• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

The Official TB Photography Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Heist - are you setting those shots up yourself? Did you rent the set, hire the model and MUAs, etc? Just curious what the backstory is....great work!
 
Jon, I like these shots!

I'd work a wee bit more on bringing 'tension' into the frame, the first 3 are ok frame wise, the 4th picture is too 'central'.

Also, is that armpit hair in that last picture? :p

The only thing that seriously bothers me, is the shinyness of your model's face. That's a make up issue I guess, shouldn't be hard to fix next time :)


Cool to see your progress :)
 
Heist - are you setting those shots up yourself? Did you rent the set, hire the model and MUAs, etc? Just curious what the backstory is....great work!

Yeah I'm just a really broke college kid so I scout my locations and build my own sets using what is available around me. All the "models" are just personal friends and if the makeup that they arrive with is not what I want I would jump in and do make up and hair myself. As far as styling goes, I collect various things/items of clothing that I may later want to use in a photoshoot or I would ask to see what the model already has and pick the pieces that I want used in the photos.

I don't hire anyone because I don't have the means to so usually a shoot would take hours to prep before the shutter starts clicking. I pay for my friends' time in photos.

I just printed a few B/W shots I did on 4x5 large format view cameras. I'll get them scanned and share.

large-format-camera.jpg
 
Jon, I like these shots!

I'd work a wee bit more on bringing 'tension' into the frame, the first 3 are ok frame wise, the 4th picture is too 'central'.

Really? I actually framed that centrally on purpose =/ It's the 'frame within a frame' that I was working. Guess I need to work on it a little harder....

Also, is that armpit hair in that last picture? :p

No - although I thought that too, when I looked at them in Lightroom. I should post the cleaned up versions....

She actually has *amazing* hair. This girl won the genetic card game - she has all the best features of both of her races, and (IMO) none of the bad of either...

The only thing that seriously bothers me, is the shinyness of your model's face. That's a make up issue I guess, shouldn't be hard to fix next time :)

I agree - and how would I fix that? (I'm no MUA...)

Cool to see your progress :)


Coming from someone like you, that means a lot! thank you!
 
Maybe the frame within the frame needs more frame, if you get what I'm saying :) I feel her right hand is a bit too close to the edge of the frame, maybe...

Also, the top of the doorframe isn't 100% parallel to the top of the image frame, while the sides of the doorframe are.

I tried rotating the picture so the top is parallel, now only the left side is a bit tilted...I think I like it better. Of course, rotating means cropping so you're losing even more of the frame.

As for the shinyness, I think something called "face powder" is what you need:

http://www.beauty-advices.com/how-to-apply-face-powder-correctly/

But it comes in different tints etc so it's best to let her buy it I guess :p

Buying anything clothes/make up related for a woman is tricky at best ("oh...*silence* so this is how I dress according to you..." :D)
 

Attachments

  • gina_by_jonpackard-d346wzt 2.jpg
    gina_by_jonpackard-d346wzt 2.jpg
    42.8 KB · Views: 68
Quick question regarding film cameras.

What differences do you look for? Some (one) of the lenses I'm getting will be compatable with older Canon SLRs, I had a look and some are as cheap as £10-£15 used.

I realise the framerate isn't going to be all that great, but the picture quality is going to be all down to the film and lens that is used, right? (assuming the inside of the camera is light-tight).

(not really for any immediate buy, but just something I'm considering, would like to play about a bit with film aswell as digital).


Edit - Meant to add that it would be mainly for shots which were using just manual control, I realise that the autofocus abilities etc will depend on the camera model, but when purely talking about manual mode.
 
Those B&W shots are beautiful HEIST.

Film is becoming a dying art so it's nice to see that there are people holding the torch. As good as digital is getting I don't think there is anything better than medium and large format film and transparencies for sharp enlargements.

For Mohawk,...Canon AF and MF lenses have different mounts,...so if you intend to use a Manual focus bayonet mount canon lens,...then look into an AE-1 Program. They are from the 80's so make sure everything is functional,...IE light meter,...shutter blade,...etc. etc. I learned on one in the late 90's and had no problems. It carried me through a year of high school B&W photography. I still have it and it operates perfectly for being nearly 30 years old.

Maybe also look into the Pentax K-1000.
 
Those B&W shots are beautiful HEIST.

Film is becoming a dying art so it's nice to see that there are people holding the torch. As good as digital is getting I don't think there is anything better than medium and large format film and transparencies for sharp enlargements.

For Mohawk,...Canon AF and MF lenses have different mounts,...so if you intend to use a Manual focus bayonet mount canon lens,...then look into an AE-1 Program. They are from the 80's so make sure everything is functional,...IE light meter,...shutter blade,...etc. etc. I learned on one in the late 90's and had no problems. It carried me through a year of high school B&W photography. I still have it and it operates perfectly for being nearly 30 years old.

Maybe also look into the Pentax K-1000.

I was looking at getting a slightly more modern (late 90s early 00's) EOS 35mm. Simply because I could use EF lenses with both my D-SLR and the film camera. Unless I'm missing something (highly likely), you get both auto and manual settings on most EF lenses?
 
Those B&W shots are beautiful HEIST.

Film is becoming a dying art so it's nice to see that there are people holding the torch. As good as digital is getting I don't think there is anything better than medium and large format film and transparencies for sharp enlargements.

For Mohawk,...Canon AF and MF lenses have different mounts,...so if you intend to use a Manual focus bayonet mount canon lens,...then look into an AE-1 Program. They are from the 80's so make sure everything is functional,...IE light meter,...shutter blade,...etc. etc. I learned on one in the late 90's and had no problems. It carried me through a year of high school B&W photography. I still have it and it operates perfectly for being nearly 30 years old.

Maybe also look into the Pentax K-1000.

Mohawk, I have to add my vote for the Pentax K-1000.

They're built sturdy as a tank, they're great to learn on, and if you go digital with Pentax, every Pentax lens ever made will fit all Pentax digital cameras.

Not that I'm too much of a Pentaxian. ;)

Mike
 
I was looking at getting a slightly more modern (late 90s early 00's) EOS 35mm. Simply because I could use EF lenses with both my D-SLR and the film camera. Unless I'm missing something (highly likely), you get both auto and manual settings on most EF lenses?

I see,...as far as I know as long as the camera body supports manual capabilities it shouldn't matter too much what lens you put on it. In a fully manual mode you are doing all the setting while the camera body is doing all the metering (I'm not to savvy on metering systems and what is superior to another).

I remember in the 90's there was the EOS A2e and the Elan IIe which were great cameras. They had a function where a sensor would detect where you eye is looking in reference to a few little boxes in the prism; arranged in a cross pattern. The camera would then use your eye position to focus in on that particular portion of the frame.

I don't think you can use EF-S lenses on EF mount bodies, (but you can use EF lenses on EF-S mount bodies). EF-S lenses will have a white rectangle alignment marking as opposed to a red dot.

Before you buy something that old make sure the motors that drive the film and operating and the shutterblade,...prism and aperture are operating properly. Make sure there are no knicks on the film rails that will snag or scratch the film.

camera-rails.jpg


You want to look for a clean interior,...any dirt, sand or corrosion is going to mean that the camera will need to go in for a clean and check. Dirt and sand are the bane of film and will leave you with scratches. Ideally, If you can try before you buy,...just load it up with a little 12 exp roll, take some random shots, do some bracketing and go have the film processed (no need to print just yet),...then inspect the film for light leaks,...scratches (hopefully the lab keeps their C-41 processor properly maintained as that can contribute scratches as well) or other abnormalities.

If all seems well with the film, have the lab print a few frames. Bracketing to see if the meter is operating properly (I'm assuming you know what bracketing is).

That said,...the more professional models of cameras tend to be robust and IMO pretty equal across the different manufacturers. Unless the camera has been badly abused it should operate normally after 10 or 15 years. I was a big fan of the Nikon N90s back then,...although I could never afford one. Probably could these days though.
 
Sorry for the Double Post,...I think I've confused myself with the EF/EF-S compatibility. The kit lens that I got with my Rebel XTi (300D in Europe) is and EF-S lens and it is typical for 1.6 crop Canons to come with such a lens. I guess there are EF only bodies out there as well as bodies that will take EF-S as well as EF lenses and will have both a white triangle and red dot on the mount ring on the body. I source information from Wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_lens_mount

I'm lead to believe that 35mm cameras will not support EF-S lense because the prism can strike the back glass of the lens and cause damage,...but now I'm a little hazy on that. Just food for thought.
 
warwick.hoy.

Cheers, I'll take that into account when looking at a camera, wouldn't have thought to check the rails etc!

The DSLR is EF-S, so I can't use the kit lens (or any EF-S lenses), with the EF mount. But you can use EF and EF-S on the EF-S mount. I'm getting a nifty fifty for out and about shots, that's an EF mount so I'll be able to use it on both cameras :)

I don't know why the EF-S's don't work with the EF mount, but I'm just not going to risk it!

I'd read about some of the older canons that would focus on where you were looking, sounds like pretty ingenious system!
 
The ef-s has a short back focus so it's closer to the sensor, basically it sits deeper in the camera. So My guess is that putting an ef-s on an ef only mount could probably mean stuff hitting/scratching/breaking inside the camera.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.