce the flash output (if I have it set on -1.0 for TMP eg), or does it simply increase the f-stop/shutter speed to prevent the TMP extra light from hitting the sensor? TMP tan. (who had a pretty good shoot yesterday and has restored her confidence TMP somewhat)
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Tanya, forgot to mention that along with the flash itself, the camera's flash setting needs to be set to W HS - wireless and high speed. This is done by repeatedly pressing the flash button until the two symbols show up. -- Best regards, Bruce Tuesday, March 23, 2004, 7:39:21 AM, you wrote: BD Last question - As to the usage between camera and flash (AF360FGZ), set the camera as BD if you were NOT using a flash, so if you were shooting manually, set BD shutter speed and f stop, or in one of the automatic modes, set either BD the shutter speed or f stop. On the flash, when the lower synch slider is BD all the way to the right (HS), you can push the S button and rotate BD the dial to set the amount of flash you desire compared to the ambient BD light. So, if you want 1 stop less flash than ambient, set the flash BD to -1. From then on the flash will respond with 1 stop less light BD than the ambient reading in the camera. Basically the flash output is BD lowered or raised based on the compensation setting on the flash.
Re: Re[2]: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] One question though - I am going to have to work with my lens stopped down due to the excess light. Probably in the realm of f16. This totally sucks for portraiture as it increases depth of field. Any suggestions how to fix this? If you put one (or more like a couple) of Neutral Density filters on the front then this will cut the light entering the lens and let you open up the aperture again. This one is pretty simple to fix really. won't that screw up the AF? Nope. The AF can't tell the difference between a lens with an ND filter being used on a bright day and the same lens without the filter being used on a dull day.
Reduced depth of field (was: RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...)
Hi Tan Sounds like picking up a ND2 and/or an ND4 filter would be a good idea. If necessary just get the filter in the largest filter size you use and get step up rings for the other filter sizes. Also, if you already have it a polarizer filter is good for 2-3 stops, so your F-16 turns into F-5.6 or F-8. Just remember when using fill flash to compensate for the filter (more power from the flash. Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
for something this important, i think best to have a friend as a temporary assistant to take care of this chore. Herb - Original Message - From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 7:36 AM Subject: RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)... 6. Gonna shoot RAW and have my laptop nearby plugged into my hire car for quick downloads. Also gonna buy another 1gb CF card before hand. Will also set the camera to its low contrast setting.
RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
G'day Tanya. Mate. If it was me, I would go back to the film bodies. If they worked great before, they will work great again. Also, you would have more faith in the gear that you know. I am like that with my rifles. I have an old parker hale 308 Winchester that can shoot 5 shots into less than 1/4 at 200 yards. It looks like crap. I also have a new rifle that is just as accurate but feels not right. When it comes to critical shot, I always go to the old rifle. I learnt to shoot with it and it feels like part of me. I know it inside out and what it likes. Forgive me for being presumptuous, But you probably learnt with you film bodies and have faith in them. If it is a big money deal, go with what you know. Just my $0.02 worth. Hooroo. Regards, Trevor Grafton OZ -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 22 March 2004 4:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)... Ok, guys, now this is serious stuff. I have just been booked for my very first fashion shoot for the weekend of 16/17 April. This is not just any old fashion label though, it is actually for an agency. It is a kids agency, and they want me to shoot 40 kids over two days for their z-cards, portfolios and the agency website. I know that it might seem like small fry to many of you, but to me, this is absolutely huge. These guys are on the Gold Coast and this is the mecca of modelling/acting for Queensland. It is equivalent to SoBe in the US. If I do this well, not only will they use me for their future stuff, but they will hopefully recommend me to their clients, and this could mean big biccies. Not only that, but I will be making around AUD$1200 profit from these two days work, so my rates are improving, and that will come in extremely handy with GFM only a few weeks away. I am not sure how much I have mentioned this to you all before, but fashion is my aspiration. I used to model myself, and my dream is to one day shoot for the large fashion houses and agencies and to be invited to attend the likes of New York and Paris fashion week. (Ssssh, don't tell anyone, cause I know it sounds like I have tickets on myself if I say that too often). This is why I offer make up artistry, and costume design etc with my shoots as it keeps my skills up and keeps me up to speed with the latest trends etc. During my trip to the US, I will also be spending a few days with a good friend who is a very well known fashion photographer in NYC and who can pretty much single handedly take the credit for me becoming so passionate about photography in the first place. When I first purchased my very first SLR back in 2000, he saw what he calls potential genius in my (then VERY bad) stuff, and I used to send my unprocessed rolls of film to him and he would hand process, and hand print and send them back to me (for free!), telling me honestly if something was total crap, or if it was potentially good. Anyways, I digress... The reason for this post is to ask for your help. Since shooting with the *istD, I have had MAJOR problems with blown out highlights. I shot a wedding last weekend which was on the beach at 11am and almost every shot with the water in the background is totally blown out. Likewise, when using flash, I am having alot of overexposure problems too. And then, on the other hand, a blown out shot will be followed by a shot that has a blue sky and for the life of me, I can't figure out what it is I'd done differently. Now my bg concern and problem here is that I will be shooting the kids for this agency for two full days over a Saturday and a Sunday. The light will be varying alot over the time and they will all be shot on the beach! Here is a link to the type of images they will be expecting: http://www.kidzmodellingco.com.au/agent_enter.php?viewpass=Tal3nt#b1 How am I going to do this? They booked me from the images that they saw of the little girl that I shot the other week (the one with the curly red hair - http://www.tanyamayer.com/avagallery/index.html ), and also from my other images on my website. They know what I can do, and I know that they haven't booked me from word of mouth (ie somebody else saying oooh, use this girl.. and then them having way high expectations etc), it was exclusively from my previous work. But, honestly, after this last wedding which was also on the beach and with similar lighting conditions to what this shoot will be, I have really lost confidence in myself in a major way. I presented my client with just over 300 average looking proofs. Some were ok, some were downright crap. I came home with 450 shots on my CF cards, and this 450 were culled down to the 300 that I offered them. I probably deleted another 50 or so during the course of the actual days shooting. I am not TOO concerned with the strike rate (I am kinda over that now), but I am concerned about the blown out highlights
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:43:17 +1000, you wrote: Post this question, perhaps shortened to just the basics, to rec.photo.technique.people, or join z-prophoto group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/z-ProPhoto . Both places have experts in people photography who seem very good at providing usable answers. However, be aware the newsgroup has more than its share of name-calling flame wars, if you can delete past the flames there is a lot of useful information from people who do this every day for a living. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
I can't present my client with images of 40 children with underexposed faces and nicely exposed backgrounds, and likewise, I can't present them with images of blown out background but perfectly exposed faces... If anything I would go for underexposed and correctly exposed (background and foreground, not necessarily in that order). That way you can hopefully get some detail out on your computer later on. I know it's not what we want, but still heaps better than totally washed out areas. If I use an ND filter won't that underexpose the foreground objects? What about a polariser (how does a polariser go with flash use?)? Any filter on the lens will not make a lot of significant difference. Putting some filter (or diffuser) on the flash may help overexposed foreground. Come guys, dig into your deepest, darkest pits of knowledge and someone please offer me an answer, cause I am PACKING it here! I have very bad experiences with *istD and flash ;-( Mind you I am using FTZ500. So far I realised that the in-built flash gives the best results. Apparently with some fiddling the 360 works reasonably well. Maybe the new Sigma is the answer? I am afraid that it's just a matter of taking a pic, and adjusting flash power and taking another one, if necessary. This is what we had to do in a wedding (istD + 500FTZ) - I had to try to play with the compensation until we got correct exposure, then we shot some 20 photos there (groups). I'd say you may have to do the same. Once you realise what +/- EV you can set it and view on the screen. I think in our case it was around -2EV, so it was quite significant correction. tan. (*)o(*) Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Well, you've got your hands full. Here's a few thoughts to kick around. You have to do something to control the light to keep the tonal range within the dynamic range of your recoring media (digital or film). If you don't there will be no such thing as proper exposure. Two things to use to do this are a large diffusion screen/panel and reflectors. A diffusion screen is a large piece of thin white fabric or translucent plastic (a shower curtain works), stretched over a frame. The screen is paced between the sun and the subject to soften and reduce the intensity. PVC pipe is good because you won't have to glue all the connections so you can break it down for transportation. You'll need a panel that is at least 1 x 2 meters in size. The other thing you need is a reflector to open up shadows and give nice catch lights in the eyes. White and, or gold, would be good. Again, large is good: a square meter would be an appropriate size. If you're wondering how you're going to work all! this by yourself, you aren't. You will need an assistant on this shoot, for this and several other things. Exposure: If you shoot digital record in RAW mode, since this will give you the best chance of touching things up latter. Use a handheld incident meter and work in manual exposure mode. Once you get the exposure right (checking histograms and such) you only have to change settings if the light changes. Your assistant can keep tabs on the light with the meter. Reflected light readings will vary with every outfit change, and throw things off. You will also keep the backgrond looking consistent from shot to shot with manual. Between now and the shoot get in as much time as you need to get the technical issues resolved doing test shots and experimenting. Your shooting schedule will go right down the toilet if you have to solve major technical problems in real time. Somebody, besides you, will have to do kid wrangling to make sure kids are in the right outfits, look good and be ready to be shot at the right time. Kids who are waiting to be shot will have to be kept ammused and comfortable. Make sure there will be enough folks around to take care of things so that you can concentrate on shooting. Good Luck. BR
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Tan, After 6 pages of the thumbnails being unusually large (in file size) they settled down to around 2kb, so I've been able to breeze through the whole collection of thumbs looking for the rotten exposures. But nothing was as bad as you suggested, instead I simply found some of the images showed dull lighting of the subjects against bright sunny backgrounds. The problem seems to be, as others have already noted, that the flash being used is just too weak to brighten the subjects enough. The answer is simple, if you're working without an assistant and quickly you need a majorly powerful flashgun. If a Pentax isn't powerful enough then get another brand, and if no P-TTL gun is powerful enough then it'll need to be an oldfashioned onboard-auto flashgun. If you can live with fully manual power setting then there's some really powerful stuff out there. OTOH if you want to get creative with reflectors you need to hire an assistant, otherwise settle for a much slower and lower workrate as you wrangle the reflectors yourself. My own opinion in the blown highlights debate is that although it's most desirable to have ideal exposure in the area of interest, some parts of the frame that are beyond the field of interest can be let blow out to white or sink into blackness if they can't be helped. Just so long as the paying customers and their guests are in the ideal exposure zone. When printing time comes around just find the maximum value that gets a little density to the paper (say 245 or 250 on the 0-255 scale of each 8 bit channel, or whatever you like the look of) so that it still looks white without actually being the blank paper base. regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: Anthony Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tan, I'd like to see your exposure problems but with 21 thumbnail pages to preview first, and on a dial-up connection, it would take far too long. Can you nominate a few problem images? As an aside, I find that your thumbnails load very slowly, and when I delved I saw that they ranged in size from about 25kb to 50kb for 50 x 75 pixel images. That seems a tad large considering that the pug standard is 75kb for an image that is 500 pixels on its longest side. Your clients might appreciate quicker loading pages, too ;-) (snip)
RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Hi everyone, Thanks so much for advice and suggestions... Firstly to Anthony - I am so sorry to have put you through that! lol. I was about to post and say to you that the thumbnails are only 2k in size and I went to my server to realise that I had uploaded the large images into the thumbnail gallery! And also to anyone else who tried to view those pages, what a nightmare it would have been! BUT, I can confidently say that I have fixed it now and that the thumbnails are indeed 2kb in size with the large images ranging between 18kb and 50kb each...! Next to Bruce - I probably should have explained a little better. My AF360fgz is still in the repair shop since my little tripod accident a few weeks back. I have been shooting with the Sigma EF 430st and the Sigma EF 500st. Like Bill Robb, I gave up shooting TTL with the *ist D about five minutes after I received it and have been shooting using M mode (manual exposure) and just using the flash as fill. This is tough with these two Sigma flash guns as you only have the option of either full (mh), 1/16th (ml) or ttl. So half the time, if I use MH I get too much output, and the other half, if I use ML, I get too little. Yes, I did shoot high res jpegs for that particular wedding, as at this stage I only have 2gbs worth of CF cards in total. What I have been doing is switching to RAW where I think that an image needs help or if I expect it to be enlarged alot, but unfortunately, when shooting on location, quickly, at a wedding, it is very difficult for me to shoot RAW and continuously download pics to my laptop. For all of my portrait and other work I am shooting only RAW, but with weddings it just takes up too much room I have the camera set to low contrast and low saturation. Bruce you asked what my flash settings on the camera were? I am unsure of the answer to this? I didn't know that I could control the flash from my camera? Are you talking exposure compensation? Cause if that is the case, there is none as I was shooting with the flash manually rather than TTL. I hope this is making sense...lol. A few of you have suggsted that for this shoot at least, I should go back to shooting the film as I know it and the cameras better. BUT, I really want to stick at it as I am sure there are ways to get around the problems that I am having and secondly, one of the reasons I got this shoot in the first place was my ability to shoot it digitally and offer them proofs almost immediately. Also, I loathe the thought of having a $2k camera that is sitting there collecting dust, I really want this thing to earn its keep and so I must learn how to use it properly... Heaps more to come, but just gotta wade through the rest of the responses, I had a shoot this afternoon too, so working on those at the moment... brb, hooroo (love that Trevor! lol), tan.
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Hi Tanya ... I wasn't going to offer any suggestions as what I know about the istd and flash wouldn't fill a thimble, but you made a comment that I can comment upon. You said: A few of you have suggsted that for this shoot at least, I should go back to shooting the film as I know it and the cameras better. BUT, I really want to stick at it as I am sure there are ways to get around the problems that I am having and secondly, one of the reasons I got this shoot in the first place was my ability to shoot it digitally and offer them proofs almost immediately. Also, I loathe the thought of having a $2k camera that is sitting there collecting dust, I really want this thing to earn its keep and so I must learn how to use it properly... I agree that you should learn to properly use your gear, but not necessarily in this situation. This is a career making shoot for you, and the client is expecting high quality work. It just doesn't seem to be the time o be learning all the new things you'll need to know, or that have been suggested. The idea that your $2K camera is at home on the shelf collecting dust is reason enough to use unfamiliar equipment is silly. A carpenter uses many saws, choosing the one best suited to the task, and does not worry too much that his new, fancy saw is sitting in the toolbox. If you can, indeed, make the istd work for this situation, great, but, imo, if there's any doubt, or if using it will interrupt your work flow, or cause you anxiety, then leave it on the shelf. It's your call, but don't get hung up on having to use that camera and the digital format just to make a point. Now, if the client insists on digital, you better deliver digital, but find out for sure. just my half thimble-full ... shel
RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
It might be worth trying the old exposure compensation trick that people used on the MZ-S. If you are shooting in manual exposure mode anyway it may not be too tricky - just set the exposure compensation on the body to the value you want the exposure compensation applied to the flash. The exposure on the body will not change because it is in manual (duh!) but the flash output in TTL would. Worth a try anyway... If I were shooting weddings I would not even consider shooting anything other than RAW when doing digital. Some Wedding Photogs have even switched back to film because digital just doesn't have the lattitude of a negative and you have to deal with the extreme contract of fine detail on a white dress and avoiding blocking on black suits. Whatever it takes to enable you to shoot RAW, I would do it - or go back to film. Buy a flashtrax would be ideal if you cannot carry your laptop, or maybe get one (or more) of those Muvo MP3 players with a free 4Gb Microdrive inside. If you have Photoshop CS (I am sure you said you did) then try taking some images with burnt highlights and see how much it can recover. When I got CS I was amazed how much highlight info could be retrieved - much more than the Pentax Photo Lab which was better than JPG itself! Ideally you should look at lighting without using flash for these shoots - Bruce was right on the button with his advice setups based on what I understand from reading around. Unfortunately I guess you wont have an assistant available and I am sure it would take some time to try out and perfect the techniques. Might be worth telling the Agency to put the 'most important' kids at either end of the day explaining that the lighting will be better as there is only so much that can be done to minimise harsh midday sun. Failing all this then I think mapson is right that you are better to risk underexposure - there is a lot you can drag out of the shadows in digital with contrast techniques. Fingers crossed for you. Rob -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 March 2004 13:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)... Hi everyone, Thanks so much for advice and suggestions... Firstly to Anthony - I am so sorry to have put you through that! lol. I was about to post and say to you that the thumbnails are only 2k in size and I went to my server to realise that I had uploaded the large images into the thumbnail gallery! And also to anyone else who tried to view those pages, what a nightmare it would have been! BUT, I can confidently say that I have fixed it now and that the thumbnails are indeed 2kb in size with the large images ranging between 18kb and 50kb each...! Next to Bruce - I probably should have explained a little better. My AF360fgz is still in the repair shop since my little tripod accident a few weeks back. I have been shooting with the Sigma EF 430st and the Sigma EF 500st. Like Bill Robb, I gave up shooting TTL with the *ist D about five minutes after I received it and have been shooting using M mode (manual exposure) and just using the flash as fill. This is tough with these two Sigma flash guns as you only have the option of either full (mh), 1/16th (ml) or ttl. So half the time, if I use MH I get too much output, and the other half, if I use ML, I get too little. Yes, I did shoot high res jpegs for that particular wedding, as at this stage I only have 2gbs worth of CF cards in total. What I have been doing is switching to RAW where I think that an image needs help or if I expect it to be enlarged alot, but unfortunately, when shooting on location, quickly, at a wedding, it is very difficult for me to shoot RAW and continuously download pics to my laptop. For all of my portrait and other work I am shooting only RAW, but with weddings it just takes up too much room I have the camera set to low contrast and low saturation. Bruce you asked what my flash settings on the camera were? I am unsure of the answer to this? I didn't know that I could control the flash from my camera? Are you talking exposure compensation? Cause if that is the case, there is none as I was shooting with the flash manually rather than TTL. I hope this is making sense...lol. A few of you have suggsted that for this shoot at least, I should go back to shooting the film as I know it and the cameras better. BUT, I really want to stick at it as I am sure there are ways to get around the problems that I am having and secondly, one of the reasons I got this shoot in the first place was my ability to shoot it digitally and offer them proofs almost immediately. Also, I loathe the thought of having a $2k camera that is sitting there collecting dust, I really want this thing to earn its keep and so I must learn how to use it properly... Heaps more
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Hello John, Why do you say that? She is using an AF360FGZ which does have flash compensation on it. Instead of dialing it into the body, you dial it into the flash (like Nikon and others). I used to do as you described with my PZ-1p's and AF500FTZ and now do the same with the *istD and AF360FGZ. I would agree that the amount of flash being used may be too weak. Tanya, you are aware that the *istD/AF360FGZ combo can do high speed flash synch above 1/180 sec aren't you? -- Best regards, Bruce Monday, March 22, 2004, 2:23:58 AM, you wrote: JF If you are blowing out the background (or underexposing the face) then the JF problem is that the flash isn't putting out enough light. Unfortunately JF this is an area where the *ist-D is nowhere near as good as the PZ-1p. JF With the PZ-1p it's straightforward - just adjust the flash compensation JF to dial up the amount of flash output. You can't do that on the *ist-D.
RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Her FGZ is bust at the moment - so she cant do this so easily. Will using the EXP comp on the body do the same thing when in manual EXP mode on the body? This was what people suggested for the MZ-S? -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 March 2004 16:11 To: John Francis Subject: Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)... Hello John, Why do you say that? She is using an AF360FGZ which does have flash compensation on it. Instead of dialing it into the body, you dial it into the flash (like Nikon and others). I used to do as you described with my PZ-1p's and AF500FTZ and now do the same with the *istD and AF360FGZ. I would agree that the amount of flash being used may be too weak. Tanya, you are aware that the *istD/AF360FGZ combo can do high speed flash synch above 1/180 sec aren't you? -- Best regards, Bruce Monday, March 22, 2004, 2:23:58 AM, you wrote: JF If you are blowing out the background (or underexposing the face) JF then the problem is that the flash isn't putting out enough light. JF Unfortunately this is an area where the *ist-D is nowhere near as JF good as the PZ-1p. With the PZ-1p it's straightforward - just adjust JF the flash compensation to dial up the amount of flash output. You JF can't do that on the *ist-D.
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Hello Tanya, Well, that certainly changes things. The AF360FGZ is about the only flash right now that will allow high speed flash synch and adjustable compensation for the flash output. Your other flashes are going to make it slower to work with - you really need a more versatile backup - either another 360 or some other flash that gives you more control of automatic and manual settings. I'm with you on sticking to the digital solution and working around the problem. There have been some good suggestions concerning light modification (diffusers, reflectors) that should be looked into. Congrats on getting the shoot! -- Best regards, Bruce Monday, March 22, 2004, 5:22:48 AM, you wrote: TMP Hi everyone, TMP Thanks so much for advice and suggestions... Snip TMP Next to Bruce - I probably should have explained a little better. My TMP AF360fgz is still in the repair shop since my little tripod accident a few TMP weeks back. I have been shooting with the Sigma EF 430st and the Sigma EF TMP 500st. Like Bill Robb, I gave up shooting TTL with the *ist D about five TMP minutes after I received it and have been shooting using M mode (manual TMP exposure) and just using the flash as fill. This is tough with these two TMP Sigma flash guns as you only have the option of either full (mh), 1/16th TMP (ml) or ttl. So half the time, if I use MH I get too much output, and the TMP other half, if I use ML, I get too little.
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Yes it will. Works just the same way. The big trick here is that TTL readings (not P-TTL) seem to be a bit off. With my AF400T I normally dial in about -1 stop for regular flash - so the amount for fill might be greater than you would think. This would be a good time to experiment (strong suit of digital) to figure out just how much to dial in. But yes, can be done. -- Best regards, Bruce Monday, March 22, 2004, 8:13:56 AM, you wrote: RB Her FGZ is bust at the moment - so she cant do this so easily. Will RB using the EXP comp on the body do the same thing when in manual EXP mode RB on the body? This was what people suggested for the MZ-S? -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 March 2004 16:11 To: John Francis Subject: Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)... Hello John, Why do you say that? She is using an AF360FGZ which does have flash compensation on it. Instead of dialing it into the body, you dial it into the flash (like Nikon and others). I used to do as you described with my PZ-1p's and AF500FTZ and now do the same with the *istD and AF360FGZ. I would agree that the amount of flash being used may be too weak. Tanya, you are aware that the *istD/AF360FGZ combo can do high speed flash synch above 1/180 sec aren't you? -- Best regards, Bruce Monday, March 22, 2004, 2:23:58 AM, you wrote: JF If you are blowing out the background (or underexposing the face) JF then the problem is that the flash isn't putting out enough light. JF Unfortunately this is an area where the *ist-D is nowhere near as JF good as the PZ-1p. With the PZ-1p it's straightforward - just adjust JF the flash compensation to dial up the amount of flash output. You JF can't do that on the *ist-D.
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Actually, I believe the 360 is on the operating table at the moment. Different John. On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:11:04 -0800, Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello John, Why do you say that? She is using an AF360FGZ which does have flash compensation on it. Instead of dialing it into the body, you dial it into the flash (like Nikon and others). I used to do as you described with my PZ-1p's and AF500FTZ and now do the same with the *istD and AF360FGZ. I would agree that the amount of flash being used may be too weak. Tanya, you are aware that the *istD/AF360FGZ combo can do high speed flash synch above 1/180 sec aren't you? -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
I do not have a digital camera, so I can only speak in generalities. But digital to my understanding is much like slide film. Blown highlights are unrecoverable. You might try setting exposure compensation to underexpose 1/2 to 2 stops depending on the brightness of those highlights. I might just leave it set on -1/2 stop all the time on the principle that an underexposed image will be salvageable where an overexposed one would not if it were me. Since I believe you are used to negative film, this is probably the opposite of what you do without thinking. Which means working on retraining yourself a bit. -- Tanya Mayer Photography wrote: The reason for this post is to ask for your help. Since shooting with the *istD, I have had MAJOR problems with blown out highlights. I shot a wedding last weekend which was on the beach at 11am and almost every shot with the water in the background is totally blown out. Likewise, when using flash, I am having alot of overexposure problems too. And then, on the other hand, a blown out shot will be followed by a shot that has a blue sky and for the life of me, I can't figure out what it is I'd done differently. Now my bg concern and problem here is that I will be shooting the kids for this agency for two full days over a Saturday and a Sunday. The light will be varying alot over the time and they will all be shot on the beach! Here is a link to the type of images they will be expecting: -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
If there is an issue with sensors and meters picking up ambient light and affecting a shot (too dark or washed out) then using a flash in manual mode may be the easiest option. For candids where you're working with a consistent distance from the subject this can work. If you have a high-output flash unit (GN120 or greater) there's often enough reflection around the room that the flash's coverage resolves and ambient light issues and greatly reduces the possibility of errors in exposure. I know a number of wedding pros who do this -- maintain a consistent subject framing (which providess a consistent camera/flash- to-subject distance) and then they don't worry about sensors and meters. Sometimes all the technology available just turns a simple matter into a complicated one. Collin
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Tanya, no filter will help you. you need to learn to check your histogram periodically whenever lighting changes a lot and the exposure is critical. use a test shot to check the highlights right away. shooting digital, you can afford to take extra shots of this nature. for tricky exposures, you really have to shoot RAW. it gives you a lot more room to work with than JPEG. specifically, a full stop of underexposure is trivial to handle. tv said that he carries 18 CF cards with him when he goes on a shoot (that is the number i remember when i asked him sometime in the last 6 months). as for the flash problem, i think yours was underpowered for the lighting conditions, but that is a guess. Herb... - Original Message - From: Tanya Mayer Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 12:43 AM Subject: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)... The guys wore white shirts which were an absolute disaster to try and expose. The bride wore a dark pink dress (thank god!), imagine if it had been white, I would have been totally up proverbial the creek.
RE: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Hi Tan repeat this mantra histograms, histograms Seriously use your histograms often to make sure you're not clipping = highlights try to stay away or modify very contrasty lighting and = bracket -1 and -2 ev. Shoot raw for the 16 bit color as it will help = with smoother tonal transitions. Finally, rely on your instincts as, = despite your doubts, you are a good photographer.. Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
just my half thimble-full ... shel I feel what Tanya is going through. I would hate to leave the *istD at home knowing I have it. BUT maybe it is possible to have 2 bodies. One for digital and a film one. Digital for those that want it. And Film to back you up and have this security blanket (just in case). You will have digi for speed and film for quality. Beest from both worlds! ;-) (*)o(*) Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
Ok, guys, now this is serious stuff. I have just been booked for my very first fashion shoot for the weekend of 16/17 April. This is not just any old fashion label though, it is actually for an agency. It is a kids agency, and they want me to shoot 40 kids over two days for their z-cards, portfolios and the agency website. I know that it might seem like small fry to many of you, but to me, this is absolutely huge. These guys are on the Gold Coast and this is the mecca of modelling/acting for Queensland. It is equivalent to SoBe in the US. If I do this well, not only will they use me for their future stuff, but they will hopefully recommend me to their clients, and this could mean big biccies. Not only that, but I will be making around AUD$1200 profit from these two days work, so my rates are improving, and that will come in extremely handy with GFM only a few weeks away. I am not sure how much I have mentioned this to you all before, but fashion is my aspiration. I used to model myself, and my dream is to one day shoot for the large fashion houses and agencies and to be invited to attend the likes of New York and Paris fashion week. (Ssssh, don't tell anyone, cause I know it sounds like I have tickets on myself if I say that too often). This is why I offer make up artistry, and costume design etc with my shoots as it keeps my skills up and keeps me up to speed with the latest trends etc. During my trip to the US, I will also be spending a few days with a good friend who is a very well known fashion photographer in NYC and who can pretty much single handedly take the credit for me becoming so passionate about photography in the first place. When I first purchased my very first SLR back in 2000, he saw what he calls potential genius in my (then VERY bad) stuff, and I used to send my unprocessed rolls of film to him and he would hand process, and hand print and send them back to me (for free!), telling me honestly if something was total crap, or if it was potentially good. Anyways, I digress... The reason for this post is to ask for your help. Since shooting with the *istD, I have had MAJOR problems with blown out highlights. I shot a wedding last weekend which was on the beach at 11am and almost every shot with the water in the background is totally blown out. Likewise, when using flash, I am having alot of overexposure problems too. And then, on the other hand, a blown out shot will be followed by a shot that has a blue sky and for the life of me, I can't figure out what it is I'd done differently. Now my bg concern and problem here is that I will be shooting the kids for this agency for two full days over a Saturday and a Sunday. The light will be varying alot over the time and they will all be shot on the beach! Here is a link to the type of images they will be expecting: http://www.kidzmodellingco.com.au/agent_enter.php?viewpass=Tal3nt#b1 How am I going to do this? They booked me from the images that they saw of the little girl that I shot the other week (the one with the curly red hair - http://www.tanyamayer.com/avagallery/index.html ), and also from my other images on my website. They know what I can do, and I know that they haven't booked me from word of mouth (ie somebody else saying oooh, use this girl.. and then them having way high expectations etc), it was exclusively from my previous work. But, honestly, after this last wedding which was also on the beach and with similar lighting conditions to what this shoot will be, I have really lost confidence in myself in a major way. I presented my client with just over 300 average looking proofs. Some were ok, some were downright crap. I came home with 450 shots on my CF cards, and this 450 were culled down to the 300 that I offered them. I probably deleted another 50 or so during the course of the actual days shooting. I am not TOO concerned with the strike rate (I am kinda over that now), but I am concerned about the blown out highlights. The guys wore white shirts which were an absolute disaster to try and expose. The bride wore a dark pink dress (thank god!), imagine if it had been white, I would have been totally up proverbial the creek. Here is a link to the gallery so that you can see what I mean. I am probably shooting myself in the foot by showing you these, and you will all think that I am positively hopeless and a clueless rank amateur at the very best, but I guess I'll risk it in the hope that I'll learn something here... http://www.tanyamayer.com/weddinggalleriesprivate/emeleus/index.html I will be working with 40 children, over two days. This means I need to work FAST. I probably won't have more than 30 mins per child, so I just won't have time to be mucking around with checking histograms, and preview pics etc. I NEED them to work first time, every time. So, I need to know WHAT AM I DOING WRONG?!?! Why can't I get correct exposure of both the foreground (shaded) objects AND the
Re: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)...
- Original Message - From: Tanya Mayer Photography Subject: omg - i have my foot in the door (but now I am scared)... Ok, guys, now this is serious stuff. lots of serious stuff here Come guys, dig into your deepest, darkest pits of knowledge and someone please offer me an answer, cause I am PACKING it here! I don't think the istD is the best for TTL fill flash, but where I have found that it comes close to working is at ISO 400, and then bump the exposure comp down a wee bit as needed. My preference is non ttl flash for fill, but I am a dinosaur. I also think blown highlights are a part of life with digital cameras. Contrary to popular belief, the image quality from optically printed film is still better than digital in most ways. William Robb
