NZG Photographers Gallery - Page 16

sv · 12th January 2009, 15:21

I've got an everything fetish ;D

Cyberbob · 12th January 2009, 15:32

Their main rule of thumb, is basically if there's something in the photo that doesn't add to its impact (background, lighting, composure, blurs etc), it's a snapshot.

and legs ftw.

sv · 12th January 2009, 15:39

Yeah, but that's subjective eh?

Like the shots of the calves... the one with the bars has more of a narrative element, and with their legs in the shot they look so static, like taxidermy or something... it has a slightly skewed, unnatural quality to it, which is the kind of quality that Kuperus focuses on.

Though her stuff is very photographery in it's sense of economy. There's nothing in the frame that doesn't need to be there, and the composition is immaculate. Her style strikes me as being strongly influenced by Hitchcock...

Cyberbob · 12th January 2009, 15:43

I love the consistent theme too, are those just from one project?

edit - hmm, spanning from 2003 to 2008, i guess not!

sv · 12th January 2009, 15:45

That's her shtick.

Cyberbob · 12th January 2009, 17:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by VERT

a couple from the Christmas holidays

How many exposures were in those?

Evoke · 12th January 2009, 19:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by sv

Yeah, but that's subjective eh?

Like the shots of the calves... the one with the bars has more of a narrative element, and with their legs in the shot they look so static, like taxidermy or something...

I think if you look it at it from stock point of view, you'd get it more. Eg. "I am a magazine editor and I want some pictures of limes and a bird flying over them".. go to stock site, find lime and birds.. the less other stuff the better, because you're going to layer it over some other stuff or whatever to make your final composition.

re: moodiness, subjectiveness - the best explanation is in their FAQ on keywords.. http://www.istockphoto.com/tutorial_6.0_naming.php scroll down for the pics and keywords.. the unacceptable ones are 'feeling', whereas acceptables ones are facts.. so I guess it's a similar photography style they are after too. Because it's up to the advertiser/editor to add feeling. The stock photographer just provides clean/tidy building blocks.

(IMO)

Rince · 12th January 2009, 21:28

Perfect white balance everytime

caffiend · 12th January 2009, 22:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rince

Perfect white balance everytime

OK that is seriously cool

- I'm going to do some research for feedback on those, and if it checks out I'm definitely buying one.

Cyberbob · 12th January 2009, 23:03

I normally just throw a white piece of paper infront of the camera and get it to save it to a custom WB setting.

But that does look seriously cool

crocos · 13th January 2009, 08:21

Nice! If I hadn't just brought a 24-105 F/4 L yesterday I might have been tempted to grab one of the 58mm ones to see if it works.

(Just HAD to slip that in there, yo)

Rince · 13th January 2009, 08:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by caffiend

OK that is seriously cool

- I'm going to do some research for feedback on those, and if it checks out I'm definitely buying one.

if you are investigating how to get one... let us know here, might be able to do a bulk order

Genesis · 13th January 2009, 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by crocos

Nice! If I hadn't just brought a 24-105 F/4 L yesterday I might have been tempted to grab one of the 58mm ones to see if it works.[/size]

Oh yes, the 24-105 is the sex - it'll be my next lens purchase, either that or the 24-70.

Lets see some pics from it then!

crocos · 13th January 2009, 12:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genesis

Lets see some pics from it then!

When it arrives - should get here tomorrow or Thursday. I had the same dilemma: The 24-70 that goes to f/2.8 or the wider range but narrower aperture; I went for the 24-105 because I want a single-lens walk-around solution - I've already got several prime lenses for wide aperture / low light tasks.

First L lens = Happy crocos ^_^

Ordered through Progear in Newmarket - graham at progear.co.nz A++ would trade again.

Cyberbob · 13th January 2009, 12:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genesis

Oh yes, the 24-105 is the sex - it'll be my next lens purchase, either that or the 24-70.

Lets see some pics from it then!

What's this zoom bullshit. My next two are a 50mm f1.8D (the f1.4 is twice as expensive, is it worth it?), and a 60mm f2.8D macro (I'd love the 105mm but I really dont have the money)

Genesis · 14th January 2009, 00:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyberbob

What's this zoom bullshit. My next two are a 50mm f1.8D (the f1.4 is twice as expensive, is it worth it?), and a 60mm f2.8D macro (I'd love the 105mm but I really dont have the money)

K, cool.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crocos

When it arrives - should get here tomorrow or Thursday. I had the same dilemma: The 24-70 that goes to f/2.8 or the wider range but narrower aperture; I went for the 24-105 because I want a single-lens walk-around solution - I've already got several prime lenses for wide aperture / low light tasks.

First L lens = Happy crocos ^_^

Ordered through Progear in Newmarket - graham at progear.co.nz A++ would trade again.

Yeah it's a fucken mint walk-around lens, the only thing that bothered me with it was it could get a tiny bit soft at 105.

It's a great first L.

Evoke · 14th January 2009, 00:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyberbob

I sent in my top three photos, and got the "too snapshotty, but try again in a few days" rejection

i'm a bit confused. it appears you have to get through this part before you're allowed to post on their forums, yet their Request a Critique forum has a bunch of threads with "what's an F stop" and "I'm new to photography"... how did those people get in?! Unless there is some other way to get your forum account activated?

crocos · 14th January 2009, 08:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyberbob

What's this zoom bullshit. My next two are a 50mm f1.8D (the f1.4 is twice as expensive, is it worth it?), and a 60mm f2.8D macro (I'd love the 105mm but I really dont have the money)

Already got the 50mm 1.8 and a 100mm 2.0

Considering a 85mm, but that won't be for a fair while.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genesis

The only thing that bothered me with it was it could get a tiny bit soft at 105.

Yeah? Hmm... Just as well I've got the 100mm prime and the 75-300mm IS then ^_^ Not "L" glass tho ;_;

Cyberbob · 14th January 2009, 09:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evoke

i'm a bit confused. it appears you have to get through this part before you're allowed to post on their forums, yet their Request a Critique forum has a bunch of threads with "what's an F stop" and "I'm new to photography"... how did those people get in?! Unless there is some other way to get your forum account activated?

There's your basic account, then you can choose to apply to register your media of choice as a marketable skill.

You sign up for an account, then think hmm are my photos/vector/flash/video/audio good enough to sell? if you think yes, you go through a gruelling application process.

So not everyone with an account will be selling their work.

p01s0n · 14th January 2009, 10:00

Any of you camera dudes know where I could buy a basic suction mount for our little sony cam? I assume the tripod mount is a standard size/thread. I need to be able to video in car footage of the trackdays that I do in my car so that I can evaluate my driving later.

I've seen a few for like, $200+ and not really willing to pay that for a suction cup with a bolt in it.

Rince · 14th January 2009, 10:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyberbob

a 60mm f2.8D macro (I'd love the 105mm but I really dont have the money)

a few years ago I bought a 200mm macro lens off trademe... for my film camera.

Remember I'm a pentax fanboi and a big selling point of pentaxes (pentaxii?) was any compatible lens for one camera works on another (either with reduced functionality, or maybe needing an adapter)

so I tried it on my K200d - nothing... nada, zip, bugger all. Camera refused to recognise the lens

Fast forward to last week, and I'm idly flicking thru my camera's manual, checking up on some white balance questions I had, and I found a "allow all lenses even without exactly the right contacts" option... so I checked it out, and it was set to Unavailable, so I changed it to Available and tried the macro lens again - voila! working!!!

200mm lens, which when factor in CCD crop factor = 300mm macro lens....
Only a couple of negatives:
- weight - it's a beast, so it won't be living in my camera bag for "just in case I need it"
- no automatic exposure control. I set the lens to whatever aperture I want. And then manually guess the shutter speed. But shooting in RAW gives me the ability to fix that in post to a certain extent.
- no AF, but then again, in macro photography you don't necessarily want AF. I been finding it easier to set the lens to its closest setting and then move in and out to get the subject in focus

nothing worth showing anyone yet... but when I do, I'll post here.

I've got an old 50mm prime from an old MX-1 (MZ-1?) which I should hunt down, and if it is fast enough then it'll be worth taking that for a run too

[WanG] Wandarah · 14th January 2009, 11:02

I love this thread, I have no idea what the fuck anyone is on about.

caffiend · 14th January 2009, 11:08

Yeah, seems to have morphed into a camera/photography discussion thread rather than a gallery...

sv · 14th January 2009, 11:10

thats alright though? i like the mix of camera nerds geeking out and nice pics...

Rince · 14th January 2009, 11:40

look - I'll go and take a pic with my newly found macro.... alright, geezer?

sv · 14th January 2009, 11:42

dooo eeet

Rince · 14th January 2009, 12:00

Rince · 14th January 2009, 12:09

^^ that's straight of the camera, just re-sized for displaying here

here is a link to the full pic (1.8Mb, 3000x2000px). (Same RAW pic, this time not re-sized, and 100% JPEG quality).

Hmmm... the banding you see it in will be faint shadows from the window blinds.... c'est la vie.

sv · 14th January 2009, 14:51

hard-out macro brah... love how crisp the edges of the word dollar are.

the coin is a good subject too - we can get some comparison action going. here's a couple of pics from my canon G9...

that second shot is about as close as i can get without starting to obscure the light on the coin.

the G9 doesn't have the uber-clarity of some of the stuff posted in this thread but it's bloody convenient. went on photo walks with a friend over new years, and she has a flash nikon with various lens etc and this massive old japanese twin lens jobby which takes some magic pics, but we ended up using mine because it's so easy and you can get some OK stuff out of it. still figuring out how to make the most of it though...

Fred · 14th January 2009, 15:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by sv

the G9 doesn't have the uber-clarity of some of the stuff posted in this thread but it's bloody convenient. went on photo walks with a friend over new years, and she has a flash nikon with various lens etc and this massive old japanese twin lens jobby which takes some magic pics, but we ended up using mine because it's so easy and you can get some OK stuff out of it. still figuring out how to make the most of it though...

The Canon Powershots are seriously nice little cameras. As long as you are happy to exploit/trust the autofocus you can get very good results out of them. Even though I recently bought a 450D body (and boy do I love having a proper SLR back once again rather than a point and shoot) I am keeping the S2 IS simply because it is easy to carry and produces amazingly sharp results. Indeed Canon seem to have optimised the lens and sensor on these cameras very well.

sv · 14th January 2009, 15:33

I had a film SLR years ago and am looking forward to getting a proper digital SLR at some point, but for now I'm having a lot of fun and spend time thinking about composition and subject rather than getting too techy with it. Suits me for the time being...

The G9 has manual focus and does RAW as well - very decent bang for buck.

Fred · 14th January 2009, 15:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by sv

The G9 has manual focus and does RAW as well - very decent bang for buck.

Yeah but the focus is displayed on the LCD isn't it? Which limits how accurate you can be. The S2 does the same thing and it helps but it still isn't a patch on using a viewfinder and looking through the lens.

Also, just to reiterate, if you have a Canon it is worth a look at CHDK, to unlock more of the functionality. For instance for the S2 CHDK allows you to do RAW mode which the default firmware won't let you. It also adds LiveView. I see they have a version for the G9 too...

crocos · 14th January 2009, 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by sv

I had a film SLR years ago and am looking forward to getting a proper digital SLR at some point, but for now I'm having a lot of fun and spend time thinking about composition and subject rather than getting too techy with it. Suits me for the time being...

I've taken exactly the opposite approach, but then I've not had any photography background prior to now: Get techy & learn the camera so that now that I'm in the position to start working on the composition & subject I can focus on that and the settings come relatively instinctively.

sv · 14th January 2009, 16:14

Fred: Cheers for the CHDK tip, I'll look into it. Yep, the manual focus is via the LCD but supposedly does an enlargement in the center of the screen for greater accuracy. Haven't looked into it... the auto-focus can be a bit of a pain so manual is one of the next things for me to look at.

crocos: What can I say? I'm lazy

crocos · 14th January 2009, 16:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by sv

crocos: What can I say? I'm lazy

LOL - And here's me thinking I was taking the lazy way

Ab · 14th January 2009, 16:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rince

Seems to be quite a bit of chromatic fuckedupedness there - the front edges look blue and the rear edges look red.

Evoke · 14th January 2009, 19:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyberbob

There's your basic account, then you can choose to apply to register your media of choice as a marketable skill.

You sign up for an account, then think hmm are my photos/vector/flash/video/audio good enough to sell? if you think yes, you go through a gruelling application process.

So not everyone with an account will be selling their work.

i know that. What I meant is a person with an account has no rights to post on the forums until they've been approved.. That is from what I can see. If you do know, do please let me know how to enable your forum posting privileges enabled without being approved to be a contributor. (not snarky)

Cyberbob · 14th January 2009, 19:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evoke

i know that. What I meant is a person with an account has no rights to post on the forums until they've been approved.. That is from what I can see. If you do know, do please let me know how to enable your forum posting privileges enabled without being approved to be a contributor. (not snarky)

Ah no clue then, never posted on their forums

Ab · 15th January 2009, 01:30

Here's a pic I took about half an hour ago. The first of my sunflowers has bloomed, and while it's alone it's the sole eyecatching bit of colour in the whole garden. I was taken with the idea of it soaking up sun during the day and hanging on to the warmth through the night.

Lighting rig: Eveready Dolphin jammed in a tree. Pheer.

sv · 15th January 2009, 02:35

sweet pic ab... my mate put me onto the whole torch lighting thing over new years. e.g.

i got so much out of wandering around having a natter about photography and seeing how someone else composes stuff and the settings etc they use. heaps of fun...

with your garden shot it'd be interesting to see what kind of effect you could get if you set up the cam on a tripod and combined the night shot with a day exposure. probably something crap... maybe something interesting though.

12th January 2009, 21:28	#608
Rince SLUTS!!!!!!!	Perfect white balance everytime __________________ Slow internet is worse than no internet. It's like putting your penis in once and then being required to make out for 2 hours --Matt "The Oatmeal" Inman

14th January 2009, 11:40	#625
Rince SLUTS!!!!!!!	look - I'll go and take a pic with my newly found macro.... alright, geezer? __________________ Slow internet is worse than no internet. It's like putting your penis in once and then being required to make out for 2 hours --Matt "The Oatmeal" Inman

14th January 2009, 12:00	#627
Rince SLUTS!!!!!!!	__________________ Slow internet is worse than no internet. It's like putting your penis in once and then being required to make out for 2 hours --Matt "The Oatmeal" Inman

14th January 2009, 12:09	#628
Rince SLUTS!!!!!!!	^^ that's straight of the camera, just re-sized for displaying here here is a link to the full pic (1.8Mb, 3000x2000px). (Same RAW pic, this time not re-sized, and 100% JPEG quality). Hmmm... the banding you see it in will be faint shadows from the window blinds.... c'est la vie. __________________ Slow internet is worse than no internet. It's like putting your penis in once and then being required to make out for 2 hours --Matt "The Oatmeal" Inman Last edited by Rince : 14th January 2009 at 12:10.

12th January 2009, 15:21	#601
sv simulationszeitalter	I've got an everything fetish ;D

12th January 2009, 15:32	#602
Cyberbob	Their main rule of thumb, is basically if there's something in the photo that doesn't add to its impact (background, lighting, composure, blurs etc), it's a snapshot. and legs ftw. __________________ ɹǝʌo sᴉ ǝɯɐƃ ʎɥʇ

12th January 2009, 15:39	#603
sv simulationszeitalter	Yeah, but that's subjective eh? Like the shots of the calves... the one with the bars has more of a narrative element, and with their legs in the shot they look so static, like taxidermy or something... it has a slightly skewed, unnatural quality to it, which is the kind of quality that Kuperus focuses on. Though her stuff is very photographery in it's sense of economy. There's nothing in the frame that doesn't need to be there, and the composition is immaculate. Her style strikes me as being strongly influenced by Hitchcock...

12th January 2009, 15:43	#604
Cyberbob	I love the consistent theme too, are those just from one project? edit - hmm, spanning from 2003 to 2008, i guess not! __________________ ɹǝʌo sᴉ ǝɯɐƃ ʎɥʇ

12th January 2009, 15:45	#605
sv simulationszeitalter	That's her shtick.

12th January 2009, 23:03	#610
Cyberbob	I normally just throw a white piece of paper infront of the camera and get it to save it to a custom WB setting. But that does look seriously cool __________________ ɹǝʌo sᴉ ǝɯɐƃ ʎɥʇ

13th January 2009, 08:21	#611
crocos	Nice! If I hadn't just brought a 24-105 F/4 L yesterday I might have been tempted to grab one of the 58mm ones to see if it works. (Just HAD to slip that in there, yo) __________________ Ξ √ Ω L U T ↑ ☼ N وكل يوم كنت تعيش في العبودية

14th January 2009, 10:00	#620
p01s0n	Any of you camera dudes know where I could buy a basic suction mount for our little sony cam? I assume the tripod mount is a standard size/thread. I need to be able to video in car footage of the trackdays that I do in my car so that I can evaluate my driving later. I've seen a few for like, $200+ and not really willing to pay that for a suction cup with a bolt in it. __________________ \|\|hellameke.com Image host of NZG pro's\|\|Tu meke Tu much\|\|

14th January 2009, 11:02	#622
[WanG] Wandarah	I love this thread, I have no idea what the fuck anyone is on about.

14th January 2009, 11:08	#623
caffiend	Yeah, seems to have morphed into a camera/photography discussion thread rather than a gallery... __________________ If ignorance is bliss, why is everyone so unhappy these days?

14th January 2009, 11:10	#624
sv simulationszeitalter	thats alright though? i like the mix of camera nerds geeking out and nice pics...

14th January 2009, 11:42	#626
sv simulationszeitalter	dooo eeet

14th January 2009, 14:51	#629
sv simulationszeitalter	hard-out macro brah... love how crisp the edges of the word dollar are. the coin is a good subject too - we can get some comparison action going. here's a couple of pics from my canon G9... that second shot is about as close as i can get without starting to obscure the light on the coin. the G9 doesn't have the uber-clarity of some of the stuff posted in this thread but it's bloody convenient. went on photo walks with a friend over new years, and she has a flash nikon with various lens etc and this massive old japanese twin lens jobby which takes some magic pics, but we ended up using mine because it's so easy and you can get some OK stuff out of it. still figuring out how to make the most of it though...

14th January 2009, 15:33	#631
sv simulationszeitalter	I had a film SLR years ago and am looking forward to getting a proper digital SLR at some point, but for now I'm having a lot of fun and spend time thinking about composition and subject rather than getting too techy with it. Suits me for the time being... The G9 has manual focus and does RAW as well - very decent bang for buck.

14th January 2009, 16:14	#634
sv simulationszeitalter	Fred: Cheers for the CHDK tip, I'll look into it. Yep, the manual focus is via the LCD but supposedly does an enlargement in the center of the screen for greater accuracy. Haven't looked into it... the auto-focus can be a bit of a pain so manual is one of the next things for me to look at. crocos: What can I say? I'm lazy

15th January 2009, 01:30	#639
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	Here's a pic I took about half an hour ago. The first of my sunflowers has bloomed, and while it's alone it's the sole eyecatching bit of colour in the whole garden. I was taken with the idea of it soaking up sun during the day and hanging on to the warmth through the night. Lighting rig: Eveready Dolphin jammed in a tree. Pheer.

15th January 2009, 02:35	#640
sv simulationszeitalter	sweet pic ab... my mate put me onto the whole torch lighting thing over new years. e.g. i got so much out of wandering around having a natter about photography and seeing how someone else composes stuff and the settings etc they use. heaps of fun... with your garden shot it'd be interesting to see what kind of effect you could get if you set up the cam on a tripod and combined the night shot with a day exposure. probably something crap... maybe something interesting though.