The Photo Snob Thread

[Oliver.]

It's most likely that you took the photographs on private property. Train stations are usually private property as they are owned by CityRail. Railway yards or other railway property owned by Government is also usually considered 'private property'.

Photographs taken on private property comes under trespass, and it is illegal. If they choose to pursue it, they can get an injunction to stop you from publishing or using the photos.

If its hard to identify the place, I wouldn't worry too much about it. It's very unlikely anyone would actually come across it and go "hey that's the photo from the guy that was there taking photos once"
Just be aware that it's illegal

 

[Sam91]

After seeing the photo on you flickr, I highly doubt you have anything to worry about, and the location isn't really recognisable, well done on the photos by the way

 

[alexx23]

Would it not be wise considering a 1 series body, if only for the ability to run redundant memory cards?

I love the 1 series but I don't think id buy one. Used one for a wedding season and it was awesome but now using a 5DMKII for weddings It is so much easier. If i was doing more action shots I would consider it, the 5DMKII has proven its self to me for anything i would need it for. Battery grip is a must on a 5d though, makes you take better photos .

 

[wombat]

I love the 1 series but I don't think id buy one. Used one for a wedding season and it was awesome but now using a 5DMKII for weddings It is so much easier. If i was doing more action shots I would consider it, the 5DMKII has proven its self to me for anything i would need it for. Battery grip is a must on a 5d though, makes you take better photos .

Fair enough; I guess I'm just paranoid about failures; probably why I'd never want to shoot a wedding!

 

[alexx23]

Shooting a wedding with out a back up body would be insane. Everything fails, you just need back up when it does, my boss is so paranoid he has 4 cameras with him at every shoot haha.

 

[wombat]

Shooting a wedding with out a back up body would be insane. Everything fails, you just need back up when it does, my boss is so paranoid he has 4 cameras with him at every shoot haha.

Nah, not backup bodies, that's a given. What scares me is getting home and finding that the card's corrupted, and half the key shots are missing. It's not like it's the sort of shoot where you can book the model again and reshoot what you lost, it's gone.

At the end of the day you can spend a couple of grand on a nice body, but you're still entrusting the stuff that really matters, the data, to a hundred bucks worth of memory card. Dual slots and redundant cards are a big attraction I reckon, if only for peace of mind.

 

[alexx23]

Ahh yes now i understand. I refuse to change memory cards for my boss or carry full ones. Thats his job for sure ! I guess it pays to buy top quality cards, even then, shit happens. This is also a massive fear of mine, that and loosing the images once they are on the computer, with in 10 minutes of the photos being imported onto a computer they are on my iMac, MacBook and external hard drive.

 

[Tristan23]

A contract signed pre-event always helps.

Does anyone actually have any real experience of CF card failure? I can understand being cautious, but I wouldn't be losing sleep over what could possibly potentially maybe happen in a worst case scenario...

 

[DHoffmann]

A contract signed pre-event always helps.

Does anyone actually have any real experience of CF card failure? I can understand being cautious, but I wouldn't be losing sleep over what could possibly potentially maybe happen in a worst case scenario...

I've never had an actual card die, but I have lost a night's worth of shooting thanks to extremely slow buffer speed of a card which didn't write everything I'd shot in over 2 hours (the red light was just constantly on on the back of the camera). Since then I've only used high write speed cards, and with 1 notable exception never lost a card. I do still have the slow card as an extreme back-up measure, but I don't believe I've ever used it since out of fear of losing more images.

The card I did lose was because of a shoddy transfer after an event in England somewhere, went to an internet cafe to make use of computers to store files onto my hard drives, but something wasn't working right so the admin had to put the files on his computer and then sent them to the one I was using over the network, and I'd then put them on my HD from there. The first and third card worked fine, but the second somehow got completely corrupted. I still have the folder with full-sized files, in the hope that one day I come across a 'de-corruption' program so I can perhaps get them back.

 

[wombat]

Contracts aren't going to absolve anyone of negligence though (not saying anyone is negligent, I've just heard of a similar issue coming up under that umbrella).

As for the card failures, CF no, SD, yes.
They're all flash memory though, the stuff isn't infallible. Actually, it was a SSD that left me in the shit on a job one day when I showed up on site, on a weekend, well away from home or any replacement parts, only to find that my computer was totally dead; this wasn't a photo gig, it was a training thing, which was pretty much entirely reliant on my machine. Thankfully I had a contingency (or sorts) that got me out of trouble, and I was lucky enough that the clients were really cool and happy to help where they could; but had it been some of the others I'd had, I could have been in super deep shit. That experience has made me very wary of equipment failures (and maybe a little paranoid).

I guess the point is that there's a difference between an amatuer doing a favour for a mate, or a cheap shoot for some people they know, and someone who's been booked for an important event as a professional. I'd expect that a professional has all the requisite skills, and all the details sorted too (gear, insurance, backup plans, whatever). I spose the difficult thing is that there's clearly a big gulf in between the two, where a lot of people (myself included at times) exist for a while. Not that it's a bad thing, it just pays to be aware of the dangers I guess.

I know if I saw a 'pro' shooting an indoor wedding with a basic body, and a slow kit lens, I'd be wondering exactly how they're going to deal with the lack of light, and subject seperation etc. Even at a hobby level we can see the importance of gear when it comes to image quality and shooting in different situations, but I just think that as soon as your images start becoming financially valuable, there's other issues that need to be considered too.

/rambling.

 

[TWChikn]

Jumping in with a shot!
Took this last night. Thoughts?

I feel as though the background is probably too complicated/the car's not separate enough.

 

[Jaydawgz]

Jumping in with a shot!
Took this last night. Thoughts?

I feel as though the background is probably too complicated/the car's not separate enough.

View attachment 217706

I think that the way the front wheel is slightly turned out puts it off a little. I can't quite put my finger on it, but there is something else which puts it off.

Even though I say this, I do like it.

 

[outlaw_inferno]

The first rule of taking shots of cars: Always turn the wheel out.
You will be surprised how good stockies can look once you're not flaunting your tread pattern at the camera.

Having said that, I really like the photo. It looks like a fantastic location.
Your model Impreza looks quite aggressive from the front. I'd be taking shots from all angles, but focusing on the front.
It looks a treat if you get the camera down nice and low, shooting up at the car.

If you're looking to try something a bit different, take a step ladder with you. You can get some wicked looking shots from up high.

 

[Tristan23]

I know if I saw a 'pro' shooting an indoor wedding with a basic body, and a slow kit lens, I'd be wondering exactly how they're going to deal with the lack of light, and subject seperation etc. Even at a hobby level we can see the importance of gear when it comes to image quality and shooting in different situations, but I just think that as soon as your images start becoming financially valuable, there's other issues that need to be considered too.

It's just a shame a seemingly large portion of 'professionals' go the opposite way and start out with $15k worth of equipment thinking it'll make their images, and then wonder why the 580exII they just bought for $650 from Paxtons, which they're using pointed directly at their subject from on top of the camera produces the same looking images as the pop-up flash they once had on their 550D did.

I just got home from shooting a wedding at Caves Beach in Newcastle, where I witnessed another photographer shooting a separate wedding, photographing his post-ceremony location shots of the bride and groom with the pop-up flash on top of his 7D. We had amazing light and a stunning location and this kook was using his thousands of dollars worth of gear and the trust of a whole bridal party to shoot what I'm guessing would've been shithouse photos. I also had the displeasure of working with a wedding cinematographer who spent the whole day filming with a 5DII and 70-200 f/2.8L IS who quite clearly didn't understand the concept of minimum focus distance, and who spent the whole day trying to work out why she couldn't get the camera to focus while at 60cm from the bride and grooms hands during the exchanging of the rings. She also came up to me during the reception and said "Tristan, why is my ISO button no longer working?", which I replied to with "Do you always shoot in Tv mode?", to which she responded "What's that? The button just won't work anymore...by the way i've never used one of these before..."

I think there should be a rule that every new photographer looking to make it in business should be confined to one body and one prime lens for at least 12 months beforehand, and if they can produce reasonable results with these limitations then the world of gear will be opened to them. I'd much prefer to see someone using their equipment to it's absolute maximum potential, and who can actually justify spending the thousands of dollars on gear than to see what we're currently experiencing (much like any hobby/profession that has the ability to cost lots): an absolute raping of the industry by every Tom, Dick and f*cking Harriet who thinks spending a few thousand dollars on gear will get them up to the standard of all of those talked-about photographers they see on the interwebs.

 

[Capone]

I have to agree with the above, i have just started shooting for fun using a D7000 and all i can say is it is a black art as to how to get the pictures looking like what i have seen here. I am using the 18-105 kit lens which may have some answers, however cant see getting anything better until i master it all

 

[alexx23]

It's just a shame a seemingly large portion of 'professionals' go the opposite way and start out with $15k worth of equipment thinking it'll make their images, and then wonder why the 580exII they just bought for $650 from Paxtons, which they're using pointed directly at their subject from on top of the camera produces the same looking images as the pop-up flash they once had on their 550D did.

I just got home from shooting a wedding at Caves Beach in Newcastle, where I witnessed another photographer shooting a separate wedding, photographing his post-ceremony location shots of the bride and groom with the pop-up flash on top of his 7D. We had amazing light and a stunning location and this kook was using his thousands of dollars worth of gear and the trust of a whole bridal party to shoot what I'm guessing would've been shithouse photos. I also had the displeasure of working with a wedding cinematographer who spent the whole day filming with a 5DII and 70-200 f/2.8L IS who quite clearly didn't understand the concept of minimum focus distance, and who spent the whole day trying to work out why she couldn't get the camera to focus while at 60cm from the bride and grooms hands during the exchanging of the rings. She also came up to me during the reception and said "Tristan, why is my ISO button no longer working?", which I replied to with "Do you always shoot in Tv mode?", to which she responded "What's that? The button just won't work anymore...by the way i've never used one of these before..."

I think there should be a rule that every new photographer looking to make it in business should be confined to one body and one prime lens for at least 12 months beforehand, and if they can produce reasonable results with these limitations then the world of gear will be opened to them. I'd much prefer to see someone using their equipment to it's absolute maximum potential, and who can actually justify spending the thousands of dollars on gear than to see what we're currently experiencing (much like any hobby/profession that has the ability to cost lots): an absolute raping of the industry by every Tom, Dick and f*cking Harriet who thinks spending a few thousand dollars on gear will get them up to the standard of all of those talked-about photographers they see on the interwebs.

Wow, couldn't have said it better myself. I can think of two other people i know that have 7D's and L glass and yet i get way better photos with my 1000d and 50mm f/1.8, and as arrogant is it sounds its really how it is.

Also, I don't know what some wedding photographers are thinking with some of the editing they do, and i don't understand why people hire them , check this blog out, this is a local photographer :

http://welovecheesehouse.blogspot.com/2011/11/emilie-lukes-wedding-day.html


I of all people edited photos too much, but even i now know that this shit just isn't on for a wedding, THAT RED SKIN MAY LOOK COOL NOW, BUT WHAT ABOUT IN 3 YEARS?

 

[moto_guy]

every new photographer looking to make it in business should be confined to one body and one prime lens for at least 12 months beforehand

I have a $400 point and shoot and MS paint and got this



Am I eligible for better equipment?

 

[Rendog]

http://welovecheesehouse.blogspot.com/2011/11/emilie-lukes-wedding-day.html

That is some really bad framing, the skin tones don't bother me because if the client looked at the page and then hired him, then they obviously liked it, each to there own, but the framing, come on.

 

[Callan.]

..............

 

[wombat]

It's just a shame a seemingly large portion of 'professionals' go the opposite way and start out with $15k worth of equipment thinking it'll make their images, and then wonder why the 580exII they just bought for $650 from Paxtons, which they're using pointed directly at their subject from on top of the camera produces the same looking images as the pop-up flash they once had on their 550D did.

Yeah, I understand that too, but my point wasn't about needing top gear to take good photos, it was more a point about the difference between being a hobbyist shooting for fun and experience, and a pro shooting because someone else is paying you to be there. Pros, by definition, need to show a degree of professionalism and IMO that extends to more than being able to take beautiful photographs, and includes things like presentation and interation with clients, as well as the stuff I was talking about before.
I'm definately not trying to say that any of that is more important than being able to get the beautiful shots in the first place, just that when someone who has already developed the skills to get the shots wants to take that next step and start making money, I believe there's more to it than necessarily just rocking up and doing what you'd do if you were out one arvo doing a shoot for yourself.

Again, this isn't directed at anyone in particular at all, just a general discussion. If anything it's probably just prompted by the "Joe Bloggs Photography" tag that seems to be on every second person's facebook page, because they own a shiny camera and took a crooked picture of a lamp post.