fmian

fmian

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a Photographer/Re-toucher/Consultant
Joined on Mar 28, 2010
About me:

If you're reading this it's probably because I wrote something that confounded or intrigued you. You should know that much of what I say is uncomfortable truth laced with straight faced sarcasm. Don't take it to heart.

Comments

Total: 891, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »
In reply to:

weisman: Here's an example:
http://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/40695273
Note the highlight that surrounds the perimeter of the model despite the black background. Then you can fill in the subject with a reflector(s) or other light(s) as desired.

You have to turn off the adult content filter to see the image.
Nice shot Weisman.. Have you used the same concept as this article speaks of (black centre on a single light light source) or did you use a couple of strip lights?
I'd imagine the striplights would be easier than trying to rig a massive 3/4 body size black flag.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 09:42 UTC

Just went to the stationary store after work and bought black cardboard for $2.40. Used a few magnets to attach it to a 6x6 foot diffusion cloth. Tied it to a couple of light stands. Backlit it with an open face and a fresnel.

Just the backlights:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1832778312/photos/3453427/_mg_9241-custom

Reflective umbrella on the front:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1832778312/photos/3453426/_mg_9240-custom

A shot from further back to show there's a lot more light around the edges than this broncolor setup. So the effect may be slightly different.. but you get the idea:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1832778312/photos/3453428/_mg_9242-custom

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 09:39 UTC as 5th comment | 4 replies

They should at least use examples that observe where the light is coming from and where the shadows are falling.
Last time I checked this solar system only had one sun...

Link | Posted on May 23, 2016 at 00:29 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

Ran Plett: Ugh what a boring FL.

There are no boring focal lengths.. Only boring photographers.. Lol

Link | Posted on May 20, 2016 at 12:18 UTC
In reply to:

Frank in Bridgewater: People who make decisions on the quality, or otherwise, of lenses, cameras, based on sample internet galleries and talk about 12 or 14 or 16 bit color and stuff seem to forget that what you are seeing in a browser are 8 bit jpegs displayed at (probably) 72 dpi (or less).

^^^
Err.. What?
72dpi is like a 1080p screen at about 26inches across. Or a smaller screen at a lower res. There where many like this just a handful of years ago.
Even a mid range Eizo monitor clocks in at about 94dpi..

Link | Posted on May 20, 2016 at 12:17 UTC
In reply to:

Frank in Bridgewater: People who make decisions on the quality, or otherwise, of lenses, cameras, based on sample internet galleries and talk about 12 or 14 or 16 bit color and stuff seem to forget that what you are seeing in a browser are 8 bit jpegs displayed at (probably) 72 dpi (or less).

You could break it down to a biological level and state that humans don't perceive colors in a universally consistent manner anyway..
My magenta might be your pink.. so what's the point?
Why don't we all just look at RGB data values and split channel histograms instead?

Link | Posted on May 20, 2016 at 06:09 UTC
In reply to:

Lan: Executive summary: Centre sharp, but corners soft.

High levels of astigamatism/coma appear to be the reason for the relatively poor showing at the corners; so this is not the lens of choice for astrophotography.

That said the A7R2 is a harsh test for any lens. Based on my experiences on a 5D2, I suspect the Samyang 14mm f2.8 might be a better option, but I haven't tried it on an A7R2...

'Executive summary: Centre sharp, but corners soft.'

Perfect for ultra wide-angle portraiture then?...

Link | Posted on May 19, 2016 at 02:46 UTC
On article Readers' Showcase: Arek Halusko (42 comments in total)
In reply to:

fmian: Wonderful compositions and great use of monochrome tones.
Can't help but want to see them shot on analog.

The results of colour scanning are VERY dependent on the the scanner itself and the settings used.
I scanned an 18x image series on 2 different scanners and even when the 2 print jobs are side by side people think they are 2 totally different series.

In my opinion if you know roughly what the end result will look like then you won't be disappointed.
I've shot a BDSM club event on Superia 800 pushed to 1600. I knew there would be grain but for most of the shots it suited the gritty rough character of the environment and people there.

Black and white is not so varied with the end result as there are no colour tones.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2016 at 01:24 UTC
On article Readers' Showcase: Arek Halusko (42 comments in total)

Wonderful compositions and great use of monochrome tones.
Can't help but want to see them shot on analog.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2016 at 00:15 UTC as 11th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

dulynoted: To me it just looks like the second image has had the contrast and clarity reduced slightly....no comments as to whether or not it improves the image but it sure did take a lot of work for something that is not all that impressive.

The only thing I have to compare this to is Michael Ortons own examples
http://www.michaelortonphotography.com/galleries/orton-effect/index.html
Which are a lot more surreal, glowing and painterly; much further removed from reality.
Each to their own but I'd like to see the one used in this article have the effect pushed on it significantly more.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2016 at 23:33 UTC
In reply to:

fmian: IMO too much foreground in the shot which takes one out of the environment due to glaringly unnatural perspective error and glow. Not to mention how the flowers become sparse (less interesting) as you get lower in the frame.
Just a guess, but perhaps this is a case where the obligation to post process and show this technique off was more important than the composition of the shot itself?

Fair enough, my guess was incorrect.
I just saw it cropped square-ish on the DPReview sidepanel and was able see it almost side by side with your 2:3-ish final. So the difference in appeal for me was apparent immediately. Again, just my opinion.

Link | Posted on May 11, 2016 at 23:22 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: might be worth picking up one of those dirt cheap original M bodies just to use this. Very cool ideal.

If you know what to focus on there is almost never focus hunting. I get the impression some people just tell their camera to focus automatically on a scene with varied subject matter and expect it to know what to do...

Link | Posted on May 11, 2016 at 13:56 UTC

1.2x close up portraiture anyone?

Link | Posted on May 11, 2016 at 13:51 UTC as 44th comment

IMO too much foreground in the shot which takes one out of the environment due to glaringly unnatural perspective error and glow. Not to mention how the flowers become sparse (less interesting) as you get lower in the frame.
Just a guess, but perhaps this is a case where the obligation to post process and show this technique off was more important than the composition of the shot itself?

Link | Posted on May 11, 2016 at 06:49 UTC as 20th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

zakk9: These are "most influential gadgets in history in the industrialised world", and some of them are hardly known outside of The United States. There are two mobile phone models that have sold better than the 3210, both of the Nokias, the 1100 and the 1110 hat sold 250 millions each. But those are models mostly sold in the Third World, a part of the world that has little meaning to most people who don't live there.

It's not about unit sales, it's about what was influential. The sales you mention in third world countries would not have been possible if some other influential product had not paved the way before it.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2016 at 02:14 UTC

Phwoar!!
60fps please!!

Link | Posted on May 6, 2016 at 00:21 UTC as 18th comment
On article Unconventional COVR Photo case launches for iPhone SE (51 comments in total)

In 1972 Dr Edwin Land, founder of Polaroid unveiled the SX-70 SLR camera. It incorporated an ingenious yet simple system that folded light AND could be flattened for storage by using internal mirrored surfaces and hinges. It made a previously large optical system smaller, AND projected onto a larger format size.

44 years later and it seems design theory has gone backwards. Taking a flat smartphone and making it bigger by way of a sharp jutting optic that always sticks out and wants to poke you in the leg, or prevent you from laying the smartphone flat on its back.

*sigh*

Link | Posted on May 6, 2016 at 00:13 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

ThePhilips: Oly & Pana too report (minor) increase in sales. Fuji reported positive results last year too. Thus, the mirrorless has (financially) happened and is here to stay.

And I'm pretty sure Fujis profits came from sales of analog media.

Link | Posted on May 3, 2016 at 14:43 UTC
In reply to:

Iloveaircraftnoise: Does anybody on here actually take photos?

This website has dynamic range paranoia.

If DR is important for landscape wouldn't one just bracket and get better results?

I think you meant to say DR is important for a handheld landscape shot with moving subject matter in it, where you don't mind the risk of noisy shadow from pushing in post.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 11:21 UTC
In reply to:

fmian: What I'm seeing is that the 5Dmk3 and 6D are capturing more detail at high ISO.
Like the blue backing of the playing cards at ISO 102400 Raw.

What's the point of Nikons shadow push capability when it's not capturing as much detail in the first place?

Totally my mistake. I'm getting the naming conventions mixed up.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2016 at 10:51 UTC
Total: 891, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »