Show off your gallery

Thanks RFC,

Your Guggenheim pics remind me that I need to go there. I've never been to NYC, but my major gallery rep wants to take me to the ArtExpo 2005 next year, so who knows???

Your Playboy at 50 gallery reminds me of my childhood, when Playboy Clubs were something I heard whispered about.

--
Todd
http://www.muskopf.org
Fine Art Painter, Wannabe Photographer
 
I'm a Nikon 5700 user and am trying to figure out which direction,
Canon/Nikon,
Todd
Here is my Gallery album on a new website I launched on July 8, 2004. I've taken over 12,000 images with my D100 but only have about 100 or so online at present. Just don't have the time to process them all, maintain the domain and perform work in the real world that actually pays me money and the bills.

Please note however that not all of these were taken with the best glass. For example the Ringo Starr concert was taken with a Nikon 70-300 f/3.5-5.6 lens which didn't give the best result. Same goes for the Widespread Panic show.

Some of the better images are found in the ZZ Top, Jerry Lee Lewis, Montgomery Gentry, Jonny Lang and Uncle Kracker albums. As far as concert shots go that is.

If you want to see some shots of Las Vegas and various nature and landscape images go to page 2 and click on the appropriate album. I think you'll be impressed with a couple of the Las Vegas images. Stock quality I think. Took them at about 4am in February. Temp was about 30 degrees. Used a tripod and the Nikon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 ED G AFS lens.

Best regards,

Tony B.

[email protected]

Come join one of the fastest growing photography websites online: http://www.ConcertShooter.com Registration is free and you get a free image gallery for uploading your concert and entertainment related photography. Look forward to seeing you there!
 
It took me a moment to figure out that you were inflecting I should shoot film instead of digital. Not a bad idea as far as cost goes. I think I could get a good film SLR for significantly less than a digital SLR. Then again, I would need to scan in all the negatives and such, so I would need a good film scanner, and I would also need to pay for the slides and processing...

I don't know. Your photos are very nice. I've got a Canon T50 SLR that I've had for about 14 years now with a couple of lenses, and, I have to admit, the only thing I use it for is taking slides of my paintings. Everything else is digital. Is it better? Is it worse? I don't know. I do know that digital is more convenient, and slides are often used as a "weeding out" item in art shows, rather than a crucial test. Some galleries feel that only "serious" artists would have slides made of their work.

I think everyone is whacked. Including me. I just do the best I can.

Thanks.

--
Todd
http://www.muskopf.org
Fine Art Painter, Wannabe Photographer
 
... They're not images, but a one-sided collection of links that make the D70 seem good, with some "negative" comments on L lenses:
http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/d70_user_testimonials

What's the point with the links? It was originally meant to counter posters who say that Canon is the be-all and end-all of DSLRs - things are never as straightforward as they seem. Great pictures have been produced by either system, so it all boils down to .... well, you know the answer, and I'm not even going to say it.

One advice I can give is to start with a very, very tiny investment, say, the camera with just a 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4, use it for a month or so - you'll VERY quickly decide whether you want to keep it or not. Reading about pros / cons won't be enough.

BTW, I'm very happy with what the Nikon / 3rd-party system can do for macros :-))
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=9762661

Good luck with your decision!
I'm a Nikon 5700 user and am trying to figure out which direction,
Canon/Nikon, I want to go when I purchase a dslr (hopefully around
the holidays). I've been waffling a bit recently. I was in love
with the specs of the 1D Mk2, but I just can't justify the $4500
price tag for the body.

I'm really looking forward to the next generation of mid-range
cameras--the replacements for the 10D and D100, but I think that
each manufacturer has characteristics that will carry over into the
next generation. I've read a lot about the differences between the
"smoother/plastic" Canon images and the "more detailed/more noise"
Nikon images and I really don't have an preference yet. What I
would like is to see if there are people out there shooting
landscapes and macros that might be similar to what I typically
shoot and then see which images I find more appealing.

So, anyone that has a landscape/macro gallery that they're proud of
from their 10D or D100, I'd appreciate it if you could post a link
to it so I could take a look.

--
Todd
http://www.muskopf.org
Fine Art Painter, Wannabe Photographer
--
Regards, David
(D.7.0. & C.P.4.5.0.0.)
http://www.fotop.net/dlcmh/
http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh
http://www.pbase.com/dlcmh/dslr_links
 
It was 4th of July! It's usually more like this:



Well, maybe something in between.
Well, thank you so much for "admiring my gallery before". I've
grown more and more impatient with what my little 5700 can deliver,
which is why I'm becoming more obsessed with the dslr thing. I
could never go to film (I've got a Canon T50--ancient, no autofocus
anything) because I shoot WAY too many photos. I've had my 5700
for 14 months and just crossed the 30,000 shots line with it. Can
you imagine what the film/processing costs would've been? Let's
say $10/36 exposures. That would be $8333. Now, does that seem
right? NO! I'm made for digital. The only problem is, I don't know
which way to go dslr.

Thanks for posting your galleries. Are the beaches always that
crowded in SoCal??? If so, I'll never go there for the beaches.
Sheesh. I just got back from the Bahamas and it was sweet, no
human crush at all.



I've got people who "used to be friends, but moved to Cali" who
I've thought about visiting, but I don't know...

--
Todd
http://www.muskopf.org
Fine Art Painter, Wannabe Photographer
--
http://radio.weblogs.com/0101365/categories/photos/
 
Duncan,

I have the D2h and the SB-800 and was planning on trying to photograph some moving insects today with the Auto FP-High Speed Sync Mode. So of course it is now raining outside so I doubt if I’ll be able to do this today. What do you mean by high speed sync causes odd effects on fast moving objects?

I just took a photo using Auto FP High Speed Sync of my wiggling toes (1/1000 sec) and it looks fine. Granted my toes are not exactly moving at a high speed but the photo looks fine. Do to the subject matter I will spare this forum the pleasure of viewing the up-close photo of my toes.

Your setup looks fantastic and thanks for the info.

Craigget
In the Canon lineup, the only camera with a 1/500 flash sync is the
1D (not the 1Ds or the 10D.)

High speed sync isn't the same thing, and causes a LARGE drop in
flash guide number, as well as odd effects with fast-moving
subjects.

Duncan C
----
Todd,

I use either a Tamron 90 mm f/2.8 1:1 macro or a Nikkor 70-200 VR
plus Canon 500D closeup attachment.

My trick for maximizing DOF is to use lots of flash and very small
apertures (typically f/22 to f/32).

I attach 2 flashes to a Manfrotto flash bracket, which lets me get
fairly even light. the rig looks something like this, although
lately I use at least one flash head without any modifiers on it
for more specular light:



Duncan C

P.S. Check out those links I posted to the Thom Hogan articles.
Lots of good info there.
--
dpreview and PBase supporter.



http://www.pbase.com/duncanc
--
dpreview and PBase supporter.



http://www.pbase.com/duncanc
--
http://www.clgphotos.com/
 
Craigget,

Here's some text extracted from a post I write to the Canon Talk forum a while back about the limitations of high speed sync:

Hard as it is to believe, high speed sync is actually a bad idea for freezing very fast motion. Here's why:

Normally, a flash's pulse of light is VERY fast - plenty fast to freeze motion all on it's own.

Cameras with focal plane shutters (almost all SLRs and DSLRs) can only flash sync up to a fairly slow shutterspeed, because the shutter needs to be fully open during the instant that the flash fires. At shutterspeeds higher than the camera's max sync speed, the shutter is never fully open. Instead, the shutter opening is a slit that moves across the frame. If you try to use flash at too high a speed, the flash fires so rapidly that it's light only exposes the part of the sensor that is exposed by the slit opening in the shutter. The rest of the frame is not exposed to the light of the flash at all.

In high speed sync mode, the flash and camera work in close concert, and the flash actually stays "lit" for longer in this mode than in normal flash sync mode. The flash stays lit for the whole time it takes for the slit opening of the shutter to travel across the film plane. Thus you get less motion-stopping ability from FP (high speed) sync mode than you do with normal flash sync.

You can also get odd distortions, since very fast-moving subjects actually move at the same time the slit opening in the shutter is moving. To understand this, Imagine a car speeding side-to-side across the frame, with a vertical shutter. As the slit opening in the shutter moves from the top to the bottom of the shutter, the car moves from side to side across the frame. thus, in an extreme case, the top of the car might be on one side of the frame, and the bottom of the car might be stretched over to the other side of the frame, with an odd blurring effect. This would occur even though the shutterspeed SHOULD HAVE BEEN fast enough to freeze the motion of the car.

The best way to get good motion-stopping ability with flash is to set your camera to it's highest NORMAL flash sync speed (which varies from camera to camera, but is commonly 1/180 - 1/250) and control the amount of ambient light so the scene looks black without the light from the flash. Then the very rapid pulse of light is the only meaningful light on the scene, and it's so fast that it does a fine job freezing subject motion for all but the most fast-moving subjects.

Battery operated electronic flashes like Canon (and Nikon) speedlights control their light output by shutting off the light very suddenly once they decide that enough light has been emitted. That means that the lower the flash power, the shorter the pulse of light. If you fire your flash at full power, the light from the flash reaches maximum brightness very quickly, then drops down to a fraction of it's max brightness after a very short interval. The light then dies away to nothing fairly slowly. Turing a flash to even 1/3 stop from full power makes the pulse of light much shorter and "cleaner" than full power, because the flash shuts off before that relatively long "fade-away period."

Here's a link to a page with some practical examples of the limits of high speed (FP) sync for motion stopping:

http://webs.lanset.com/rcochran/flash/hss.html

Another problem with high speed sync is that it reduces the guide number of the flash quite a bit. This is because the flash creates a light that isn't as bright, but keeps it lit for the whole time the slit opening is travelling across the image sensor. Each portion of the image sensor only gets light very briefly, and the rest of the light from the flash is wasted against the closed parts of the shutter.

Mind you, high speed sync is very useful, but more for exposure control than for motion stopping. Don't be afraid to use it, but be aware that it had limitations for motion stopping.

Duncan C
--
dpreview and PBase supporter.



http://www.pbase.com/duncanc
 
...guess you've allready had a look at my galleries, but since I don't "frequent" NTF much, I've added quite a few new pics !

Don't stop at Canon or Nikon... Fuji's S2 Pro is just as good -I daren't say "if not better" in THIS forum dare I ?).

In any case, you know that it's not the camera who make nice photos, it's the photographer ! ;=)

Cheers,
Jean-Pierre
http://www.pbase.com/scherrer/
Equipment list in profile
 
Duncan,

Thanks for the very logical and well written explanation.

Craigget
Craigget,

Here's some text extracted from a post I write to the Canon Talk
forum a while back about the limitations of high speed sync:

Hard as it is to believe, high speed sync is actually a bad idea
for freezing very fast motion. Here's why:

Normally, a flash's pulse of light is VERY fast - plenty fast to
freeze motion all on it's own.

Cameras with focal plane shutters (almost all SLRs and DSLRs) can
only flash sync up to a fairly slow shutterspeed, because the
shutter needs to be fully open during the instant that the flash
fires. At shutterspeeds higher than the camera's max sync speed,
the shutter is never fully open. Instead, the shutter opening is a
slit that moves across the frame. If you try to use flash at too
high a speed, the flash fires so rapidly that it's light only
exposes the part of the sensor that is exposed by the slit opening
in the shutter. The rest of the frame is not exposed to the light
of the flash at all.

In high speed sync mode, the flash and camera work in close
concert, and the flash actually stays "lit" for longer in this mode
than in normal flash sync mode. The flash stays lit for the whole
time it takes for the slit opening of the shutter to travel across
the film plane. Thus you get less motion-stopping ability from FP
(high speed) sync mode than you do with normal flash sync.

You can also get odd distortions, since very fast-moving subjects
actually move at the same time the slit opening in the shutter is
moving. To understand this, Imagine a car speeding side-to-side
across the frame, with a vertical shutter. As the slit opening in
the shutter moves from the top to the bottom of the shutter, the
car moves from side to side across the frame. thus, in an extreme
case, the top of the car might be on one side of the frame, and the
bottom of the car might be stretched over to the other side of the
frame, with an odd blurring effect. This would occur even though
the shutterspeed SHOULD HAVE BEEN fast enough to freeze the motion
of the car.

The best way to get good motion-stopping ability with flash is to
set your camera to it's highest NORMAL flash sync speed (which
varies from camera to camera, but is commonly 1/180 - 1/250) and
control the amount of ambient light so the scene looks black
without the light from the flash. Then the very rapid pulse of
light is the only meaningful light on the scene, and it's so fast
that it does a fine job freezing subject motion for all but the
most fast-moving subjects.

Battery operated electronic flashes like Canon (and Nikon)
speedlights control their light output by shutting off the light
very suddenly once they decide that enough light has been emitted.
That means that the lower the flash power, the shorter the pulse of
light. If you fire your flash at full power, the light from the
flash reaches maximum brightness very quickly, then drops down to a
fraction of it's max brightness after a very short interval. The
light then dies away to nothing fairly slowly. Turing a flash to
even 1/3 stop from full power makes the pulse of light much shorter
and "cleaner" than full power, because the flash shuts off before
that relatively long "fade-away period."

Here's a link to a page with some practical examples of the limits
of high speed (FP) sync for motion stopping:

http://webs.lanset.com/rcochran/flash/hss.html

Another problem with high speed sync is that it reduces the guide
number of the flash quite a bit. This is because the flash creates
a light that isn't as bright, but keeps it lit for the whole time
the slit opening is travelling across the image sensor. Each
portion of the image sensor only gets light very briefly, and the
rest of the light from the flash is wasted against the closed parts
of the shutter.

Mind you, high speed sync is very useful, but more for exposure
control than for motion stopping. Don't be afraid to use it, but be
aware that it had limitations for motion stopping.

Duncan C
--
dpreview and PBase supporter.



http://www.pbase.com/duncanc
--
http://www.clgphotos.com/
 
Todd,

Great capture. For that shot I like the very limited DOF. It really isolates the bee.

If you're trying for max DOF, why use such a fast shutterspeed and relatively large aperture? Was that shot with your 5700? The only reason I could see for using such a fast shutterspeed would be if you were trying to freeze the motion of a bee's wings or something.

I'd suggest shooting in fully manual mode, and picking a smaller aperture, and a moderately fast shutterspeed (1/200 to 1/500). With the smaller sensor on the 5700, f/11 might be small enough. Then use flash to provide enough light. What type of flash did you use for that shot?

I've seen people mount disc shaped diffusers, made of plexi (or even paper) to the front lens element and fire their on-camera flash into the diffuser. It provides nice even lighting, kind of like a ringflash. I keep meaning to get my hands on a piece of white plexi and a step-up ring and mount it to the filter threads of my macro lens. I haven't found a source of small pieces of white translucent plexi, however. All the mail-order places want to sell me 4ft x 8ft sheets, which is WAAAAAAY more than I need. My camera doesn't have an on-camera flash, so I'd need to mount a flash on some sort of bracket and place it down near the front of the lens.

Duncan C
----
Thanks for the info.

I agree that a good flash setup is essential for good macros. I've
been reasonably successful at it so far this summer.
Unfortunately, my camera will typically give me no more than f/7.4
at 1/2000 or sec for macros, so my DOF is extremely shallow. It's
kind of cool in some ways, but hard to get a good shot.

Here's one:



See how shallow the DOF is?

--
Todd
http://www.muskopf.org
Fine Art Painter, Wannabe Photographer
--
dpreview and PBase supporter.



http://www.pbase.com/duncanc
 
I think you should rent both cameras and give them a try.

the most important tool is the artist behind the camera.

by lookign at galleries you see what others can do with the tool
and not what you can do with the tool.
You are right that the most important is the one behind the camera, but by looking at galleries from others, you get ideas for new themes or new pictures... and you learn how to do you pictures better than before.

Regards

Lex
 
Hi Rory, this is one of the finest collections of photos that I have seen in the various forums. You have a real talent. Thanks for sharing.
Hi Todd

I am currently shooting with a D2h, but owned a D100 prior to
getting the D2h. Here are some galeries shot with the D100:

http://www.pbase.com/roryhill/scapes_utah
http://www.pbase.com/roryhill/yellowstone
http://www.pbase.com/roryhill/fav_2003

I hope this helps. I really enjoyed the D100 and upgraded to the
D2h only because I wanted the speed and professional build.

--
Rory
--
digitaldaze
http://www.pbase.com/betnbill
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top