Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I love the way you put that. That's part of what inspires my photography too. I want the scene to look better than reality but I want the real location to still be recognizable to the viewer.
A somewhat related inspiration is to see the world differently than what the eyes can show you - whether that's making backgrounds blurry, exaggerating lines and angles, or manipulating events over time with long exposures.
both my wife and i shoot and process very similar now . i become more subdued like her and she became more in your face with lots of presence like my stuff .
so now many times we look at stuff we did and go is it yours or mine ?
I started doing photography because I have a fine motor issue that makes it difficult to paint/draw the way I'd like to. I started upgrading equipment and learning more advanced techniques because if I'm going to spend the time chasing down images and sharing them, I want to work toward making my photos as fine as possible. Like, as a watercolor painter CAN I complete a painting with a walmart set of paints and paper pad? Sure. But a set of Yarka paints and cold-press Arches paper will give me more vivid colors, finer control, and produce an painting that holds up better over time. It's not snobbery (although some people can make it into that) - you genuinely can do things with certain higher quality tools and equipment (not always more expensive equipment, but often higher quality does cost more) that you can't do with lower-end stuff. For example, I do a ton of night photography, which you just can't do satisfactorily with a cell phone or even a lower-end DSLR.
I like playing around with old cameras, homemade cameras, and yes, cell phones, for various experimental projects where fidelity and image quality aren't the objectives.
I do sell some sizable prints of single images (3 feet or more), and you really can't go that big unless you've put work into achieving high image quality in the initial shot, the processing, and the printing.
Interesting. I always thought painting looked like so much fun - like the work Bob Ross does. Or an artist who made a picture of my dog into a painting. But for as long as I can remember (at least going back into high school) I've had a mild hand tremor that interferes with that kind of art. It's not anxiety-related. I've just never had steady hands. Nevertheless, at a reasonable shutter speed, it doesn't affect my photography. I can even do 1/10th sec hand-held shots as long as I have image stabilization.
we shot a music festival last night . i used the nikon 28-300mm for the afternoon shots . i had been debating selling my 70-200mm vrii f2.8 . but after the sun went down it was time to put the f2.8 on instead . the speeds were going to low and the iso to high so the f2.8 was really called for .
now i took it back off the sell list
nothing like long lenses and a dslr when the job calls for it . i have the nikon 2x extender for it .
I really like the first one. The others are nice but I would have preferred more background blur. I assume either that wasn't possible (too small a subject to background distance) or you wanted a sharper background.
Not award-winning photos by any means, but for various reasons I was unable to bring my mirrorless setup, and the iPhone did its job.
(Unless you've seen a prior solar eclipse, I strongly recommend just using your eyeballs to enjoy the experience. Eclipses are too short to waste futzing around with camera equipment! If you do want to shoot it, a tripod is a must.)
If your goal was to simply take a photo of the solar eclipse well done my friend. You've accomplished that in no uncertain terms. Comparing the capabilities of a cell phone with an SLR is like comparing a McLaren 720S with a Prius. They both "do the same thing"....one just does it better and is far more expensive.
I really like the first one. The others are nice but I would have preferred more background blur. I assume either that wasn't possible (too small a subject to background distance) or you wanted a sharper background.
If your goal was to simply take a photo of the solar eclipse well done my friend. You've accomplished that in no uncertain terms.
That was the goal. I wasn't about to spend a lot of time fussing with camera equipment during my very first experience of totality, and I was viewing the eclipse out at sea. Even a tripod doesn't help if the platform the tripod is on isn't steady. So for those reasons (plus weight limitations) I left my mirrorless setup at home and just took an advanced point-and-shoot and my iPhone and only took a few quick shots with each. The iPhone photos actually came out far better than the point-and-shoot's did, which surprised me. Anyway, I posted the photos to show that you CAN get some halfway decent eclipse shots with a smartphone camera, provided you stay within the limits of what the equipment can do. A smartphone camera is not a DSLR, but it can have its place in a photographer's gear list.
(As it turned out the sea was pretty calm that day, so those traveling on the cruise who did bring their DSLRs and good tripods did get some great shots. With eclipse photography, luck always plays a big, big role.)
If your goal was to simply take a photo of the solar eclipse well done my friend. You've accomplished that in no uncertain terms. Comparing the capabilities of a cell phone with an SLR is like comparing a McLaren 720S with a Prius. They both "do the same thing"....one just does it better and is far more expensive.
Fascinating example because ironically, there are many advantages the Prius has over the McLaren (as well as many disadvantages).
This is by far the dumbest thing I've read today. Try capturing the solar eclipse with that iPhone
I'd just add that he said 90% the user, 10% the tool. Night time photography is probably in that 10%. (I do think a top cell phone on a tripod for a long exposure might be better than you think though not DSLR level.)
Sorry for the late reply: I just got back from Finland yesterday, and am playing catchup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frostnip
Well, yeah, the new pro and enthusiast mirrorless cameras are giving DSLRs a run for their money But I know that's not what you mean.
Actually, it was what I meant (along with the existence of film rangefinders, and both film and digital medium and large format cameras).
Quote:
The thing is, though, that if you take any one skilled photographer who has creativity, technical acumen, and a good eye, and give them a variety of devices, and free reign and time to shoot the same scene on all of them, the higher-end professional grade equipment is going to produce higher quality photos in the vast majority of conditions.
Of course. But that quality comes at a price (and not just in dollars).
Quote:
Lower-end and casual equipment only really has the advantage when it can go somewhere the fancy stuff can't or won't for whatever reason. The main advantages of cellphone cameras are that you have them with you, and that they're sneaky. I wouldn't say that has much to do with the art of photography...it's just practicality.
But practicality drives a lot of photography. If it didn't, we'd all be shooting with large format view cameras all the time.
Quote:
I say this as someone who has a lot of fun taking pictures with a little cardboard box with a hole poked it, so I'm not discounting the cool photography that can be done with super basic equipment.
A bit OT, but I remember coming across a forum once where people posted creative photos they took with old Holga film cameras (which had been chosen specifically for their legendary lens aberrations). Sounds like the sort of photography you'd enjoy: having fun by pushing the limits of really limited gear.
Quote:
Honestly, for me personally a cell phone camera or a pocket point-and-shoot is neither fish nor fowl when it comes to photography...I can't get the technically challenging shots I can with a DSLR, nor can I get the weird organic effects I can with old or homemade cameras.
What I like about my cell phone camera is that I have it on me all of the time, and that it's super easy to upload shots directly from my camera to SmugMug. What I like about my advanced point-and-shoot is that (unlike a cell phone camera, which has minimal controls), it feels and handles like a "real' camera but it doesn't draw attention to itself the way a DSLR or a larger mirrorless camera might. It doesn't look like something worth stealing, and it doesn't look like a "professional' camera which might not be allowed in some venues. The big advantage of the DSLR or a good mirrorless camera, of course, is the quality the larger sensor gives you and the ability to pick exactly the lens you need for the job at hand.
Different guns for different game.
Last edited by Aredhel; 08-16-2017 at 03:36 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
