Share your art.....

Actually I have these ones

2483DC6C002EE10260524A9C5EE0AAD4B9BD4EE0_large.jpg


But you are right, used on any smaller lens your working distance is very small. I wanted to get a dedicated macro lens like the Canon 100mm IS but now that I'm drumming any extra cash goes to my kit :)

What are you using Sarah in terms of gear?

Ah, mine are macro filters. My Dad gave me one segment of an extention tube, not tried it out yet :-D I use a Canon 350D and I have 3 lenses - 18-55, 28-80 and 50-200. I also want that Macro 100mm :-D

That's about it really. Only got into it in July!

Do you use Flickr? If so, add me :) http://www.flickr.com/photos/sarahjane_1986/
 
So I'm not a photographer by any means but catch a cool shot every now and then. Saw Jeff Beck in concert last year and caught this photo of him in action. I really liked the lighting and how it all turned out.
 

Attachments

  • jeff beck.jpg
    jeff beck.jpg
    53.4 KB · Views: 226
Nice lovely pictures on the Osprey! I adore birds of prey...Keep up the good work!

Great Idea! Some awesome work here guys, I would like to go through each one carefully, I love all kinds of art and can look at it all day! It's no coincidence that many musicians are into photography.

I'm into photography, 3d art and video editing as well but I'll just share some photography :)

I really love shooting birds of prey but nature in general is what I really like to take pics of.
I have quite a few but here is my favourite subjects!

I'm currently rebuilding my site so the pics in the album are not the best stuff I have but if you are interested http://www.jeminimedia.com/index.php?option=com_expose&Itemid=29
I used these pics just to test out the album module.
 
This was a figurative self portrait I did for a photography class I took. I wish it would have turned out better, but at the time, I only had one lens, and it wasn't good for shooting this. I actually had to stand on a ladder to get this picture, I still wish it could have turned out better though. The lighting was also weird, which is why I made it black and white.
http://clone232.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d3b9t7c
 
Wow! So many great artists and photogs here! I also have a portrait business in photography that started as a hobby for me over ten years ago. My blog is here:

http://mattederblog.blogspot.com/

The actual gallery is the first log, so you'll have to back-track there. I mainly concentrate on people ('cause people pay), and I spend alot of time practicing with my strobes. I should probably concentrate on some artsy stuff, but my music takes care of that side of me, too. Let me know what you think (or not ;)
 
Wow! So many great artists and photogs here! I also have a portrait business in photography that started as a hobby for me over ten years ago. My blog is here:

http://mattederblog.blogspot.com/

The actual gallery is the first log, so you'll have to back-track there. I mainly concentrate on people ('cause people pay), and I spend alot of time practicing with my strobes. I should probably concentrate on some artsy stuff, but my music takes care of that side of me, too. Let me know what you think (or not ;)

*gulp* Is that...a Canon 1D?! I saw one once...in a perspex box in a shop...not allowed to touch it. It's like a fable creature! :-D
 
Last edited:
Great Idea! Some awesome work here guys, I would like to go through each one carefully, I love all kinds of art and can look at it all day! It's no coincidence that many musicians are into photography.

I'm into photography, 3d art and video editing as well but I'll just share some photography :)

I really love shooting birds of prey but nature in general is what I really like to take pics of.
I have quite a few but here is my favourite subjects!

I'm currently rebuilding my site so the pics in the album are not the best stuff I have but if you are interested http://www.jeminimedia.com/index.php?option=com_expose&Itemid=29
I used these pics just to test out the album module.
Loving all of this. I'm so talented in my head, such a pity I'm also deluded.
 
*gulp* Is that...a Canon 1D?! I saw one once...in a perspex box in a shop...not allowed to touch it. It's like a fable creature! :-D

Yeah - all two of them. I've pretty much shot with alot of different cameras, Leicas, Hasselblads, Nikons, 4x5 - cutting my teeth on film. And after a while you come to a combination that reminds you of one of your early favs. I've taken the 1D's and I make 'em act like old film cameras. I still work faster that way.

And take heart, I do not shoot with the newest DSLRs. I've been making do with the first gen 1D - they're only 4.15 MP. I've made prints as big as 16x20 with these things and no one seems to notice that my files aren't extremely huge. Which just proves that it's the
brain behind the camera (if I do say so myself). I say it's all about the lighting. Thanks for taking a look!

Attached is a picture of what DrummerSarah saw of what I usually carry around to a job. I also have bigger lights in cases and backdrops cased up and ready to go too.
 

Attachments

  • Bo's-gear.jpg
    Bo's-gear.jpg
    208.2 KB · Views: 179
Ah, mine are macro filters. My Dad gave me one segment of an extention tube, not tried it out yet :-D I use a Canon 350D and I have 3 lenses - 18-55, 28-80 and 50-200. I also want that Macro 100mm :-D

That's about it really. Only got into it in July!

Do you use Flickr? If so, add me :) http://www.flickr.com/photos/sarahjane_1986/

Just remember fellow photogs everytime you add a piece of glass you are adding a small percentage of distortion. A better macro lens will work better than all of those lenses stacked.
 
Just remember fellow photogs everytime you add a piece of glass you are adding a small percentage of distortion. A better macro lens will work better than all of those lenses stacked.

But what if you're a poor girl living on beans on toast? Hahaaa! When I have saved up for a drum kit, I'll be saving for a macro lens...I always seem to be saving for something! :-D
 
Yeah - all two of them. I've pretty much shot with alot of different cameras, Leicas, Hasselblads, Nikons, 4x5 - cutting my teeth on film. And after a while you come to a combination that reminds you of one of your early favs. I've taken the 1D's and I make 'em act like old film cameras. I still work faster that way.

And take heart, I do not shoot with the newest DSLRs. I've been making do with the first gen 1D - they're only 4.15 MP. I've made prints as big as 16x20 with these things and no one seems to notice that my files aren't extremely huge. Which just proves that it's the
brain behind the camera (if I do say so myself). I say it's all about the lighting. Thanks for taking a look!

Attached is a picture of what DrummerSarah saw of what I usually carry around to a job. I also have bigger lights in cases and backdrops cased up and ready to go too.

Only 4.15mp? Woah! My 350D has 8mp! But I suppose it's the person behind the camera that makes great pictures! :)

That's a lot of stuff to be carrying around! That might be me one day when I've learnt a bit more stuff...still a rookie!
 
The megapixel count is only one part of the story. A higher megapixel count can mean a lower sensitivity/accuracy per pixel. What matters is the quality of the sensor and the shutter speed, image stability, quality of the lens and ISO versatility.

Once you get over four megapixels, unless you're doing really huge spreads it doesn't really matter provided the rest of the camera is up to it. I'm not insulting your camera at all (it's a fine camera) but I would liken megapixels to the old 'megahertz myth' of early last decade. Larger numbers don't necessarily mean increased quality. In the 'megahertz myth', manufacturers stopped taking into account instructions per cycle; which is why you had a Pentium IV clocking at over 3.0GHz effectively doing no more 'work' than a PowerPC chip that is running at a much lower clock speed.
 
The megapixel count is only one part of the story. A higher megapixel count can mean a lower sensitivity/accuracy per pixel. What matters is the quality of the sensor and the shutter speed, image stability, quality of the lens and ISO versatility.

Once you get over four megapixels, unless you're doing really huge spreads it doesn't really matter provided the rest of the camera is up to it. I'm not insulting your camera at all (it's a fine camera) but I would liken megapixels to the old 'megahertz myth' of early last decade. Larger numbers don't necessarily mean increased quality. In the 'megahertz myth', manufacturers stopped taking into account instructions per cycle; which is why you had a Pentium IV clocking at over 3.0GHz effectively doing no more 'work' than a PowerPC chip that is running at a much lower clock speed.

The ISO is a biggie for me. If I were to buy another camera I'd try and get one that was pretty decent at higher ISO's...soo many pictures ruined because I forgot to change the ISO :-(

I would like to print some of my picture out large so the bigger mp number will hopefully do it justice :-D
 
The ISO is a biggie for me. If I were to buy another camera I'd try and get one that was pretty decent at higher ISO's...soo many pictures ruined because I forgot to change the ISO :-(

I would like to print some of my picture out large so the bigger mp number will hopefully do it justice :-D

I was at a photog convention in Vegas and got to hear famed photog Joe McNally speak, and even though he shoots with the latest greatest Nikon that can do ISO's to 128000 (or whatever) he wants the best quality possible, so he's always at ISO 200 (or the lowest setting). I do the same thing, I want low ISO (you should try film and shoot Fuji's Velvia rated at ISO 50). The rest is technique. I say if it's good enough for Joe, then it's good enough for me.
 
But what if you're a poor girl living on beans on toast? Hahaaa! When I have saved up for a drum kit, I'll be saving for a macro lens...I always seem to be saving for something! :-D

We have chosen two expensive hobbies.
 
I was at a photog convention in Vegas and got to hear famed photog Joe McNally speak, and even though he shoots with the latest greatest Nikon that can do ISO's to 128000 (or whatever) he wants the best quality possible, so he's always at ISO 200 (or the lowest setting). I do the same thing, I want low ISO (you should try film and shoot Fuji's Velvia rated at ISO 50). The rest is technique. I say if it's good enough for Joe, then it's good enough for me.

I'm the same, it's nearly always on 100. I just wish it was less grainy at 1600..it would make things a bit more easier sometimes (especially if you have no tripod with you!). I want the black black! and not a noisy mess. I'm sure my technique will improve...only been doing it 3 months :-D
 
Back
Top