General Photography Chat - Page 50

Robert Pence · #**981** Posted **Mar 8, 2011, 4:42 AM**

You can resolve the standard frame size problem by buying sectional frame kits available at most art supply and hobby stores. I know that Michael's and Hobby Lobby both have them. Each kit has two rails, and they come in 1- or 2-inch increments. You buy two kits to make a frame, one kit for each dimension of the frame. They come with all the hardware needed to assemble them.

Mostly the ones available in the hobby shops currently are aluminum. I always preferred the wood kits from Nielsen-Bainbridge, but they seemed to have become unavailable for a while. Lately I notice some on-line vendors are advertising them again.

Just for kicks, sometime compare plexiglas with glass for your framed photos. Personally, I prefer plexiglas because it's truly clear and shows the print just the way you created it. Glass, even picture glass, has a greenish cast to it that alters the appearance of some colors, especially lighter ones, and seems to flatten contrast in black-and-white photos.

If you're going for art sales, I suggest not matting or framing. Most art buyers will have their own ideas of how they want it matted and framed, or they follow the advice of a professional framer whom they trust. For that market, just print on oversized paper and go with a crystal-clear envelope with cardboard backing.

Gallery shows usually will require matting and framing, wired for hanging. A show I entered recently stipulated white mat and black frame for an approach that would emphasize the photos instead of glittery, flamboyant presentation. Old-school gallery exhibits used to stipulate print and mat size, typically 11x14 print with a 16x20 white mat. Further, the old-school way of matting was centered left-to-right and with 40 percent of the vertical white space above the print and 60 percent beneath it. I still like that look; maybe it's because I'm old.

diskojoe · #**982** Posted **Mar 9, 2011, 7:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThatDarnSacramentan

I'm not pricing these for my classmates. I'm pricing these for their rich, art loving parents. The kinds of parents who can afford to buy their kids a BMW and then a Lexus after they've totaled the BMW.

those kind of people by names, not art.

Aleks · #**983** Posted **Mar 9, 2011, 11:44 PM**

yayyyy! i sold my first copy on a website todayyy!!! i set up an account with etsy and i'm printing on thick poster paper at costco.

all my prices are at $35, including shipping, of a 11x14max copy with 1/2 inch white margin around.

i'll keep you guys updated on how my first online order went!

mr.John · #**984** Posted **Mar 10, 2011, 1:55 AM**

check out this 40 megapixel bad boy

http://www.lozeau.com/en-CA/catalogue/cameras/slr/pentax-645d-body-only/

Doady · #**985** Posted **Mar 13, 2011, 7:29 AM**

Just found out that my favourite photography magazine - Color - has folded. Color was the sister magazine to B&W, both dedicated to showing fine art photography. Sad that color photography is still not considered to viable as "art" in this day and age. Literally, most, if not all, the other art photography magazines have black-and-white photos only. Color was the only one that had colour photos, and now it's gone. Sad.

Doady · #**986** Posted **Mar 13, 2011, 9:35 PM**

Btw, has anyone heard of the new Fujifilm X100. Seems like it would be a good camera for street photography, considering the live view and the silent shutter (to attract less attention). It also has (electronic) focus distance scale, which missing on most other cameras/lenses, so you can actually set the camera manual focus to the hyperfocal distance. Plus, the camera looks really cool.

The lens is fixed though, at 23mm (34.5mm) F2.0, but that is a really good general purpose, and also good for street. But if I do get this, it means I will need another camera for more telephoto.

diskojoe · #**987** Posted **Mar 15, 2011, 1:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.John

check out this 40 megapixel bad boy

http://www.lozeau.com/en-CA/catalogue/cameras/slr/pentax-645d-body-only/

how about 46?

sigma sd1

diskojoe · #**988** Posted **Mar 15, 2011, 1:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doady

Btw, has anyone heard of the new Fujifilm X100. Seems like it would be a good camera for street photography, considering the live view and the silent shutter (to attract less attention). It also has (electronic) focus distance scale, which missing on most other cameras/lenses, so you can actually set the camera manual focus to the hyperfocal distance. Plus, the camera looks really cool.

The lens is fixed though, at 23mm (34.5mm) F2.0, but that is a really good general purpose, and also good for street. But if I do get this, it means I will need another camera for more telephoto.

This camera seems like it could be really nice. i wish it had some variable range in the lens but considering its an f2 it kinda makes up for it. i like the look too. really classic with the textured body. looks straight outta the 70's.

Ramsayfarian · #**989** Posted **Mar 15, 2011, 9:23 PM**

More bad news from Japan:

"After last week’s devastating earthquake and tsunami in Japan, Canon and Nikon have been forced to shut down major camera and lens manufacturing plants due to damage and injuries to employees. At Canon’s Utsunomiya plant — which contributes to much of the company’s lens output and appears as the letter “U” on the date code — 15 workers were injured and operations have been suspended indefinitely. Nikon’s Sendai plant — which has produced all of Nikon’s pro-level DSLRs including the D3S, D3X, and D700 — has been shut down as well after an unspecified number of workers were injured. No word on when operations at the plants might resume.

The two companies are also doing their part in contributing towards the relief efforts: Nikon is making a cash donation of 100 million Yen (~$1.25m USD) to the Japanese Red Cross, while Canon is donating 300 million Yen ($3.7m USD)."

http://www.petapixel.com/2011/03/15/cano...utm_campaign=Feed:+PetaPixel+(PetaPixel)

photoLith · #**990** Posted **Mar 15, 2011, 11:33 PM**

^
Well, that sucks, but its good to know that the companies I buy my lenses and cameras from care about their country and are helping out.

Ayreonaut · #**991** Posted **Mar 16, 2011, 1:22 AM**

Apparently my Canon 55-250 was made in Malaysia.

diskojoe · #**992** Posted **Mar 16, 2011, 2:31 PM**

They only make the good stuff in Japan.

flar · #**993** Posted **Mar 18, 2011, 12:57 PM**

I'm always missing out on great photos because I can't carry my DSLR and lenses everywhere, so I was thinking about getting a small camera that fits in my pocket.

Anybody have suggestions?

Must have:
-responsive shutter button (ie, no big delay)
-12 megapixel or more
-RAW output
-good optical quality
-full manual control (aperture, shutter, ISO)
-small rectangular, prefer that lens doesn't stick out

I would prefer to use a viewfinder instead of the LCD screen

Focal length is not a huge deal, a small zoom range is okay. Wide to normal is more important, I rarely go to telephoto lengths.

The camera Doady mentioned above is interesting, but I think it might be too expensive, I'd like to stay under $400 if possible.

mr.John · #**994** Posted **Mar 18, 2011, 2:48 PM**

why not a panosonic lumix they have models around the $400 that really kick ass,Bedhead uses one and he gets spectacular results (probably the sharpess photos I've seen being posted)

Aleks · #**995** Posted **Mar 19, 2011, 4:33 PM**

sorry, no suggestions

but! i just ordered a tokina 11-16!! it drained my bank account, but i don't have to pay for school till september and it's community college so i have plenty of time to save up (kinda stingy with my money anyways).

as for japan, starbucks donated 1.2 million as well. on one hand it's great that we have such a strong connection to japan here in seattle, but at the same time it's devastating for those with family members thousands of miles away.

diskojoe · #**996** Posted **Mar 20, 2011, 6:43 AM**

congrats on the tokina 11-16mm. i had my eye on one of those until i saw this sigma 8-16mm f4.5 - 5.6. now i just dont know. its hard to decide on what to trade off on speed and dof or a wider angle. Im kinda leaning towards that extra 3mm's.

Aleks · #**997** Posted **Mar 21, 2011, 5:08 AM**

thanks! it's such a sexy lens. i had it for a few months a while back but then it got stolen

i would recommend it over any mid-price wide angle out there. the build and picture quality are amazing. plus the f2.8 is nice. not that it makes a dramatic difference with wide angles, but it's nice during dim winter days. i haven't gone wider than 11mm (on dx sensors) but i would imagine it'd look sweeeeet. although even with 11mm i found things to look a bit dramatic from some angles.

anyways, i ordered it from adorama, which is currently out of stock but i can wait. definitely would rather wait than pay 700 bucks over at amazon (100 dollars more).

diskojoe · #**998** Posted **Mar 21, 2011, 1:34 PM**

I saw the tokinas on ebay going for about 600 a while back. but that was right after christmas when they want to get rid of overstock. i really want to check out that new sigma 8-16.

flar · #**999** Posted **Mar 21, 2011, 2:46 PM**

I've heard good things about the Panasonic Lumix cameras, and Bedhead gets really good results. I played with some cameras at Best Buy on the weekend, it's pretty tough to get used to the feel of compact cameras after using an slr for so long. The cameras that seemed closer to my needs started to climb in price (of course). There's such a huge selection, it becomes confusing. The worst thing is that almost all the cameras are nearly the same, and none of them seem to be what I'm looking for.

Doady · #**1000** Posted **Mar 21, 2011, 8:35 PM**

Viewfinder (electronic or optical) generally means camera is not going to be pocketable (though it would be much more compact than SLR). Add in RAW, full manual controls, good image quality, speed, I think you'd have to be prepared to spend $600 at least.

I don't think you should be too concerned about megapixels on cameras like these. The fact that the new high-end compact cameras have less megapixels than the cheaper, low-end cameras should tell you something.

Summary of the possible choices:

The Canon G12 ($580): much more compact than SLR (and probably slightly smaller than my Olympus C7070, based on my experience with the G10), but not enough to be "pocketable". It has a basic (and small and inaccurate) optical viewfinder.

The Olympus XZ-1 ($550): truly pocketable and compatible with the best EVF ($270) out there. The EVF is attachable and fits on the hot shoe, meaning you can't use it the same time as an external flash, but I guess its portable that way. Note that the XZ-1 has a bright F1.8-2.5 lens.

The Panasonic LX5 ($500): pocketable, but its external EVF is low quality, and lens is F2.0-3.3, which is very bright, but still pales in comparison to that of the XZ-1. It has the widest angle though (24mm instead of 28mm) and has a multi-aspect ratio sensor.

These are all 10 megapixel cameras. I like the G12 the most out of all these, but only because I don't need it to fit in my pocket and I like to have a lot of buttons and dials. I just like a camera to be compact and fit into a small pouch or bag. If you really need pocketability (or even if you don't), I think the XZ-1 could be the best because of the ultra-bright lens.