whiney pop punk at its best

Those 2 shots would have been awesome, if they were shot on a Canon!


I kid!
They'd still be cra.... wait, I'm still kidding.

Great shots

but wait, i shot them in raw so they must be better right?? :-\

I can tell they were taken in RAW.
They have that look.

the look of unnecessary self indulgent wankery?

oh, young padawan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_pezman

the look of unnecessary self indulgent wankery?

by that logic chefs should only use microwaves to cook food.

Buy a Ferrari.
Convert it to electric cause you don't need the additional power options.
Smart!

here we go again

by that analogy, to me its more like spending the extra to buy a ferrari when i only want to drive the speed limit (maybe a bit higher) and dont need it for "just in case" times i want to drive 300+kph, which is never.

or having a michelin chef to cook your everyday meals at home

or carrying ALL your camera gear EVERYwhere, cos you know, JUST in case you need it

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hemerage

oh, young padawan.

so you were being serious?

i wasnt, shot in jpg, lightly processed.

contrary to all the downward nose looking, im willing to give anything a try and have been shooting raw over the last couple months to see where it can benefit me. i shot the support (taking back sunday) in raw to see the difference or more so see if i could make a difference in processing. generally it didnt help much, i found myself pushing sliders way more and spending more time doing so (tweaking back and forth) than i normally would. i did notice there was way less loss for colour shifting etc but im not going to fabricate something that wasnt there.

i deliberately underexposed a few shots to see what i could salvage, while i could bring some of it back, the noise (no thanks to shooting around iso6400) killed it. lr noise reduction just made everything vaseliney. in general, the processing i did on the shots didnt require anything more than a couple clicks in the library window for level adjusting.

cant see it benefiting me with live stuff but have just finished processing a batch of promo shots (will post when i get to it) where i tried nismos wedding shot using a test shot, pulled it back nicely after a good 15min of adjustment brushing. handy but not necessary for the shot since i just bumped up my key light on the day.

of course it has its applications, like one chance sort of moments at weddings but if you know what youre shooting and can read a scenario which is 95% of my shooting, then why should i use it?

serious question, im all for improving so tell me how i can use it to make my photos better.
(short of getting better at processing and becoming a shoptographer)

because it's like having a blu-ray player that you only watch dvds on.

not if you dont own any blu ray dvds

Best of both worlds is to use the camera manufacturers proprietary software. You can churn and burn a lot and the cameras noise reduction algorithms are typically pretty good.

I did find yself using view nx to do some quick on the fly adjustments. Was all well and dandy until it corrupted an image file. :S

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_pezman

not if you dont own any blu ray dvds

oh god, terminology fail

thanks aa, might have to give that a try. pretty sure i still have the original disc floating around some where

Quote:

Originally Posted by rancho

oh god, terminology fail

oh god, pedancho strikes again!

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_pezman

thanks aa, might have to give that a try. pretty sure i still have the original disc floating around some where



oh god, pedancho strikes again!

Free download from Nikon

It has limited adjustment options, but you can still tweak exposure, contrast and a few other things.

thats all i really need. the nr is the one thing thats perked my curiousity, could def. use it on some live gig shots, thanks man

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_pezman

oh god, pedancho strikes again!

hey man, that girl was definitely 16.

second gig ive shot with the d800, performance has been great. the AF is way faster, more accurate and hunts less than the d700, still havent gotten use to the backwards +/- buttons on the back, the backwards metering..meter, the small iso button or the lack lustured muffled shutter noise but the condensed grip has proved to be rather comfy over long periods and the ...ill call it the pinnail view (one more zoom out from normal thumbnails) ie. you can see 50(?) images at once, is good for scrolling back to check over a days work.

have had a couple weird lock ups where it stays on when the switch is off or it becomes unresponsive when trying to accessing photos. this was sposed to be fixed on the first firmware upgrade, mines the latest and is a few gens ahead but still does it. write speed is slower too even when im "only" shooting at 20mp on a 90mb/s sony pro card, but nothing a couple on/off clicks doesnt fix.

(first gig was parklife and only the second time ive bothered with two bodies and after working out positioning sans a black rapid im sold, no more lens changing for me i did miss my fending arm tho, copped a few good elbows to the chest and gut!)

anyways, these are from steel panther, (un?)surprisingly more tits out than their LA gig i saw at the house of blues!
dont know what eatons hill is like normally but the lighting was some of the best ive seen in a non festival/arena venue

aws shots pez!

Siick!

and where can we get a link to the shot you can't post online?


and what's Eatons Hill like, there's been a couple of gigs there I've thought about but thought it'd be too much like an rsl

thanks guys (:

time off ended up running the first shot (with a center square crop) live gigs dont matter too much so theyre not as strict. normally as a courtesy i wait a week so they get the traffic/readers.

dont know what the rest of eh is like (tho judging from the strict dress code and rsl like rules itll be a right shit of a place to go out to normally) but the function room where they have the concerts is great. at a guess its slightly bigger than the tiv and set up in the same U shape with a mezzanine level. sound was good, getting around was as bad as any concert tho the single double doors that was open for entry/exit was a bit annoying at times and the drive out there is a bit of a hike. worth it for gigs like that tho

Hi all, a few photos taken at this Year's Field Day.

Taken exclusively with the nikkor 85mm 1.8g which has become my favorite lens.

Unfortunately, facebook's "High Quality" does not do the sharpness of this lens any justice.

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?s...8689495&type=1

I thought Hi-Quality just meant that it uploaded and stored the full res, so you can get it from the 'Download' option on the photo?
ps, are you resizing to 960 long edge with a small sharpen after re-size?

Quote:

Originally Posted by autumn acid

Hi all, a few photos taken at this Year's Field Day.

According to your coverage, there was next to no guys at the event

isn't that how all festivals are? mostly just chicks wearing not much


aa did you find the one length limiting at all? don't wish you had some wider shots to mix it up?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hemerage

I thought Hi-Quality just meant that it uploaded and stored the full res, so you can get it from the 'Download' option on the photo?
ps, are you resizing to 960 long edge with a small sharpen after re-size?

I just heard this 960 rule today. I'll try upload something tonight to see if it makes a difference. Yeah, I apply a small touch of sharpening at export stage.

Haha, RE no males? Yeah, not much interest in them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NismoR31

isn't that how all festivals are? mostly just chicks wearing not much


aa did you find the one length limiting at all? don't wish you had some wider shots to mix it up?

No, not really. I had my 24 to 70 with me, but I was really enjoying the photos and the perspective that the 85mm was yielding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by autumn acid

I just heard this 960 rule today. I'll try upload something tonight to see if it makes a difference. Yeah, I apply a small touch of sharpening at export stage.

Haha, RE no males? Yeah, not much interest in them.

I think they changed their normal display size 6-12 months ago... it used to be 800x*, iirc, which is what yours currently are.

That said, some still get raped.

i've found with facebook, if your images are over 200kb then they RAPE them on compression. i've found that 960x long edge @ 70% jpeg quality (using lightroom) yields pretty decent results that don't then get massively downsampled on upload to FB.

i shot SFD with a sigma 50mm f/1.4 and i loved it. i normally use a 24-70, but i found the 50mm prime awesome. i took my zeiss 21/2.8 and used it like... once. for a coupla shots of booka shade. although in saying that, all 3 main stages were tents, so there wasn't really any opportunity for wide crowd shots.

will post some pics later coz can't fb @ work.

i export for fb at 960px @ 96 dpi (don't remember my reasoning for this - probably to do with modern monitors dpi not being 72) at about 70% jpeg qual. Never seems to get hit with the compressionator when i up them. I don't actually pay attention to file sizes but pretty sure they're well under 200k

calvin harris

and yeah the rest are gonna be m.i.a. because she was the only performer with decent lighting.















autumn acid, finally saw your gallery with the 85mm, damn that looks great. natural lighting ftw, looks much more fun than shooting social pics with fill flash.

^first and third ones are all you need
dark skin, cap/hood and low lighting is the worse combination!


man, i couldnt think of anything worse than shooting a whole festival at 85mm! granted you did a good job AA but for me its too long for wide and too short for long! id also take fill flash anyday, no squinty faces looking into the sun, no need to stick to the shade and no trying to jostle ppl into position. also good for getting a nice balanced shot late in the arv for a sunset or stormy clouds.


i export at 640px 72dpi 90%jpg, no idea where those numbers came about. well apart from the dpi, didnt know the new monitors were highly so might have to bump that. so you guys think its fine at 70% jpg for online viewing?

i can't really tell the difference between 90% and 70% @ 960px. other than it being less than half the file size.

the only time you will tell is if you have a smooth gradient. you'll get banding from the compression

that's the only time i ramp up the quality

a few from soundwave, not a bad day, still the biggest bitch to get around that venue, the direct clashes didnt help at all!
they also made an extra firm point of "no shots of the stage from the crowd", of course its fine for the ppl down the front with the high end compacts. might have to bring mine next time











most entertaining band of the day was "fucked up"
crushing cans and cups on his head so they would stick


moshing with the crowd until some kid jumped on him, swiped the mic and started singing the song, he kept going even as he was getting thrown around like a rag doll!

Good stuff!

awesome stuff pez, definitely some of your finest work

Spoiler:

also super jelly of your d800 high iso, that red light is normally lost detail nightmare!

nice juan

Crisp photos Pez!

thanks guys
all shot with my trusty (probably should rename it rusty with all the water its taken in over the years :p ) ol 70-300 4.5-5.6 not exactly the best for quality, speed (focus and ap) or weather sealing (re: none!) but its got the reach!

and thanks for noticing rancho, ive really been trying hard to harness the red beast. it seems like way underexposing is the way to go on the right shots.
managed another one at future swampfest with prodigys guitarist

probably the least muddy section ...only ankle deep :S


chick totes copped it in the face


stonerz


dizzaz


prodaz - never an easy shoot, 20 strobes on different power and speed settings, half of them pointed at eye level and ol keith going berko! lol






piss easy when theyre standing still and the lights slow down tho


blocaz

killin' it pez, i think your compositions have really stepped up lately. just love that last one with the rain.

5th one (red light!!!!) is simply superb as well.

disappointed i missed out shooting future, was at a friends wedding instead (which was fucking awesome, but wish i could do both).

Don't do many club shots, but my mate was up from Sydney playing and saw my camera in the car and made me take it with me...

50mm not the best choice for the occasion I've now learnt!


_MG_8264 by Gallery9Studios, on Flickr


_MG_8487 by Gallery9Studios, on Flickr


_MG_8313 by Gallery9Studios, on Flickr

I've also learnt I can't take photos when I'm drunk

I think the first ones great!

first one for me too

lol yep, 50mm in a club, you only do that once. good for picking off ppl on the dancefloor as you found but pretty shit for everything else.

is that family? i havent been there for so long!

Quote:

Originally Posted by rancho

killin' it pez, i think your compositions have really stepped up lately. just love that last one with the rain.

5th one (red light!!!!) is simply superb as well.

disappointed i missed out shooting future, was at a friends wedding instead (which was fucking awesome, but wish i could do both).

thanks again man i think being away from the scene for a little bit ie. not shooting every week has given me a new perspective on it. shooting for print media has probably added to that too since they almost always want tight crops (much to my annoyance when ive made the effort to include a cool background or their shoes :p )

i dont know how disappointed youd be if you were there man. it now ranks as my #1 worse festival ever that ive shot. not just stop start rain or drizzle, not just a bit muddy in places but nonstop rain the whole day and completely swampy everywhere! it was just terrible. i even dropped the "fvck this for a joke, def. not doing this again next year" as i was leaving, which ive never said and fmf is always shit for conditions!
....but alas no doubt i'll be taking it up the tailpipe again next year lol

some from bloc partys solo show sans the torrentials

like the laser one Skerik

Hey Pez, curious if you are still shooting JPEG? Rancho was surprised by how the d800 treats reds, but this is where proprietary raw conversion trumps lightroom.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_pezman

first one for me too

lol yep, 50mm in a club, you only do that once. good for picking off ppl on the dancefloor as you found but pretty shit for everything else.

is that family? i havent been there for so long!

Thanks - 'twas elsewhere down the goldy

Thinking a 17-40 would be more suited to the task? That's what I'm looking at getting next anyways, reckon I'll find out next time I try take drunken club shots!

17-40 on full frame is pretty damn good for clubs. i think a 24-70 is probably better though.

35 f/1.4 is perfect though.

Depends on how good the club is. The better the club the wider the prime.

35mm was too long.

I found a 24 to 70 useless in clubs. Far too cumbersome.