I need someone with a D800 in Washington DC to take a picture for me.

VoiceOfReason said:

Why don't you rent the camera?

Click to expand...

Jon Ingram said:

VoiceOfReason said:

Why don't you rent the camera?

Click to expand...

Good question. I forgot to mention - I live in Washington State.

Click to expand...

VoiceOfReason said:

Jon Ingram said:

VoiceOfReason said:

Why don't you rent the camera?

Click to expand...

Good question. I forgot to mention - I live in Washington State.

Click to expand...

Ahhh.... that makes sense. Sorry I can't help you out, but I'm sure you'll find someone who can help. If not here, a local camera club for sure.

Click to expand...

Jon Ingram said:

VoiceOfReason said:

Jon Ingram said:

VoiceOfReason said:

Why don't you rent the camera?

Click to expand...

Good question. I forgot to mention - I live in Washington State.

Click to expand...

Ahhh.... that makes sense. Sorry I can't help you out, but I'm sure you'll find someone who can help. If not here, a local camera club for sure.

Click to expand...

Great idea about the local camera club! Hadn't thought of that.

Click to expand...

Jon Ingram said:

Ok, so here is the deal. I will pay someone $100 bucks or more to take a particular photograph for me, and send me the raw file. Technically you will be giving me the file, and I’ll be paying you for the trouble of taking the image. I ask for it to be with a D800 or D810 because I want the image to be high resolution. The image is a Bierstadt painting, which is a public domain piece of art, meaning there is no copyright associated with the image because the painter has been deceased for more than 100 years.

I have been absolutely obsessed with this painting for the last several years, and have not found any way to get a faithful reproduction of the image. All websites sell hugely down-sampled prints of average quality. All of the "hand-painted" reproductions are even worse.

Here is a jpeg of the original image.

Bear in mind, the actual painting is 10 feet long and 6 feet tall, and immensely detailed. If I get a good enough image, I will get a canvas printed for my living room that is over 6 feet long and about 5 feet tall… maybe bigger. I will only pay if the image is of high quality with good corner sharpness. I really hope someone can help. Let me know if you’re interested!

The painting is currently located in the Smithsonian Amerian Art Institute, 2 floor, east wing.

Click to expand...

philharris said:

You would get much better results using a lens with a flat field rather than a wide angle I think.

Although you can correct a wide angles distortion in post, it is always at a cost of some sharpness.

My suggestion would be something like the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G or the 105 f/2.8G. If distance from the image is a problem then take four or six images and stitch them together. This would obviously require careful placement of the tripod (if allowed), but would produce the best result.

Click to expand...

philharris said:

You would get much better results using a lens with a flat field rather than a wide angle I think.

Although you can correct a wide angles distortion in post, it is always at a cost of some sharpness.

My suggestion would be something like the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G or the 105 f/2.8G. If distance from the image is a problem then take four or six images and stitch them together. This would obviously require careful placement of the tripod (if allowed), but would produce the best result.

Click to expand...

vbuhay said:

philharris said:

You would get much better results using a lens with a flat field rather than a wide angle I think.

Although you can correct a wide angles distortion in post, it is always at a cost of some sharpness.

My suggestion would be something like the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G or the 105 f/2.8G. If distance from the image is a problem then take four or six images and stitch them together. This would obviously require careful placement of the tripod (if allowed), but would produce the best result.

--
Phil Harris
http://500px.com/philharris999

Click to expand...

I have always found that the 14-24 is my sharpest lens specially the corners. Not sure how far back the you would have in the room that painting is.. I have the 105 Micro and my experience says the 14-24 is much sharper still. I would not suggest stitching for the possibility of minute misalignment and unwanted pixels specially when blown up. as you have stated, some distortion can be corrected in post, but this will be minimal at the long end. I have tried all three of the 2.8 Trinitiy for this purpose and have found the 14-24 is ideal with great color saturation and true color rendering.... good luck in your quest for that image..

Click to expand...

vbuhay said:

vbuhay said:

philharris said:

You would get much better results using a lens with a flat field rather than a wide angle I think.

Although you can correct a wide angles distortion in post, it is always at a cost of some sharpness.

My suggestion would be something like the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G or the 105 f/2.8G. If distance from the image is a problem then take four or six images and stitch them together. This would obviously require careful placement of the tripod (if allowed), but would produce the best result.

--
Phil Harris
http://500px.com/philharris999

Click to expand...

I have always found that the 14-24 is my sharpest lens specially the corners. Not sure how far back the you would have in the room that painting is.. I have the 105 Micro and my experience says the 14-24 is much sharper still. I would not suggest stitching for the possibility of minute misalignment and unwanted pixels specially when blown up. as you have stated, some distortion can be corrected in post, but this will be minimal at the long end. I have tried all three of the 2.8 Trinitiy for this purpose and have found the 14-24 is ideal with great color saturation and true color rendering.... good luck in your quest for that image..

Click to expand...

I think the main issue would be how even the lighting is, there could be hotspots -

Click to expand...

vbuhay said:

vbuhay said:

vbuhay said:

philharris said:

You would get much better results using a lens with a flat field rather than a wide angle I think.

Although you can correct a wide angles distortion in post, it is always at a cost of some sharpness.

My suggestion would be something like the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G or the 105 f/2.8G. If distance from the image is a problem then take four or six images and stitch them together. This would obviously require careful placement of the tripod (if allowed), but would produce the best result.

--
Phil Harris
http://500px.com/philharris999

Click to expand...

I have always found that the 14-24 is my sharpest lens specially the corners. Not sure how far back the you would have in the room that painting is.. I have the 105 Micro and my experience says the 14-24 is much sharper still. I would not suggest stitching for the possibility of minute misalignment and unwanted pixels specially when blown up. as you have stated, some distortion can be corrected in post, but this will be minimal at the long end. I have tried all three of the 2.8 Trinitiy for this purpose and have found the 14-24 is ideal with great color saturation and true color rendering.... good luck in your quest for that image..

Click to expand...

I think the main issue would be how even the lighting is, there could be hotspots -

Click to expand...

here is the link: http://americanart.si.edu/collections/

Click to expand...

philharris said:

You would get much better results using a lens with a flat field rather than a wide angle I think.

Although you can correct a wide angles distortion in post, it is always at a cost of some sharpness.

My suggestion would be something like the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G or the 105 f/2.8G. If distance from the image is a problem then take four or six images and stitch them together. This would obviously require careful placement of the tripod (if allowed), but would produce the best result.

Click to expand...

michaeladawson said:

philharris said:

You would get much better results using a lens with a flat field rather than a wide angle I think.

Although you can correct a wide angles distortion in post, it is always at a cost of some sharpness.

My suggestion would be something like the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G or the 105 f/2.8G. If distance from the image is a problem then take four or six images and stitch them together. This would obviously require careful placement of the tripod (if allowed), but would produce the best result.

Click to expand...

In order to properly stitch the photos together without the need for perspective correction one would need to take the photos with the sensor plane parallel to the painting. I doubt you would be able to do that without getting on a ladder.

My point is not that stitching isn't a good option. It's that there is going to have to be some distortion correction regardless of how this photo is shot unless you use a TS lens.

Click to expand...

vbuhay said:

vbuhay said:

philharris said:

You would get much better results using a lens with a flat field rather than a wide angle I think.

Although you can correct a wide angles distortion in post, it is always at a cost of some sharpness.

My suggestion would be something like the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G or the 105 f/2.8G. If distance from the image is a problem then take four or six images and stitch them together. This would obviously require careful placement of the tripod (if allowed), but would produce the best result.

--
Phil Harris
http://500px.com/philharris999

Click to expand...

I have always found that the 14-24 is my sharpest lens specially the corners. Not sure how far back the you would have in the room that painting is.. I have the 105 Micro and my experience says the 14-24 is much sharper still. I would not suggest stitching for the possibility of minute misalignment and unwanted pixels specially when blown up. as you have stated, some distortion can be corrected in post, but this will be minimal at the long end. I have tried all three of the 2.8 Trinitiy for this purpose and have found the 14-24 is ideal with great color saturation and true color rendering.... good luck in your quest for that image..

Click to expand...

I think the main issue would be how even the lighting is, there could be hotspots -

Click to expand...