The Professional Photography and Photoshop Thread

[Mechwarrior]

By the way since you guys are talking about photo editing too, do you know of a good program that can change, focus, or replace a certain color? My camera is a Cannon SD400 and it has a custom color option at which I can set it to focus only on that color, or even switch a certain color with another automatically. I was wondering if you guys know of a program like that.

Here's a shot that focus mainly on Optimus prime RED

[attachmentid=37913]

To replace color, simple and fast use Recolored 1.0

It is trial, but you can still use it for 21 days, no restrictions, and it is the best one, easy to use program out there for recoloring photos.

http://www.recolored.com/

[CdnShockwave]

I'm particularly proud of this one.

[izzyfcuk]

frankly, i dont' see us moving forward..the last two pages are full of nothing but previously posted pics..

We gotta move on for this thread to take off man..if not i'll just be stuck here forever..

[drifand]

I guess those who have taken any of the tips to heart should try them out and post accordingly to other threads like the 'Strike A Pose' discussion. Once, a shooter gets comfortable with achieving what he wants and expects with his set-up, then he can proceed to having more 'fun' in PS etc. This thread can continue for those who have questions about particular problems etc...

[REMINATOR]

The one thing I have problem with my picture is that I get one side of the images very sharp and clear while the other is blurry. How do I avoid that?

I usually use the Macro mode and no flash except light lamp/bulb.

e.g. if I photographed the VF-1S frontal, rear, or sideway, then the pic is okay. But if I tried to do at 45 degree, then the nosecone portion would be come clear, but the rear section as the leg or tailfin would become blurr. How can I make the pic look sharp/ clear throughout?

Edited November 13, 2006 by REMINATOR

[Xyberz]

I saw earlier in this thread people who where trying to take panoramic shots. Well here's a cool link that will show you how to make a panoramic tripod head for $10.

http://www.worth1000.com/tutorial.asp?sid=161123&print=1

Here's a sample image that that person took. It was stitched together from 9 images and had an no errors bigger than a single pixel. It'll help you out if you have the right equipment in the first place so you don't have to painstakingly do it all yourself.

Edited November 16, 2006 by Xyberz

[Matt Random]

The one thing I have problem with my picture is that I get one side of the images very sharp and clear while the other is blurry. How do I avoid that?

I usually use the Macro mode and no flash except light lamp/bulb.

e.g. if I photographed the VF-1S frontal, rear, or sideway, then the pic is okay. But if I tried to do at 45 degree, then the nosecone portion would be come clear, but the rear section as the leg or tailfin would become blurr. How can I make the pic look sharp/ clear throughout?

Macro mode has a very shallow depth of field since the aperture is open very wide. Macro mode is intended for mostly flat objects such as coins, individual flowers and insects. You are getting good results on the front, side or back shots since the entire object lies within the depth of field.

You can try adjusting the shutter until you get a sharp focus throughout if your camera offers this. You may also try the portrait mode if your camera has this since the portrait mode often has a wide aperture setting in order to blur the background.

[Matt Random]

Is anyone who is using a studio setup also using a flash? I'd like to get a little more subtle fill light into my setup and to soften any shadows a bit. I'm thinking of using a Lumiquest 80/20 setup (product page). The 80% that is dedicated to ceiling/wall bounce should help to soften shadows and the 20% that is used as fill light should be subtle. Any thoughts on this?

[anime52k8]

:edit: *is jackass*

Edited May 3, 2009 by anime52k8

[Dante74]

Check here.

[anime52k8]

how is it that when I do a search I can't find crap no matter how long I look, but someone else finds exactly what I had been looking for in about 2 minutes.

[Vegas]

same here, ive been looking for this thread forever

some shots i took when im not shooting my toys

Edited May 3, 2009 by Vegas

[honkhet]

those shots remind me of a Venice themed hotel in Vegas...

Edited May 3, 2009 by honkhet

[kanedaestes]

Wow didn't know we had this thread ever, talking about Ghosts of Threads Past.

[MacrossMan]

those shots remind me of a Venice themed hotel in Vegas...

I was thinking the same thing. Venitian Vegas???

[MacrossMan]

Wow didn't know we had this thread ever, talking about Ghosts of Threads Past.

Yeah, here I am thinking a thread should be started about this and it already exists. Lord willing and the creeks don't rise, I hope to receive some bonus money in August. I should be all caught up on my collecting by then and hope to purchase a new cam then.

What do you guys think of the Nikon D40? I've had goodluck on ebay and I know a lot of black market stuff ends up there. What do you all think about purchasing a camera from there? Seems like that's where I'm going to get the best deal.

[eugimon]

The problem with buying a used body is you don't know how many times it was used. The internal mechanisms only have so many uses that they're rated for or just if it was abused in general.

the D40 is a good transition body. It's pretty easy to use and the UI is almost universally praised. However, the one big thing about it is that it doesn't have an auto focus motor in the body. This will limit the lens selection unless you don't mind manually focusing. Not a big deal if you're buying newer lenses only but there are some bargains to be had on slightly older lenses that don't have internal motors.

[MacrossMan]

The problem with buying a used body is you don't know how many times it was used. The internal mechanisms only have so many uses that they're rated for or just if it was abused in general.

the D40 is a good transition body. It's pretty easy to use and the UI is almost universally praised. However, the one big thing about it is that it doesn't have an auto focus motor in the body. This will limit the lens selection unless you don't mind manually focusing. Not a big deal if you're buying newer lenses only but there are some bargains to be had on slightly older lenses that don't have internal motors.

Thanks eugimon. Before anything else, I've noticed your pics as well in the pic threads. Swoosh and Vegas just came to mind when mentioning members. I know it's no skin off your back, but I also like to give credit where credit is due.

You're talking a bit over my head though. I have no idea what UI is. If auto focus motor is self explainatory then I have an idea of what that is. I guess the better question for me to ask is if someone toally new to the world of photography was considering a DSLR camera, what features are must haves or basically what should be taken into consideration when limiting yourself to $500.00? I'd like to get the most bang for my buck in the cam without any added accessories.

Edited May 3, 2009 by MacrossMan

[Vegas]

those shots remind me of a Venice themed hotel in Vegas...

I was thinking the same thing. Venitian Vegas???

yes, its from the venetian....registration area

[anime52k8]

ok, anyone have advice on lenses? I'm planing on getting a new camera (canon T1i) some time in the next year and will need to get all new lenses for it.

I'm hopping to get both camera and lenses for around $2000 (plus or minus 200) all total and I'd prefer to end up with a similar selection to what I'm used to on my film camera (with that I have 50mm and 28mm lenses as well as a standard zoom and a telephoto zoom.)

considering the 1.6x multiplication from the smaller sensor, I was planing on getting a 20mm, a 35mm and a 70-300mm zoom on top of the standard kit lens (18-55mm).

I've also been looking at an F1.4 50mm as well as either an 85 or 100mm telephoto. I'm really not sure which of these I'd be better off with.

I'm not sure if I'd get more use out of a wide angle lens or a more telephoto lens, and I'm also wondering if I should forgo the kit lens AND the telephoto zoom and just get an 18-200mm lens as a walk around lens.

[Lonely Soldier Boy]

I haven't took a photo in ages (since photography switched to digital at least), so this picture wasn't taken by me but a MW fellow member (I can't remember his name right now). What got me into making this composition was the lighting of the original picture. It's hard to find good toy pictures with natural lighting that you can use to set the toy in a natural environment.

Enjoy

[eugimon]

Thanks eugimon. Before anything else, I've noticed your pics as well in the pic threads. Swoosh and Vegas just came to mind when mentioning members. I know it's no skin off your back, but I also like to give credit where credit is due.

You're talking a bit over my head though. I have no idea what UI is. If auto focus motor is self explainatory then I have an idea of what that is. I guess the better question for me to ask is if someone toally new to the world of photography was considering a DSLR camera, what features are must haves or basically what should be taken into consideration when limiting yourself to $500.00? I'd like to get the most bang for my buck in the cam without any added accessories.

Aw, thanks man.

So, UI is just user interface. The d40 uses the big LCD panel on the back to clearly show the settings and metering, so it's easy to spot what the exposure is, shutter speed and aperture.

And auto focus motor is probably what you're thinking of. Basically some lenses (AF-S for nikon) have a built in motor for the purpose. Older lenses require a motor in the camera itself to push/pull the mechanics of the lens for auto focus to work. Honestly, most modern lenses come with this feature. This is really only an issue for legacy lenses or if you're looking to buy older lenses off of ebay.

So, the single most important thing is to know what type of photography you're going to be doing. You mentioned in the other thread that it was primarily going to be family gatherings and then shots for your toy hobby. Okay, so then you'll want to know if your family get togethers are during the day and outdoors or primarily evening affairs or indoors.

If it's going to be out doors, the standard kit lens the nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5 - 5.6G is a decent lens. This will give you a modest wide angle shot and zoom in for a pretty good portrait shot. The "f/3.5 - 5.6" describes the aperture or how wide the lens will open up. The lower the number, the wider it gets which has two effects. The first is speed. The wider it is, the more light it allows in which allows for faster shutter speeds. The 2nd effect is the depth of field. This is basically how much of your picture is in focus. If you look at my shots, I typically shoot with a low depth of field so only a specific part of the image is in focus with the immediate foreground and background not in focus. Shooting with a higher 'f-stop' restricts the light but puts more of the image in focus.

The kit lens (this is gonna be true for both the nikkor and cannon lenses) has a variable f-stop. This means that depending on what level of zoom you're on, the f-stop has a minimum value of f/3.5 - 5.6. Other lenses will have say just "f.28" or what have you and that means that no matter what zoom you are dialed into you will always have that minimum f-stop available for use. There's some lenses where this isn't true but I won't bore you unless you really care.

So, if you're going to be shooting outdoors, during the day, then the nikkor 18-55mm is a decent lens to start off with OR if you don't mind using flash for indoor/night time shooting. Proper flash usage is a field of study in itself, one that I know next to nothing about only that I hate the way flash looks.

So, if you think you're going to need a faster lens and you're on a budget, I would look at the prime lenses. A prime lens means that it has a fixed focal length. No zoom. So if you want more things in frame, you need to back up, or move forward to tighten your composition. The pluses are numerous though. One, these lenses are FAST and cheap the nikkor 50mm f/1.8 is around a hundred bucks. The 50mm will give your shots that "portrait" look since with the cropped sensor it will look slightly zoomed in. Also, the primes are SHARP, you'll get results that have little distortion both in geometry and in color.

So... I would either just get the D40 kit or if you can swing the extra money, get the 50mm prime on top of it so you'll have some more flexible options for shooting indoors.

[jenius]

Here's my newest rig for shooting toys. It's 16"x16" and wouldn't work for above shots (but that's easy, just remove the tent and lay down some poster board). It also wouldn't work for large group shots but I'll never have a tent that can handle that. Also included is a quick snap (no camera adjustment) of the toy inside without any photo shop help. It's the full tent with a foam board under a dry erase poster board to form the floor (so there won't be any wrinkled fabric in my shots). This will probably be the rig I'm using for all future toy reviews on my site. I'm hoping this new rig will help me reduce the amount of post-shoot correcting I do (I rely heavily on Photoshop to make up for my less than amateur talent with the camera).

EDIT - yes, I probably will be trimming the dry erase board that is currently spilling over all over the place... just haven't decided how much.

Edited May 4, 2009 by jenius

[Dante74]

ok, anyone have advice on lenses? I'm planing on getting a new camera (canon T1i) some time in the next year and will need to get all new lenses for it.

I'm hopping to get both camera and lenses for around $2000 (plus or minus 200) all total and I'd prefer to end up with a similar selection to what I'm used to on my film camera (with that I have 50mm and 28mm lenses as well as a standard zoom and a telephoto zoom.)

considering the 1.6x multiplication from the smaller sensor, I was planing on getting a 20mm, a 35mm and a 70-300mm zoom on top of the standard kit lens (18-55mm).

I've also been looking at an F1.4 50mm as well as either an 85 or 100mm telephoto. I'm really not sure which of these I'd be better off with.

I'm not sure if I'd get more use out of a wide angle lens or a more telephoto lens, and I'm also wondering if I should forgo the kit lens AND the telephoto zoom and just get an 18-200mm lens as a walk around lens.

Forget about the 18-200, it compromises everything for zoom range. Instead of getting two separate lenses for the 20 mm and the 35 mm, why not go with a 17-40 mm f4 lens, or a 24-70 mm f2.8? I wouldn't recommend the 18-55 kitlens either, the 24-70 mm has enough range to act as your walk-around lens and the 70-300 would match up great in zoom range. So basically, by getting a 24-70 mm, you save cash on a crappy 18-55 mm, an moderately priced 20 mm and a moderately priced 35 mm.

I've got a 40D with a 17-85 mm kit lens which is ok, but has some severe barrel distortion at wide angle. I'm currently saving up for a 70-200 mm f2.8 IS and after that a 10-22 mm. After that I might get the 24-70 and get rid of the 17-85.

You wanna read up on canon lenses? Go here.

The digital picture

[macrossnake]

Don't know much about Photography, but I do use Photoshop for work though...

Here is my contribution to MACROSS ZERO.

enjoy.

[Dante74]

Shouldn't this thread be in the "Anime or Science Fiction" section, like the other "off topic" thread?

[eugimon]

Shouldn't this thread be in the "Anime or Science Fiction" section, like the other "off topic" thread?

if the general focus of the photography discussed is on taking pictures of our toys... it's kinda toy related... right?

[anime52k8]

Forget about the 18-200, it compromises everything for zoom range. Instead of getting two separate lenses for the 20 mm and the 35 mm, why not go with a 17-40 mm f4 lens, or a 24-70 mm f2.8? I wouldn't recommend the 18-55 kitlens either, the 24-70 mm has enough range to act as your walk-around lens and the 70-300 would match up great in zoom range. So basically, by getting a 24-70 mm, you save cash on a crappy 18-55 mm, an moderately priced 20 mm and a moderately priced 35 mm.

I've got a 40D with a 17-85 mm kit lens which is ok, but has some severe barrel distortion at wide angle. I'm currently saving up for a 70-200 mm f2.8 IS and after that a 10-22 mm. After that I might get the 24-70 and get rid of the 17-85.

You wanna read up on canon lenses? Go here.

The digital picture

holly asscrackers is the 24-70mm expensive. it is tempting though.

what about the 17-55mm IS? $140 cheaper and sharper image quality plus IS. not sure if the sealed metal barrel and an included hood/case are worth the extra cash.

[eugimon]

Wanna save money? Look at the tamron versions of the 18-55 and the 28-75. You get the f/2.8 (minus the IS or VR) but at a 1/3rd the price.

image quality is pretty good as well.

I have the 28-75mm tamron on a d90 body, if you want to see samples, shoot me a pm with the sort of stuff you want shot and I'll send you some raws to look at.

[Dante74]

holly asscrackers is the 24-70mm expensive. it is tempting though.

what about the 17-55mm IS? $140 cheaper and sharper image quality plus IS. not sure if the sealed metal barrel and an included hood/case are worth the extra cash.

The 17-55 is a good option too, but IS isn't too important to have at focal lengths shorter than 55 mm unless you're a recovering drug addict in need of a hit. It always helps, but it's put to better use on a telephoto/zoom lens.

[sharky]

Shouldn't this thread be in the "Anime or Science Fiction" section, like the other "off topic" thread?

Agreed. The fact that the very last part of the title has "of your valks" doesn't really make this on topic for the Macross toy thread. Besides if you have pics of your valks than it would probably be best to post in the strike a pose thread be they professional or not.

Edited May 4, 2009 by sharky

[Dante74]

if the general focus of the photography discussed is on taking pictures of our toys... it's kinda toy related... right?

True, but for this thread to stay in the toy section, we should only be discussing how to take better pics of our collection. If we start giving each other advice on lenses, tripods and other equipment, we'd stray off topic and might get the thread closed. The computer and electronics supergeek thread is a good example of a similar type of thread where members get and give advice on computers etc.

[anime52k8]

this tread probebly would go better under the anime/sicfi section but it's been here for 2 years and hasn't been locked or moved yet so...

How about we continue to talk about photography in general and If a mode/admin decides that this thread doesn't belong here then they Move it at their own discretion?

[Vegas]

The 17-55 is a good option too, but IS isn't too important to have at focal lengths shorter than 55 mm unless you're a recovering drug addict in need of a hit. It always helps, but it's put to better use on a telephoto/zoom lens.

my suggestion is the 24-105mm L f4. its lighter and little bit smaller than the 24-70 2.8 its really a great walkaround lens. while the 17-55mm 2.8 is lalso a great lens mind you that its an EF-S lens so its only for cropped bodies. if youre thinking going full frame in the future get the EF lenses

[Dante74]

my suggestion is the 24-105mm L f4. its lighter and little bit smaller than the 24-70 2.8 its really a great walkaround lens. while the 17-55mm 2.8 is lalso a great lens mind you that its an EF-S lens so its only for cropped bodies. if youre thinking going full frame in the future get the EF lenses

There you go, the perfect lens for your needs! It's an L EF lens with lots of zoom range and it's cheaper than the 24-70.

BTW: Canon's L range is their pro range meaning they're built to last. Besides the difference in picture quality, if you ever want to know why you're paying so much extra for an L lens go to a shop and hold an L lens and a 18-55 kitlens.