Some personal thoughts from the point of view of the surveyor and photographer:
- Having tried a lot of photographic equipment, you understand one thing: you have to shoot the same thing with different photographic equipment. The quality and variety of pictures, scenes, ideas almost does not depend on technology
- Art photography, photography as art is in no way connected with photographic equipment. Photographic equipment, lenses, cameras are in no way associated with good creative photography
- The best picture I took many years ago on a whale 18-105, it's a pity, then I didn't have something better and I had to stand on my ears to make it work
- New cameras and lenses are 99% better than their predecessors and so good that they often exceed the capabilities of the photographer who uses them
- Often you have to review equipment that you don’t want the enemy to do, which in general is not bad, but strongly dislike it. These are the worst moments. So recently I shot several times on Pentax K-70, Canon 750D and much more, but I did not prepare reviews
- There is photographic equipment to which you need to get used to and 'see through' it. In one or two days, you can only very superficially describe its subtleties. For example, there are lenses that 'unfold' only after years of use.
- If earlier, new photographic equipment was delighted, now I look at almost all photographic equipment as ordinary tools for the photographer. Nothing new and nothing interesting. Either already tried something like this, or it's a new good technique
- What difference does it make, what kind of camera do you have, if you still shoot some next gray wedding with a pregnant bride?
- Over the past 10 years of practice, I was only 3 times asked what I am shooting. Moreover, these were just questions without an understanding of the matter.
- Readers Radozhiva in no way intersect with my customers. For clients there is my old separate site wedding-photographer.tv
- Often you take survey equipment for shooting, but as a result, there is almost nothing to show in the review
- I shoot a lot of nature such as, it really relaxes me a lot from planned filming
- Many reviews on Radozhiv are terrible, but there is no time to rewrite them. Through the prism of experience, everything looks very different. But many have been rewritten, for some even the galleries have been updated
- Surveys and filming are two completely different directions. I switch from one to the other as soon as one thing bothers me
- No favorite camera. No favorite lens. There is no favorite system. I like Nikon and Canon the most. Question 'Nikon / Canon?' is a kind of photographer's maturity detector
- Right color and good color are two different things.
- My dream is not about cameras and lenses, but how to get out of the bondage of weddings and deal only with Rainbow. It turns out with varying success
- I noticed that beginners and even advanced amateurs believe that a good camera will greatly help them to take a good photo. Tormented by choice. And you need to torment yourself with ideas and plans for interesting filming.
- What difference does your camera have if you have nothing to shoot? Especially when winter comes in my area and 2 times a week I have to go to the same studio and shoot the same thing
- Often, I don’t want to do a review, since everything that was possible has already been said about a certain technique. So I rented more than once from friends or acquaintances for personal purposes Canon 5D MarkII, 5D Mark III, 6D, 6D MarkII, 750D, D3, Z6 and a bunch of other things, while I did not do their reviews
- Often I have to shoot not how I want, but how the client wants. It is very important to find a mutual solution. You need to strive to ensure that the client is personally interested in your approach to shooting. Often the client does not understand either his own desires or the goals of achieving them
- The word 'Radozhiva' is inclined, that is: Radozhivu, Radozhivu, Radozhiva. For some reason, I often communicate with people and they do not decline this word
- Phones are seriously taking away the bread from low-budget filming and are already getting to the mid-budget segment. You need to move towards high budgets, and this requires a change in the model of your photo business
- Not so long ago I was thinking about color, looking at the original images from the 'canonically correct' cameras. Then, continuing to ponder, he went out into the street on business. By chance, my gaze stopped on a yellow minibus minibus. For some reason, I thought this bus was 'shot' with a Canon 1 Ds Mark II, and I didn't like the color and didn't seem to be natural. But in fact, I looked at the bus with my own eyes and did not trust them. After which I am absolutely sure that the often-dense perception of color in a photograph is subjective.
- It takes years to discern trifles and be able to manage details in a photograph
- When working with old equipment, a challenge arises, a struggle in which the photographer’s work is or may be manifesting itself. Old equipment sometimes tempers the spirit and makes you play by other rules
- I am in favor of updating the technology in one generation. It’s better to skip the first generations of new cameras (this is the question of new mirrorless cameras)
- Sorry Pentax
- For big cities, a very good rental equipment paradigm is now. For beginners, I advise you to stick to it
- The best camera of all time? I would prefer Canon 5D MarkIIbut the correct answer does not exist
- One lens to rule the world? I would prefer the good 35 / 1.4 / 1.2
- How not to fall asleep? Just find and see at night good shots and ponder how they were removed and what of the like I would like to repeat, but what to come up with yourself?
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
What hurt the Canon 5D mark II?
It hit, probably 5D, just in 5D II all key flaws were completed. And III and IV are no longer fundamentally different. Just just more.
Wangyu mass fire for a number of points: D
In principle, I agree with everyone, even without having the experience of paid filming (I am regularly asked if I am renting equipment from my fleet for money - I’ll immediately answer for nothing).
Arkady, thanks for the confession. Less tired to you!
A very interesting confession. Good luck in your wishes!
Class. Sincerely, from the heart. I’m not familiar with many, since I’m not a pro, but I agree with the rest.
// Often you have to shoot not how I want, but how the client wants. It is very important to find a mutual solution. //
Are you a photographer. The client hired you to get the result. And my opinion is that you should do everything as you see fit. Otherwise, the client may not receive what he expects or saw in your ad. Customer wish I think last. You can do as he wants if it coincides with the opinion of the photographer. Well this is my opinion.
Often you have to refuse the client if you see that the opinions on this issue do not coincide.
The best camera of all time? I would prefer the Canon 5D Mark II, but there is no right answer.
one hundred%. And according to objective measurements the best in color.
In 5dmk3 6d and further, the color only worsened.
Roman, can you look at these very objective measurements of color?
Well of course you can.
http://www.imatest.com/products/
Here is one of the tools, this is the industry standard.
And then see which lab uses it to test the carcasses and see the results.
More complex curve measurements give much more accurate results than a dice table.
In principle, an experienced photographer will determine that there are problems with the color of the carcass itself and in ditches, a series is made in the studio and everything is immediately visible.
No, I understand everything and what for some to say about color in the context of a COLOR photo seems strange, but nonetheless)))
Sorry, I see I didn't quite accurately express my question: where did you look at these very objective color measurements of the 5D Mark II vs. Mark III vs. 6D vs. XXX from which you concluded that the second “carrot” is the best in color?
But such secrets are not disclosed, otherwise there will be nothing to post)
I wanted to lay out links, but since people are interested in playing secrets and searching for themselves, I will not deprive you of pleasure.)
Go for it! )
No, not interesting. Spread, everyone has been waiting for these links from you for a long time
Lord, yes on the review sites you can find these your charts from imatest. Dude fucked up on the numbers and believes that if the matrix reproduces colors from the color picker with the least distortion (color accuracy weighted average or total delta), then this is the best matrix in the world TRUE. And judging by the measurements, it turned out that the 5D Mark II has this minimum number. And the whole world is not steamed, and the lover of tsiferok is steamed. Well, this is the most important thing in photography, so that the numbers converge, because the most accurate color - it’s our most ideal color, in no other way. And the fact that then a normal person with aesthetic goals passes through this very ideal color and makes the most disgusting transformations (unless you photograph bundles of underpants, jewelry, or some other nonsense), who cares.
These are abstract, damn, naked numbers. When shooting a color checker with a specific spectrum (daylight, reference). Yes, any transformation introduces distortion. Anyone. One flash is 50 degrees hotter than the other - distortion. The filter on the flash is distortion. The color temperature is not the same as that of the light source or there are several different temperatures - distortion. Enlightenment of the lens, especially the old one - distortion. Changed brightness with curves - distortion. Podgbernil, changed the cut-off pattern - distortion. Polarik put it on, the sky is darker than in life, there are no glare on the foliage - distortion. I removed the haze with a UV filter - no longer like in life. I added the colors, threw in the loot - all the distortions. All fake color. A lover of numbers must go crazy with such liberties.
Yes, it’s understandable, it’s just interesting to know where he gets these numbers from. The Preview, Photozone is not doing this sort of thing (I have never seen it).
For example - https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E5D2/E5D2IMATEST.HTM#
This inviting-alluring schedule with deviations from the ideal, isn't it exciting? Isn't that what any self-respecting photographer should strive for? Yes, oh yes, delta, delta ... mmmmm
Lord, all manufacturers were fucking on these numbers because they sawed the color of the DIGITAL photo on them.
Arkady won out because he noted the pyadvak as the best camera.
How would you explain to dudes that in a digital photo, digits are the primary source.
And the editors work with numbers, and even more importantly, the manipulation goes with or without rounding of arrays - so other advanced dudes have made a new excellent demosaic from scratch without the horror of sliders!
Noobs dudes may not understand this, but it is so and what they see as equal is simply arrays of numbers, a nightmare.
I hope you understand in such vocabulary?
Or will you start trolling Arkady?
* yawns *
I have no habit of interpreting fragments of the statements of strangers. And I doubt that someone in their right mind and good memory will consider some kind of camera to be the best, because in her synthetic test the number is minimal.
I always believed that in digital PHOTO the primary source is PHOTO. I have never seen here at least one discussion about photography per se. Do not look how divinely this eighteenth pixel on the right in the fifth row looks like, no other camera can do that, but just a cool photo, an interesting idea.
The most interesting thing is that the trolls absolutely do not understand what and how is measured and what is actually talking about)
Their nonsense about polarics, flashes, distortions and so on is an enchanting and complete misunderstanding of the process.)
On the fingers, for absolutely (crossed out) ...
Eat as many puffs as you like, cling to a pack of polarists, catch hares.
It measures what has entered the matrix and compares with what is equal.
You have entered yellow and came out orange - congratulations.
Instead of blue, purple came out - wave to edit in the editor.
Therefore, an experienced photographer appreciates a camera in which it turns out to shoot what they shoot and not fantasies on the topic)
And WHAT do you take off that you want to edit in the editor? Do you fill the tiles with flowers for the Pantone catalog? That's just interesting - what is it all for? For what? So that the output is like garbage from the article that you sent, where is the oversaturated pair on the background of a palm tree and white sand? Where was only one normal, professionally shot photo, taken not on the divine 1Ds Mark III, but on the damned Nikon and not the author of the article, who prays for color, taking off bullshit?
And the funny thing is that the trolls do not understand that such a Test in color space completely covers all possible real future pictures and you can immediately and in advance say that there will be a problem with carrots, gray, green or something else.
Because such as real frames, these are special cases of a full test)
However, is it interesting to them? )
And yes, both pyadvak and 1dsmk3 and the entire series of cameras with these matrices give excellent real images and synthetics, even if head-on or on the forehead - nothing changes)
I have a strong feeling that you are struggling in the paroxysm of religious ecstasy and do not hear what you are being asked about.
I recommend writing for the future not: “Test”, but “T-st”. And "Pyadv-k". Not to be remembered in vain.
God save me from this.
Roman thanks for the link, looked. It turns out my first digital camera (450D), whose RAW I turned inside out to get an acceptable result, convincing myself that this is a cheap camera - what to want from it, the color is better than the vaunted 5D II. Gee, simple. I'm out))) Well, at least now I know where the numbers come from)
Do not blaspheme! Tsv-t is one in the trinity and triple in the unit. For R, G and B demo in 1Ds MkIII, Alleluia * fled into the forest with laughter *
Roman, you prayed to the wrong T-stu! What will we do? Has your world collapsed? Is the 450D the best camera now? And what if there is an EVEN smaller delta somewhere?
... which once again confirms that no matter how much you wave the beads, understanding among a certain audience will not increase and how many troll shouts Alilujah and foams trying to spin the fan of his brains, alas, this does not add to him)
The amazing ability of some public to violent imagination and complete misunderstanding of the written.
Popcorn ends but you don’t give up)
Michael, we’ll leave out that you have problems with the numbers.
You just made, I’m not afraid of the word, just three (!) Brilliant discoveries!
You realized that the colorfulness and accuracy of color reproduction are not always the same thing, you realized that the matrices of one technical process produce a very similar color, you realized that the color measurement in the lab fully corresponds to the real frames! Keep it up!)
On the third move, it turned out that the grandmaster plays eighteen Spanish parties. In the remaining twelve, Black used the obsolete, but rather true defense of Philidor. If Ostap found out that he plays such sophisticated games and faces such a tried and tested defense, he would be extremely surprised. The fact is that the great combinator played chess for the second time in his life.
And I didn’t say anything about colorful
Actually, grandmaster, in these circles of yours it is customary to say not “colorful”, but “color gamut”.
Mikhail, do you know what these terrible people are doing? They, for example. gather at night and look at pictures of something like the reflection of the synthesizer LED panel on the headphones. They clink their tongues, they argue whether this nightmare border around the perimeter of the reflex is appropriate or not, and which of the profiles is better suited in this case, and which sensor has the spectral characteristics better corresponding to the spectral characteristics of the LMS. Ah, if not for the damned Luther Ives ... They call it photography.
They are imbued with spectrophotometers and sculpted profiles to each other ...
Roman, thanks for the link. Unfortunately, she did not clarify anything. Imatest, as I understand it, measures a lot of different color parameters (saturation, deltaC, deltaE, etc.), there is no one averaged indicator. And in the case of, for example, the 5D MkII vs. 1Ds MkIII, it turns out that the deltaC of the “carrot” is better (less), but the saturation is higher (worse). So how can you tell which of these cameras has the best color and why? And this is at ISO 100. And if the situation changes dramatically at high ISO?
At high iso, the situation changes; partly, an explanation is already applied there.
If very simplified, the old cameras do not change color globally with an increase in ISO, the signal-to-noise is simply degraded.
Recent generations of sensors, alas, change color accuracy with the growth of ISO.
Further. Saturation is a tribute to the desires of the noobs so that everything is colorful right in the rabbi and reducing saturation is not a problem.
Deltas and others have a measurement error, it must be taken into account.
That link is not a complete test, many important parameters are not shown.
Okay, but I still want to go back to your original claim that the 5D MkII is the best in color. It turns out that since the situation changes at high ISO, the "carrot" is not so good anymore? Or is it still the best, but only with reservations for (conditionally) two pages? :)
Moreover, the color accuracy varies from exposure. Colors drawn from shadows will differ from those correctly exposed.
Question 'Nikon / Canon?' is a kind of photographer maturity detector
Plus. He began with Nikon many years ago, went all the way to d800.
He switched to Kenon, the difference is huge in the quality of the pictures.
But today, kenon has greatly worsened the picture, but Panasonic has burst into the market and Sony has added its profiles to the color of kenon.
So, given the realities, the question is more likely Kenon or Sony or Panasonic. Nikon with Seryatina clearly fell into the second league.
I guess Arkady meant something completely different ...
Let's wait for him. But he wrote many times that the camera does not matter, the photographer takes pictures ...
At the same time, he commented on the sad color of the d700, which can not be fixed with anything and calls the best 5d mk2 camera in which everything is bad except for excellent color rendition.
How did you feel: “16. The right color and the good color are different things ”? I immediately thought about you.
Everyone has a good color.
As they say, to whom and the bride mare @
The correct color is objective reality.
5d mark 2 is the best camera in terms of color accuracy.
The more experienced the photographer, the closer his good color to the right one.
So Arkady says the correct and obvious facts. Obvious to experienced photographers.
“There is no favorite camera. No favorite lens. There is no favorite system. "
This is a quote, just a quote ...
Favorite should be a girl and not a camera.
The camera is just a tool, no more.
And as a tool, it must solve specific problems.
Do you have a favorite hammer?
No, I take the first one that fits the weight, without thinking about the shape of the imprint on the nail head.
That's exactly what a tool is, and you almost pray for a hammer of a certain firm and color.
Finger to the sky.
In the case of a hammer for working with a specific task, I prefer one that will solve it quickly and with minimal effort.
This is the difference between a milking lover who is just a hammer or just a screwdriver, and a pro who sees the difference in the tool and uses different hammers for different tasks.
And the result is naturally different.
But Vitaly, I understand you. You are still shocked that the best camera was a pyadvak)
You have thrown out so much effort and flood proving that there is no difference in cameras) and that it is unimportant and everything is corrected in the editor.
Do not be afraid, but it is useless - here and exorcism will not help. Well, man has erected a flower for himself into a deity, well, let him continue to pray. Whatever the child is amused with ...
Vitaly, as usual, you fantasize something and comment on yourself.
Cameras are a tool. You need color - take a pyadwak. You need a reportage - take one. You need a station wagon - mark 3 or 4. You need max resolution - Sony or 5dsr.
You need a bz station wagon - sony a7mk3. The best color for bz is Panasonic C1.
Read the article again - the business model is changing, there is no point in buying hardware and loving it dearly, just go to the rental and take the tool that you specifically need at the moment.
And a non-imperishable type of tops, some and other things in passing you remove on iPhone x or Samsung 10, which anyone has)
Roman, I'm wondering - do you often compare your pictures with reality, or are you sure they are correct, by the way tests show that this matrix is correct? And if the face was not backlit with white light, do you leave it as it was in real life or do you rule?
I comment on the deleted post of your namesake, do not expect.
And at the expense of color - you confuse me with someone, I eat popcorn when you paint about it.
Vitaly, relax and think - do you need it? Color, hammers, etc.?
And read the article above again)
Roman, could you show this mythical “seryatin” of Nikon in the pictures? Preferably paired with a shot of the same subject under the same conditions, but with a different camera. It's just that I shoot both with kenon and nikon (different models at different times) and have not observed anything of you stated.
You will not wait for any frames. This is a matter of faith. Maximum, carefully stored as a front-shot screenshot from imatest. And with double-blind testing, something tells me, there will be the same embarrassment as audiophiles and sommeliers.
- The bouquet is complex. The taste is tart. Tannin is high. Citrus notes, spices and herbs.
Waiter: - This is water to rinse your mouth. Wine will be served now.
Arkady, hello.
You wrote that you used nikon z6 - in short, how do you like it?
I’m not Arkady, but I tested this camera at the box office.
In short, nothing frankly bad, but nothing outstanding either.
If you need ff bz then a much better choice instead is Sony 7 mk3.
And this is the main problem of bz nikon.
Arkady, but can you give a little more detail, what is wrong with Pentax? They have very interesting cameras, just like puzzles. You can figure out some fine settings for years :)
Indiscreet question, but why are they interesting?
Pentax went under the hammer and has already been sold several times.
The cameras had more than a problem af and a standard color for Sony matrices. The old limits were interesting, the new optics are the usual tamrons for which the pentax ordered it.
So, sales of about 0.5% of the market and the likely imminent end of the brand are natural.
Good afternoon, Roman! I am not very interested in materiel, because I am more involved in the fine arts, including photography (this, of course, is a subjective statement: an objective assessment is given by the fast flowing time). I vibrated my camera last year: it was a pity, of course, to give my bloodshed forever, but the price did not bother me much - I was looking for image quality that would completely satisfy me as an artist. And you know, I chose Pentax K-I II with its "main" glass row: 15-30, 24-70, 70-200, 28-105, 100! I shoot mainly a landscape with water, often from the side of a ship, often at dusk, occasionally a portrait, and also my fast-running dogs (one very fast-running one - a small Sicilian greyhound, Cirneca), often in the sunset backdrop. And you know, I have almost no complaints about the equipment! The fact that the rumor belongs to the main drawbacks of the Pentax is quite true: the rate of fire on the rafts would like to have a faster rate of fire, the autofocus really sometimes slows down and even less often misses. But everything in this world has advantages and disadvantages, including equipment. The main thing is that our merits should be tripled to a greater extent than our disadvantages should not. The main thing - and this applies directly to you - is not to be categorical in your words and deeds: for who knows what is truth? Each of us has only an opinion about the truth, which, in turn, changing, is a function of our fast-running and finite time.
I allow myself to cite my past works (until last year): https://www.photocrowd.com/photographer-community/166521/ .
Thanks for the photo. With regards to the "materiel" - they would shoot the dog with the wiring, at shutter speeds of 1/500 and shorter (it is possible with an open aperture), it could have turned out more beautifully, not smeared.
Good afternoon, Valery! This year I became interested in the "frozen" run - and did exactly as you advised! The aperture was kept 2.8 to 3.5, rarely higher, the ISO had to be raised to 800, sometimes higher (for evening running), the shutter speed was from 200 to about 1000.
Flash with high speed sync to help. Take it away to minus so that it adds a little light, it would be better with some kind of softbox.
Good afternoon, Roman! Thanks for the tip: maybe I'll try a flash. Although there are technical problems (sorry for offtopic): everything happens on a random uninhabited shore in traveling conditions, where I get on a boat, where I bathe, drink, eat, walk and then take pictures, as entertainment on the one hand, but it’s also not tiring serving his Muse on the other. On a cloudy day, undoubtedly, the warm reflex from the flash will be quite out of place in the shadows, but cloudy frames in our case are very poor in beauty. And in the sunny sunset hour of warm reflexes and without a flash in excess. Unless, flash a shadow and a little dematerialize volumes. I will have to familiarize myself with the tools. Thanks again.
... And specifically with the K-70, the opinion is also interesting. This is a wonderful camera for me.
I agree, especially in connection with the K-70. In a niche from 40 to 50 kilo rubles there is nothing better (unless a commission full frame is provided that it is a worker, not a pig in a poke).
For some reason, it became sad.
Arkady said well about smartphones.
As they say, let's tell the truth - good smartphones for many tasks already shoot no worse and often better than many DSLRs of past years, especially with a whale lens.
Hence the obvious n 23
Phones are seriously taking bread from low-budget filming and are already getting to the mid-budget segment. You need to move to high budgets, and this requires a change in the model of your photo business.
And I do not agree with this!
If I understood Arkady’s thoughts correctly, then;
I can’t imagine, for example, the newlyweds who will hire some Vasya to film their wedding with a duper-duper telephone. Unless some poor-sighted or very poor.
And pay him food;)))
As for me it’s better to shoot a wedding or any paid filming with some old simple prototype Nikon D40 with a whale of 18-55. Than on the most mega-super advertised phone with 100500 megapixels.
In short, any commercial filming on the phone is the bottom and the zashkvar !!!!
Retrograde thoughts, but the photo on my phone has never been associated with anything serious.
BUT I will find the video (shot on a modern telephone camera), I'm not so critical;)
So she is not commercial. They just don’t hire a photographer, they shoot it themselves (and the guests). And it’s not a matter of poor eyesight, but the fact that the pictures go to Instagram, the maximum print is 10x15. In such cases, 2-3 MPix of the phone is enough
Plus
And the result is one - these people do not order bombila with d90. And even with a pyadwak.
Because the budget segment bombed went almost to zero, the average in the process and the premium is still holding.
I live in a small provincial town in the center of Russia and I can confirm that quite unexpectedly for most wedding photographers a new phenomenon “telephone photography” was born. One or three girls contract for weddings (exclusively girls, 17-20 years old), desperately promoting themselves in social networks, and they take pictures of weddings like hell, but, probably, cheap. Surprisingly, not even a large number of weddings use their services. And besides them, the number of guests is full (5-7) of “photographers” at every wedding; they take pictures with expensive telephones that give an excellent twenty-thirty-pixel picture. For viewing on a computer, great! Come on, tell me, friends, are there a lot of photographic prints being made now for ordinary consumption?
Great article and great thought-provoking stuff!
And of course I agree with Valery - you should have a rest.
Point by point:
6) I completely agree.
7) There is no enthusiasm, curiosity remains.
15) I like aperture zoom. There is no favorite system. There is a task and there is a camera and a lens that work out it in the best way.
24) Arkady is from physical fatigue.
I also went after the weekend to the weekend and caught myself thinking that I like the skin on the girl in front of me and in general the skin is similar to Fujevsky. Mustache, chef, arrived (s)
PS> It's a pity that there are no reviews of Units and other Pyataks on Radozhiv.
When I was doing watercolor painting and selecting a palette of pigments, I read a lot about paints, did paint ... So I already looked at the shadow and imagined how I was mixing ultramarine with umber in what proportion.
"16) Right color and good color are two different things."
Yes, + million
The most debatable point is 4 - that a new lens or camera will be 99% better than the previous one.
Firstly, this is not always in 99% of cases, but somewhat less. There are cases the other way around.
Secondly, the difference with the predecessor is often very small and in practice little perceptible. And in view of the much more liberal price tag, it often makes sense to take a predecessor.
Paragraph 27 - sometimes it makes sense to update the equipment after two generations.
Interesting thoughts, ALMOST agree with everything
I am so tired, I agree with all the points.
Thanks for the honest review. All the time I am tormented by the question of how I can help the site, and I answer myself - nothing (I am a beginner and there is very little time for self-development, I take off little by little in the summer.
I agree that peace and destiny are so arranged that sometimes, having rich technical capabilities, there are almost no artistic ideas or possibilities. Before the birth of a child, she could catch a bunch of models who would not mind posing at any time of the day. And now the model is practically one, and she flatly refuses to be removed, and, of course, when there is very good lighting.
Recently I contacted the photographer, with whom she began to study, which he himself teaches at the institute. And he scolded once again that I did not abandon the whale lens and did not train to shoot in manual mode. This is probably a sin in which I have to confess.
If you think about it, then in any case it is. First, scales or simple exercises, and you need to go this way with dignity.
I do not quite agree that the routine can crush. But I rather judge by the old man's experience. Anyway, women (photographers are no exception), it’s easier to adapt to the routine. And for them, even after 10 years, a new wedding (well, or another object, if it specializes in it, children's photos, etc.) will be unique and inimitable. Well, somehow even in a routine moment you fall in love, you perceive the idea as a child.
I’m sure, deep down, you also really love every moment of your work, just like that, for general intimidation, you wrote to beginners what you should think about first of all.
Your position on the photographers-messengers of Nikon would be interesting (I think Cannon has such). They have the main directions in development there - animal studies, children, extreme sports. Each has some accredited photographers. That is, the idea is that a person shoots only what his soul is in, while advertising the product, and it seems like both parties are happy.
Does this sound like a bargain with your conscience from the perspective of an experienced photographer? Selling something that you may not believe in to the end. (Although there was an interview with one animalist - he simply has no choice - the technique is too financially unaffordable).
Thanks again for the honest article, which makes you think. I wish you some fresh ideas. And not only creative, but also business ideas that will help you devote more time to your favorite aspects of your business.
By the way, perhaps the site, as it seemed to me, is missing a little video. I am not saying that this is a direct drawback, the texts are, of course, more informative and more important. It's just that the psychology of people is different, someone will see a large text and “get scared”, someone listening to information will be a good addition.
Your new subject is not used to shooting, if you shoot all the time and do not command you, they will just “get tired” of reacting. And, perhaps, the child simply does not have enough attention.
No) Moms are too many.
Actually, I don't impose myself, I tried a little - it didn't work, we switched. On the one hand, it's a shame. On the other hand, it is even more reckless to shoot on the sly, much better than children who already play a little to the audience with green snot.
He himself likes to shoot, which is gratifying. 4 years - already filming everything with a camera. I don't want to interrupt this interest.
I, an amateur, did not and did not try to do a single review of any technique, but I agree with all points of this material. It’s a pity to look at people chasing a blue bird more often than gloves.
A carcass is just a tool.
Today milking tasks is better one tomorrow and the other.
Different tasks, new technologies, new business models.
Informative.
Arkady, thank you for your reviews. I do not miss a single one for many years. I sincerely wish you good luck in your work and all the blessings of the earth.
Everyone has their own best camera. Rather, the one you are shooting.
I recently decided to look after my new best camera, used D4s. So they are not anywhere! And those that are there are some kind of strange money.
I thought the D850 would be better, but no. There with rams is a complete disgrace, alas. And I was hoping so .. I’ll have to save up for D5 if nothing comes out there.
Arkady, I'm sorry if my question has already been raised, but I still haven’t found an answer. Please tell me, what does Radozhiva mean? thanks
I read the article with pleasure, but disagree with something. You, Arkady, wrote from the point of view of a professional, a person who reached the top. I'm a beginner, I just love to PHOTOGRAPH FOR THE SOUL. And in the matter of technology (body / lens ...) for me there is a lot that has not been known. I want a new body, the lens is not because it shoots better, but because there are other, more advanced features. And with the development itself, this is just not enough (well, my old fotik cannot shoot a series at high speed or the lens is weak in the dark!). Yes, the photograph is taken by the photographer, but there should be opportunities.
And I wish you all beautiful autumn shots.
Dear Arkady recently asked me to make a small Canon 1Ds Mark3 reviewer, I still won't get to the city where I live to borrow it again, but after this post I thought to make a slightly different review - try to immediately borrow this camera, as well as the Canon 5D2, and since I myself am Nikon D3s, try to make a cross-sectional review of these three cameras with a focus on working with color, shoot the same photos or scenes, or even artificially constructed multi-colored still lifes, and put everything here in RAW so that people can with what to compare. Personally, I think that the 1Ds Mark3 is noticeably superior in terms of color handling not only to the 5D2, but also to all other cameras still produced, with the exception of medium format cameras. But it will also be true if we say that different cameras can give better results in different conditions, since they have different signal processing algorithms, the color also depends on the optics used, some lenses change it a lot, and the best lenses give high microcontrast (i.e. more gradations of one or nearby colors - this term is not very accurate but is used in the English-speaking environment for other purposes, which misleads many ...), which also visually improves the color. I would also like to add that without a professional monitor and even professional color calibration, talking about color accuracy at the stage of file processing is also incorrect, but do the respected visitors of this forum have such monitors? I say this because many years ago I worked in several top world glossy magazines where we used exclusively Barco monitors for the accuracy of screen color proofing, and then, after the appearance of LCD displays, exclusively top-end Eizo models, but even normal modern monitors for working with color cost Not many have $ 1500 or more. But, whatever it was, I will try to do what I wrote about above, and I hope such a comparison will reveal some peculiarities of working with the color of the vaunted cameras (by the way, Nikon D3s also produces beautiful colors!).
A counter question - do the viewers of your shydevras have the appropriate monitors for their viewing and viewing rooms, as well as qualifications, admission and dignity? And what if these requirements are not met? What should color blind people and tetrachromats do? Do the test, of course.
Of course they have. After all, the viewer sees the final result, i.e. print of typography. He has a monitor on his side)
Do you see many prints now? In the print, by the way, the color rendition is wildly distorted, the color gamut is much less.
Books, magazines. A lot of them. If a person works in a printing house, then the viewer of his masterpieces is a reader of printed material. It is precisely because of printing distortions that good monitors with color proofs are needed.
And the profile of the printing device. And emulation of a printing device when processing photos. On which - hop - and already practically our ideal color is not reproducible. So what does the printer do? Attempts to process the image so that it looks acceptable. Not exactly as on the screen, but acceptable. Because there isn’t such a deep black on the press. And the contrast of the best types of paper is less than the worst types of screens. Therefore, the task of EXACT color reproduction is very complex, specific and not always solvable. That is what the printer was talking to me under my article on color profiles, they say, he took his shadedevs to a bunch of printing houses, but they did it differently in everyone. Because there are restrictions at all stages. Typewriter. Ink. Lighting conditions. Metamerism, when dyes that give the feeling of one color in one light, with another give a feeling of a different color. And your reader of your products also does not use viewing tables. What about optical illusions? When, for example, an image of 10 cm and 10 m gives a different color sensation? And neutral objects on a large solid fill must be additionally tinted in the opposite color so that they remain neutral, because the brain is so arranged (not even an eye).
But for those freaking, who are obsessed with color, the exact ideal, you know what color graders do? Reference pictures are brought to them, on which colorcheckers are taken, they carry out color correction based on experience to get a CLEAR color. And then they edit the color of the colorchecker to match the perfect color. That the moron came with a pipette, measured and rejoiced. He, a moron with a pipette, only with a pipette and measures color, the main thing for him is that the deltas come together.
Bravo! That is why all this fuss with the correct color is fuss. Your namesake never answered me what he would do with a face with the wrong color - to correct it in order to be beautiful or to leave it as correct in real life. And there are no panties and the cross hangs ...
And what is the correct complexion? Hundreds of races and nationalities. Hundreds of types of foundation and makeup. Sunburn-charred and so on. Illuminated, with reflexes and stuff. And if a person just has an unhealthy complexion? I have a lot of yellow pigment from my grandfather - either Bulgarian blood, or Turkish - there were a lot of things there in the Balkans, and in photographs he always has to be edited separately. And I can’t leave it as it is, because it turns out ugly (as always in life it’s not as noticeable as in the photo - the brain perceives the complexion differently). And the CLEAR color does not suit me. And I can have dozens of different color options that do not suit me - from milky whiteness (which in some photos is not what is appropriate, but desired) to sunburned or simply reddened skin.
Have you seen Asian ads? Where a tan is considered a sign of poor origin, like a lot of people work, so everyone is selected (or our models are taken). White is almost finished with cosmetics and post-processing.
And then lovers of the reference color come, pronounce the mysterious word "skinton" and run away laughing into the distance.
Well, I think that we won’t see an honest answer, but he does as you wrote, successfully forgetting about the correct (meaning true as it is, with different shades depending on the lighting) real color to please a beautiful one.
This is all clearly and correctly described. I mean, the end user doesn't need a monitor anymore. As well as “exact” color.
Koba, thanks, it will be interesting to read your review, maybe recently he became the owner of 1Ds_mk3. It remains to buy lenses to taste.
I did this comparison, maybe even the files were saved.
The picture is identical, absolutely.
Pyadvak is easier and cheaper with a very poor af.
A unit is much more expensive and heavier but better af.
Both cameras deliver outstanding image quality.
To see the difference, you do not need a calibrated monitor, the difference with d800, d7200 and d750 is visible even on an ancient monitor with tons.
in any case, when viewing files on the same device, a person will be able to see at least a difference, if any. Personally, I think that most of the “difference” is in the so-called. converters are in the converter profiles for processing RAW files of a particular camera. Different converters sometimes process the same files in significantly different ways, for example, Capte One clearly gives better results when processing files from Canon 5D m3 compared to Lightroom (by default, of course), and if DxO Photolab plays with different profiles from different cameras, you can get the best results for a specific person or for a specific purpose. In addition, almost regardless of the original results, with the help of competent color correction, you can achieve much better results, or the intended results. Color is a function of our visual apparatus, but in nature it does not exist, everything around is in shades of gray, so it does not matter to anyone. And if photography is intended for printing, then there are already limitations, etc.