I know that many of our readers are real estate photographers or have at least tried their hand at real estate photography. The most common method used to create 'good enough' real estate photos is HDR: whether it is tonemapping or exposure fusion, HDR is definitely the most-used method for real estate and beginner interior photographers. In this post, I'll do a comparison between tonemapping, exposure fusion, single on-camera flash, and multiple off-camera flash, and show you the benefits (or disadvantages, rather) of each.
This morning our pals at PopPhoto tweeted, "The most popular photography story this morning is the Exif of Reuters' best images of the year. Not the pictures. Doing it wrong." I have to agree with them here. Instead of focusing on the images, the story is instead focused on what they were shot with. Is that what we are reduced to? Oogling over gear?
Take a 3-minute break from whatever you're doing right now, and listen to this short recorded lecture of British philosopher and writer Alan Watts (1915-1973). This is a very inspirational, thought-provoking and interesting to anyone who ever wanted to work in the industry - Doesn't matter if its as a photographer, film maker, sound-man or a retoucher. Listen, and decide: 'What do you desire?'.
I have always had a love for the visual arts. As a kid I constantly was shooting and editing snowboard and skateboard videos with friends, as I grew older I got more and more into photography. In June of 2007 I purchased my first DSLR to start shooting hardcore punk rock shows, and soon after made a Flickr to share my work with the rest of the world. 5 years and some change later Flickr seems to be on the decline, and I am left wondering, "what now?"
Vimeo recently rolled out a Tip Jar feature for it’s content creators, where you can tip a donation to the artist. Coming up next for Vimeo is a Pay-To-View service, where audiences will actually have to pay to watch the video. It’s controlled solely by the creators, but will Vimeo take a cut of the money, like they do with the tip jar?
First, let me start off by saying that I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Yes, I am Mormon. When a fellow Fstopper writer posted this piece in our writer's group at first I was saddened to see the material within the link, but then I took a step back and really processed what this series of photographs meant. The photographs depict a pair of Mormon missionaries in various sexual positions. The photographs may be quite simple, but the message is not. Warning: Some of these photographs might be offensive to some readers.
When Canon released the upgraded 24-70mm f/2.8 II lens earlier this year, it was met with a serious mix of emotions. Why was it so expensive, and where the HECK was the image stabilization? And sure, the lens performs magnificently, but it left a lot to be desired. Last night, Canon announced a new member to the lens family, and many of us are confused as to where a 24-70mm f/4 IS fits into the picture between the 24-105 f/4 IS and the 24-70mm f/2.8 II.
So before anyone thinks I am expressing any political views on Fstoppers, know this, I AM NOT. I came across this yesterday and at first glance I thought, "well look, a politician lying, SURPRISE SURPRISE," but then upon further examination I have decided for myself that this is just someone who shot a terrible panoramic on their iPhone. Maybe Mitt needs to hire someone with a little more photo knowledge to run his Instagram account.
There are a few names in this industry that have always meant something. Nikon. Canon. Hasselblad. Fuji. Kodak. The latter has had a rough go of things in the past couple years, culminating in what can essentially be called a final meltdown in early 2012. Chapter Eleven bankruptcy and a rapidly collapsing stock price have left the company a shell of what it was. This week at PhotoPlus, I saw the realization of that at their booth, and it was one of the saddest things I have experienced in recent memory.
I never went to college or any other secondary school for photography. I have been blessed to fall into this hobby turned career in an era when photographic knowledge is readily available online, and a vast amount of it is 100% free. However when it came time to make my work public on the web, the outcome wasn't always pleasant. You see, constructive criticism is a great tool for learning and growing, but the keyword is constructive.
Forgive me for the non-linear article to follow, but this is my first evaluation of the transitive properties of the figurative "E" and it's marginal utility in the life of the Nikon D800. Whereas others may tell you which camera can photograph grass or your pet Weimaraner, I would like to talk about the real life application the D800 has to those of us that call this hobby a job.
The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Sony is buying up a healthy share of Olympus stock, furthering on their previous announcement that the two companies would share tech and co-produce product. This is a huge, bold move that makes real Sony's promise to continue to build their camera division. Sony, I am impressed. You're on your way to making me a believer.
BorrowLenses recently published a test they did looking at the sharpness between Canon's latest 24-70mm f/2.8 L II lens and the original, and were pleased to note several distinct reasons you might want to pick up the new one. The new version two has less chromatic aberrations, less vignetting, and is also sharper than the original. Though we are still testing this lens and haven't yet reached a verdict, their test might help you decide one way or the other.
When the original 24-70mm f/2.8 L lens came out, it quickly became the go-to, do everything lens of choice for almost every Canon photographer I knew. Yes, we all had our prime favorites, but if we needed a workhorse that we could rely upon to do-it-all or only had the space to bring one lens, we grabbed for our 24-70. The original is still considered to be an amazing lens, and it's no wonder that it's one of the toughest lenses to find used on the market. Needless to say, I am excited about the upgraded 24-70mm L II.
If there was one thing that people are unanimously saying about Nikon's new D600 "budget" full frame camera, it's that the price is entirely too high. No matter which blog you read, it seems everyone cannot believe the MSRP of $2,099.95. But are these claims valid? Does Nikon's smallest full frame DSLR really lack the features that professionals desire? In the full post I'll tell you why I just bought two of these cameras and why the price seems just right.