Stratton PPOS

brian_f2.8 · Feb 24, 2014

10.5 fish, /24-70,70-200. I thought a 300 would be too long.

imagemaker46 · Feb 24, 2014

I've only ever shot alpine events with a 300,400 or 500mm, but then I was really restricted as far as access went. My lens of choice is pretty much always a 300mm, so I work around distance with it, I prefer tighter images than loose, but then most of the sports I do shoot require that. I have a bunch of alpine stuff starting in a couple of weeks and will have 9 straight days of it. I know how to shoot it, but will be going onto the hill without knowing what the positions will be like, only that the access will be very tight and security will make sure of it. It'll be a challenge.

brian_f2.8 · Feb 24, 2014

No way a 500 or 400 would be needed.The total distance of the course was 200 yards max. I mean all they did was start, hit one jump, go over another small jump and two sets of rail slides. Looking forward to seeing your work in a few weeks. No offense but being from Canada you have skiing in your DNA.

So as I was critiqued before, I was under the impression to shoot wide to show the stunt and the view. As I look around it seems most images are wide with views at a really high elevation. We might have been 2000ft.

This was a small event, nothing crazy but a good event. Im not going to shoot x-games with no experience in this.

imagemaker46 · Feb 24, 2014

I'm shooting the Paralympics in Sochi, leave next Monday. I'll be doing alpine, snowboard, biathlon and cross country. Once I get over my 24 hour flight I have 3 days before competition starts, 10am in the morning, have to be on the hill 90 minutes before the start. I'll have two days before the events start to walk some of the course and find the best spots, working on two mountains, 30 minutes apart. I'll try and post stuff on the forum.

runnah · Feb 24, 2014

brian_f2.8 said:
No way a 500 or 400 would be needed.The total distance of the course was 200 yards max. I mean all they did was start, hit one jump, go over another small jump and two sets of rail slides. Looking forward to seeing your work in a few weeks.

It's all about compression of objects.

brian_f2.8 · Feb 24, 2014

runnah said:
It's all about compression of objects.

To each his/her own

The_Traveler · Feb 24, 2014

Judging by the whites on the shoes and clothes, these seem more like the exposures should be.

brian_f2.8 · Feb 24, 2014

Um yeah it's not rocket science. I went for the looks as I first posted. It's a matter of moving a slider.

runnah · Feb 24, 2014

Brian, simmer down you asked for c&c and now you are getting it. Stop making excuses. You had some good images and you had some bad ones, people are taking the time to try to help you improve. It's not personal at all.

brian_f2.8 · Feb 24, 2014

runnah said:
Brian, simmer down you asked for c&c and now you are getting it. Stop making excuses. You had some good images and you had some bad ones, people are taking the time to try to help you improve. It's not personal at all.

I'm not upset. I'm just stating a fact that I went for a look. What do you think? I don't like being told how I should edit, I'd rather be evaluated on what I did.

Anyone can get that look. It's a matter of moving a slider to the left or right.

imagemaker46 · Feb 24, 2014

The_Traveler said:
Judging by the whites on the shoes and clothes, these seem more like the exposures should be.

View attachment 67525 View attachment 67526

These are properly exposed images.

imagemaker46 · Feb 24, 2014

We all will have our own opinions on what works and what doesn't. 2.8 will always stick to his guns regardless of what he posts, what anyone thinks of them and as long as he feels he has posted his best allowable images then that's the way it should be. Personally I find a lot of what 2.8 posts are underexposed and soft. I've mentioned in previous posts that a lot seem soft, but also realize that compression will do that, I don't find too many other people that post images having the same problem, but it may just be the way they are done in post processing. 2.8 never had any camera info attached to his images, so it's impossible to offer any technical input, he has his reason for hiding it and that's up to him. He teaches photoshop so I can't fault him for his understanding of post processing, he has more knowledge on that side than I do.

He's looked for a creative twist to the images he posted, as the camera holder he should be, not everyone tries.

brian_f2.8 · Feb 24, 2014

My exif info is on my flickr site. No clue how to put on here. Im not hiding anything. I upload to drop box and then download to my phone and upload via ios app. Its cumbersome but it works.

Yes I do a twist, think of this. Eric Clapton and Buddy Guy are playing the blues. Along comes Slash, another great guitar player. He can play but its different. I know how to use the meter in my camera. Whats wrong with breaking a few rules to be different.

The_Traveler · Feb 24, 2014

If you didn't want input, you shouldn't have sent me the images.
And then to turn around and slight what I did, because it was 'easy' seems pretty rude.

imagemaker46 · Feb 24, 2014

Nothing wrong with always looking for the creative slant to pictures. Creating images unlike others is what people notice. I've always been the one off on my own, looking at things from different angles, different places, sometimes it's works really well, and sometimes it just doesn't work at all. Mind you, when that happens no one sees them.