What camera i would use for specific shoots..

[donny1963]

Lightroom is not the best software for cloning things out, but I imported the file to LR and cloned it out with two clicks. When I first got LR, after having had PS for 15 years, I felt pretty frustrated with the way Lightroom's clone tool worked, but I've since then become more comfortable using it for cloning out objectionable things, like sensor dust blobs, but also stray hairs, pores, pimples, and rough skin patches. I LIKE the easy way LR allows me to re-size the brush I'm using for doing my cloning.

By the way light room is mainly for re-touching / post production, it has a tool you can use to remove spots and stuff like that, but it's horrible to remove objects or major editing like that, it can be done but why bust your cookies like that when you can do it much faster and easier with Photoshop, each software has it's place and area, and light room is not one of them for that type of editing.
it's mainly for like what it says light room , what you would do in a photo lab, ie, fixing exposures, color balance, editing blacks and whites and color saturation and even lens manipulation.

I shoot some green screen portraits and fashion shoots and use that to create backgrounds i took separately, like if some one would like a portrait of there children in background maybe christmas pictures, or what ever, or even models i taken and really don't have the means to bring them there and later put them in backgrounds i done. That is where photoshop comes in. or if i took a picture out in the city and want to remove annoying objects in it like a lamp post or what ever i use photoshop. or created stuff like these images i'm posting.

they are a couple other very good ones i done but can't post it here because it has nudity in it..

 

[Vtec44]

I don't claim to be an expert, yeah i been doing it a long time, and the comment about it being amateurish is not true, say what you want, i know that isn't true, and nope i don't get opposite effects, from every one...
So who have you worked for? where have you got your work published?

I've shot for Macy's as their house photographer, yeah that Macy's. My work has been published on Wedding Wire, The Knott, Borrowed and Blue (yeah you know some of the world's largest wedding blog networks). I shoot film (Kodak Portra 400 and 800 to be specific). I'm traditionally trained (Bachelor of Arts with an emphasis on digital art). I'm an active member of Nikon Professional Services. If your work sucks, it doesn't matter how long you've been shooting. So I don't go around parade that information. If I do, my photographs better be EPIC vs similar photographers. LOL

 

[Tim Tucker]

i don't use clone much any more to take things out, i would rather use masking for something like that depending,

Yep, I'd use masking as well, then you'd be able to see what's behind it.

 

[Vtec44]

Soooo........ the cigarette butt is what? An artistic detail carefully placed to add an air of informality?

Yep, this is one of the many amateur mistakes that I was referring to. We all have done when we started out.

I've been waiting to see some awesome Hasselblad digital medium format images thrown into the mix of this thread, you know, for discussion.

What the landscape or the models??

The two models; I missed the landscapes.

the two models are before, well the first one is the second one is after.

Soooo........ the cigarette butt is what? An artistic detail carefully placed to add an air of informality?

Yep, this is one of the many amateur mistakes that I was referring to. We all have done when we started out.

 

[donny1963]

i don't use clone much any more to take things out, i would rather use masking for something like that depending,

Yep, I'd use masking as well, then you'd be able to see what's behind it.

I love using layer masks, lets say i got a portrait of a model's face, and i want to paste an object maybe a logo or something, and when i paste the logo and i got the portrait of the model on the left side of the picture and i want the logo to run from left to right of the picture but part of the log is blocking her face, well i can just add a layer mask on that log and then start painting the logo black and it will make it appear that it's behind her rather in over her..
so that's a really cool way to place objects or other pictures in, with out it blocking your main subject, kind of hard to explain but that is just one of the instances that i would use layer masks to edit or remove objects..
NOTE allways use layers, that way you have the freedom of just effecting what ever your layering instead of the entire picture.
It makes it easier and quicker.

 

[donny1963]

Soooo........ the cigarette butt is what? An artistic detail carefully placed to add an air of informality?

Yep, this is one of the many amateur mistakes that I was referring to. We all have done when we started out.

I've been waiting to see some awesome Hasselblad digital medium format images thrown into the mix of this thread, you know, for discussion.

What the landscape or the models??

The two models; I missed the landscapes.

the two models are before, well the first one is the second one is after.

Soooo........ the cigarette butt is what? An artistic detail carefully placed to add an air of informality?

Yep, this is one of the many amateur mistakes that I was referring to. We all have done when we started out.

Not just amateur's make them mistakes, every one does from time to time, even the best of the best can make that mistake.
nobody is above making a mistake, or to good, and that specific mistake is really a minor one, takes about 1 minute or less to fix.

I took classes at the Cambridge School Of Photography, one thing i have learned, and know, that with every photographer, the ratio of a photographer of creating an Ordinary picture, vs an extraordinary picture is not as high as most people think. In fact after going out on a shoot taking maybe 200 pictures, you find that your satisfied with maybe 25% of them on a good day depending on how you shoot and what you was doing. Not saying 75% of them would be bad, but the 25% is what you find to be really great and want to use for what ever you did that photo shoot for., like i said depending , if your at a studio and doing a portrait for a customer your going to go over the images with them and probably only use half if that, that's a different situation.
But lets say for example you go out travel somewhere and shoot landscape, waterfalls, or what not, and you end up taking a couple hundred though out the day.
And then later you find you really like probably about 20 to 30 of them and the rest you would either put aside or do nothing with them ever.
Any one who takes a couple hundred pictures and says then went home and all 200 of them or 190 of them was epic pictures and perfect, is full of crap,
I don't care if your Irving Penn...

If you don't know who Irving Penn was, he was photographer known for his fashion photography, portraits,he worked for Vogue magazine, Harper's Bazaar, Saks Fifth Avenue, and did independent advertising work
You could see a lot of his nude work at, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

if you do a Wikipedia on him, his carrier accomplishments are impressive, the list goes on.

He used a variety of equipment - Leica and Nikon cameras, 4" x 5" or 8" x 10" Deardoff view cameras, or Rolleiflex or Hasselblad cameras.

His most famous stuff was "Cuzco Children" "Pablo Picasso"

Photographed, President John F Kennedy, celebrities, like Marilyn Monroe, Al Pacino, Robin Williams, Bill Gates, Cindy Crawford, Gruco Marks, Albert Einstein, Bette Davis, Mel Brooks, the list goes on.

born 1917, died 2009, lived in New York..

Now that was an epic photographer.

 

[Vtec44]

Not just amateur's make them mistakes, every one does from time to time, even the best of the best can make that mistake.
nobody is above making a mistake, or to good, and that specific mistake is really a minor one, takes about 1 minute or less to fix.

You'll NEVER see random trash stuff in the portfolio of an experienced photographer. Dirty feet, crooked vertical and horizontal, cropping joints. A really small minor one which takes a bout 5 seconds to fix, but you didn't fix it before using it as a show piece. If it was shot on film, that trash would have been removed prior to the photo. It shows your amateur mind set. An photographer with extensive experience would not do something like that.

I took classes at the Cambridge School Of Photography, one thing i have learned, and know, that with every photographer, the ratio of a photographer of creating an Ordinary picture, vs an extraordinary picture is not as high as most people think. In fact after going out on a shoot taking maybe 200 pictures, you find that your satisfied with maybe 25% of them on a good day depending on how you shoot and what you was doing. Not saying 75% of them would be bad, but the 25% is what you find to be really great and want to use for what ever you did that photo shoot for., like i said depending , if your at a studio and doing a portrait for a customer your going to go over the images with them and probably only use half if that, that's a different situation.
But lets say for example you go out travel somewhere and shoot landscape, waterfalls, or what not, and you end up taking a couple hundred though out the day.
And then later you find you really like probably about 20 to 30 of them and the rest you would either put aside or do nothing with them ever.
Any one who takes a couple hundred pictures and says then went home and all 200 of them or 190 of them was epic pictures and perfect, is full of crap,

It's called curating your images. It's nothing new or surprising. I'm not sure why do you even go from taking a few classes to the success ratio.

I don't care if your Irving Penn...

If you don't know who Irving Penn was, he was photographer known for his fashion photography, portraits,he worked for Vogue magazine, Harper's Bazaar, Saks Fifth Avenue, and did independent advertising work
You could see a lot of his nude work at, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

if you do a Wikipedia on him, his carrier accomplishments are impressive, the list goes on.

He used a variety of equipment - Leica and Nikon cameras, 4" x 5" or 8" x 10" Deardoff view cameras, or Rolleiflex or Hasselblad cameras.

His most famous stuff was "Cuzco Children" "Pablo Picasso"

Photographed, President John F Kennedy, celebrities, like Marilyn Monroe, Al Pacino, Robin Williams, Bill Gates, Cindy Crawford, Gruco Marks, Albert Einstein, Bette Davis, Mel Brooks, the list goes on.

born 1917, died 2009, lived in New York..

Now that was an epic photographer.

Irving Penn is irrelevant to this conversation, so is Ansel Adams, Benjamin Von Wong, and the likes.

Like I said, we all started somewhere. When you parade your experience, awards, length of shooting, etc. then post sub par work. You attracted attention to yourself, so expect people to look at your work closely and set the bar much higher. LOL

 

[donny1963]

Not just amateur's make them mistakes, every one does from time to time, even the best of the best can make that mistake.
nobody is above making a mistake, or to good, and that specific mistake is really a minor one, takes about 1 minute or less to fix.

You'll NEVER see random trash stuff in the portfolio of an experienced photographer. Dirty feet, crooked vertical and horizontal, cropping joints. A really small minor one which takes a bout 5 seconds to fix, but you didn't fix it before using it as a show piece. If it was shot on film, that trash would have been removed prior to the photo. It shows your amateur mind set. An photographer with extensive experience would not do something like that.

I took classes at the Cambridge School Of Photography, one thing i have learned, and know, that with every photographer, the ratio of a photographer of creating an Ordinary picture, vs an extraordinary picture is not as high as most people think. In fact after going out on a shoot taking maybe 200 pictures, you find that your satisfied with maybe 25% of them on a good day depending on how you shoot and what you was doing. Not saying 75% of them would be bad, but the 25% is what you find to be really great and want to use for what ever you did that photo shoot for., like i said depending , if your at a studio and doing a portrait for a customer your going to go over the images with them and probably only use half if that, that's a different situation.
But lets say for example you go out travel somewhere and shoot landscape, waterfalls, or what not, and you end up taking a couple hundred though out the day.
And then later you find you really like probably about 20 to 30 of them and the rest you would either put aside or do nothing with them ever.
Any one who takes a couple hundred pictures and says then went home and all 200 of them or 190 of them was epic pictures and perfect, is full of crap,

It's called curating your images. It's nothing new or surprising. I'm not sure why do you even go from taking a few classes to the success ratio.

I don't care if your Irving Penn...

If you don't know who Irving Penn was, he was photographer known for his fashion photography, portraits,he worked for Vogue magazine, Harper's Bazaar, Saks Fifth Avenue, and did independent advertising work
You could see a lot of his nude work at, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

if you do a Wikipedia on him, his carrier accomplishments are impressive, the list goes on.

He used a variety of equipment - Leica and Nikon cameras, 4" x 5" or 8" x 10" Deardoff view cameras, or Rolleiflex or Hasselblad cameras.

His most famous stuff was "Cuzco Children" "Pablo Picasso"

Photographed, President John F Kennedy, celebrities, like Marilyn Monroe, Al Pacino, Robin Williams, Bill Gates, Cindy Crawford, Gruco Marks, Albert Einstein, Bette Davis, Mel Brooks, the list goes on.

born 1917, died 2009, lived in New York..

Now that was an epic photographer.

Irving Penn is irrelevant to this conversation, so is Ansel Adams, Benjamin Von Wong, and the likes.

Like I said, we all started somewhere. When you parade your experience, awards, length of shooting, etc. then post sub par work. You attracted attention to yourself, so expect people to look at your work closely and set the bar much higher. LOL

I don't see that i parade anything, just give information..

And that is not true, Irving Penn was very relevant to my point, what i just saw, was you shifting a point i just made..
That's ok i know how to shift back..

 

[Vtec44]

I don't see that i parade anything, just give information..

I will give you information right back. The quality of your work does not match with the experience you claim to have. IMHO, you should stop telling people your "extensive" experience. Maybe then you'll improve your work by starting to actually learn from some of the members on this forum.

Up to you...

 

[thereyougo!]

Not just amateur's make them mistakes, every one does from time to time, even the best of the best can make that mistake.
nobody is above making a mistake, or to good, and that specific mistake is really a minor one, takes about 1 minute or less to fix.

You'll NEVER see random trash stuff in the portfolio of an experienced photographer. Dirty feet, crooked vertical and horizontal, cropping joints. A really small minor one which takes a bout 5 seconds to fix, but you didn't fix it before using it as a show piece. If it was shot on film, that trash would have been removed prior to the photo. It shows your amateur mind set. An photographer with extensive experience would not do something like that.

I took classes at the Cambridge School Of Photography, one thing i have learned, and know, that with every photographer, the ratio of a photographer of creating an Ordinary picture, vs an extraordinary picture is not as high as most people think. In fact after going out on a shoot taking maybe 200 pictures, you find that your satisfied with maybe 25% of them on a good day depending on how you shoot and what you was doing. Not saying 75% of them would be bad, but the 25% is what you find to be really great and want to use for what ever you did that photo shoot for., like i said depending , if your at a studio and doing a portrait for a customer your going to go over the images with them and probably only use half if that, that's a different situation.
But lets say for example you go out travel somewhere and shoot landscape, waterfalls, or what not, and you end up taking a couple hundred though out the day.
And then later you find you really like probably about 20 to 30 of them and the rest you would either put aside or do nothing with them ever.
Any one who takes a couple hundred pictures and says then went home and all 200 of them or 190 of them was epic pictures and perfect, is full of crap,

It's called curating your images. It's nothing new or surprising. I'm not sure why do you even go from taking a few classes to the success ratio.

I don't care if your Irving Penn...

If you don't know who Irving Penn was, he was photographer known for his fashion photography, portraits,he worked for Vogue magazine, Harper's Bazaar, Saks Fifth Avenue, and did independent advertising work
You could see a lot of his nude work at, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

if you do a Wikipedia on him, his carrier accomplishments are impressive, the list goes on.

He used a variety of equipment - Leica and Nikon cameras, 4" x 5" or 8" x 10" Deardoff view cameras, or Rolleiflex or Hasselblad cameras.

His most famous stuff was "Cuzco Children" "Pablo Picasso"

Photographed, President John F Kennedy, celebrities, like Marilyn Monroe, Al Pacino, Robin Williams, Bill Gates, Cindy Crawford, Gruco Marks, Albert Einstein, Bette Davis, Mel Brooks, the list goes on.

born 1917, died 2009, lived in New York..

Now that was an epic photographer.

Irving Penn is irrelevant to this conversation, so is Ansel Adams, Benjamin Von Wong, and the likes.

Like I said, we all started somewhere. When you parade your experience, awards, length of shooting, etc. then post sub par work. You attracted attention to yourself, so expect people to look at your work closely and set the bar much higher. LOL

I don't see that i parade anything, just give information..

And that is not true, Irving Penn was very relevant to my point, what i just saw, was you shifting a point i just made..
That's ok i know how to shift back..

I find it hilarious that you're trying to teach Derrel and others how to do post production. A decent photographer edits before he shoots so there is no need to clone. How? Remove the cigarette butt before shooting. Intrusive wire? Others may differ but I tend to not shoot at all if it is too intrusive.

You are no expert and your patronising almost condescending tone is I suspect starting to annoy people I suspect. It certainly makes you come across as an arrogant know-it-all that knows pretty much bigger all.

It also shows you have failed another forum 101 for getting the best from a forum. You haven't bothered to get to know members on here before you teach them PP basics. Derrel is one of the most well known and respected users on here and it's completely passed you by.

Step back from trying to teach others and you might learn something.

 

[donny1963]

Not just amateur's make them mistakes, every one does from time to time, even the best of the best can make that mistake.
nobody is above making a mistake, or to good, and that specific mistake is really a minor one, takes about 1 minute or less to fix.

You'll NEVER see random trash stuff in the portfolio of an experienced photographer. Dirty feet, crooked vertical and horizontal, cropping joints. A really small minor one which takes a bout 5 seconds to fix, but you didn't fix it before using it as a show piece. If it was shot on film, that trash would have been removed prior to the photo. It shows your amateur mind set. An photographer with extensive experience would not do something like that.

I took classes at the Cambridge School Of Photography, one thing i have learned, and know, that with every photographer, the ratio of a photographer of creating an Ordinary picture, vs an extraordinary picture is not as high as most people think. In fact after going out on a shoot taking maybe 200 pictures, you find that your satisfied with maybe 25% of them on a good day depending on how you shoot and what you was doing. Not saying 75% of them would be bad, but the 25% is what you find to be really great and want to use for what ever you did that photo shoot for., like i said depending , if your at a studio and doing a portrait for a customer your going to go over the images with them and probably only use half if that, that's a different situation.
But lets say for example you go out travel somewhere and shoot landscape, waterfalls, or what not, and you end up taking a couple hundred though out the day.
And then later you find you really like probably about 20 to 30 of them and the rest you would either put aside or do nothing with them ever.
Any one who takes a couple hundred pictures and says then went home and all 200 of them or 190 of them was epic pictures and perfect, is full of crap,

It's called curating your images. It's nothing new or surprising. I'm not sure why do you even go from taking a few classes to the success ratio.

I don't care if your Irving Penn...

If you don't know who Irving Penn was, he was photographer known for his fashion photography, portraits,he worked for Vogue magazine, Harper's Bazaar, Saks Fifth Avenue, and did independent advertising work
You could see a lot of his nude work at, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

if you do a Wikipedia on him, his carrier accomplishments are impressive, the list goes on.

He used a variety of equipment - Leica and Nikon cameras, 4" x 5" or 8" x 10" Deardoff view cameras, or Rolleiflex or Hasselblad cameras.

His most famous stuff was "Cuzco Children" "Pablo Picasso"

Photographed, President John F Kennedy, celebrities, like Marilyn Monroe, Al Pacino, Robin Williams, Bill Gates, Cindy Crawford, Gruco Marks, Albert Einstein, Bette Davis, Mel Brooks, the list goes on.

born 1917, died 2009, lived in New York..

Now that was an epic photographer.

Irving Penn is irrelevant to this conversation, so is Ansel Adams, Benjamin Von Wong, and the likes.

Like I said, we all started somewhere. When you parade your experience, awards, length of shooting, etc. then post sub par work. You attracted attention to yourself, so expect people to look at your work closely and set the bar much higher. LOL

I don't see that i parade anything, just give information..

And that is not true, Irving Penn was very relevant to my point, what i just saw, was you shifting a point i just made..
That's ok i know how to shift back..

I find it hilarious that you're trying to teach Derrel and others how to do post production. A decent photographer edits before he shoots so there is no need to clone. How? Remove the cigarette butt before shooting. Intrusive wire? Others may differ but I tend to not shoot at all if it is too intrusive.

You are no expert and your patronising almost condescending tone is I suspect starting to annoy people I suspect. It certainly makes you come across as an arrogant know-it-all that knows pretty much bigger all.

It also shows you have failed another forum 101 for getting the best from a forum. You haven't bothered to get to know members on here before you teach them PP basics. Derrel is one of the most well known and respected users on here and it's completely passed you by.

Yeah ok..

lol
:/

 

[Overread]

And I think that is quite enough.