nataliephoto

joined 1 year ago
[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

wow 15k. Big spender.

The studios that asked for this feature are multi million dollar companies.

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

This story has been bugging me for a bit because it's being told by people who have no clue what they're talking about. They're not in this specific part of the industry and they have these hot takes that are wildly uninformed.

First, this update is not for you. This is almost exclusively firmware designed for volume school portrait studios e.g. Lifetouch. $150 to update a camera is nothing compared to the time in post that custom gridlines will save. I would even wager Sony was directly asked by these companies to do this and they were like "okay but we're going to charge you."

So, you have to understand how school portrait software works. You go to a school, shoot 500 something kids against a green screen, good to go, right? No. At some point you throw those photos into cropping software (usually provided by your lab) to get all the heads in the right spot and the right size. And the cropping software has these little ovals where you're supposed to put the head and lines for the shoulders. Cool, right? Well it's a ton of work if your photos are all different, someone has to go in and adjust that after the fact. And yeah, the existing grids can more or less get you there, but with custom grids you're certain when you take the shot. They're also helpful in this specific industry because the people taking these photos aren't usually good at photography, so you can't really trust their eye anyway. Certainly not across hundreds of different people. I've been shooting for nearly 20 years and I don't think I could even be that consistent.

Anyways, how did we used to solve this problem? Viewfinder masking!

www.viewfindermasks.com

So this company would hook you up with an updated camera (like on your 5D or more likely a Rebel, in this type of photography) that had a custom grid line that was exactly what you needed it to be. And it cost something like $200.

So sony's solution is a) cheaper and b) more flexible than what the industry has been doing for the last 30 years. The exact opposite of what most people are complaining about.

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

up 8 lets fucking gooooo

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

How does anyone do anything? Practice.

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What about a DJ fogger?

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

That's a horrible throw but I don't think it's a fumble. He had his fingertips on it.

 

To be clear, before anyone shows up with like "I shot low light and it was fine" - no you didn't. I'm talking darkness, lit only by minimal mobile dj lighting, or even low ambient lighting. I was at an elks club last night and.. jesus christ.

My settings for events (dance floor) are typically in the range of 1600-3200, 1/125-200 depending on where I want the background, and f1.2. Flash is TTL but if it's not consistent 1/64-1/32 is usually great. Bouncing with a magsphere. In this case it was the 50 1.2 Z. I'm also in 'starlight mode', which increases the LV it's able to shoot in. Sidenote: Nikon needs to add an option to keep the LCD at normal brightness but enable the extra LV latitude. Or rather, why isn't that always on?

The z9 just.. hunts, a lot. And you can get great photos out of it, I really like the accuracy of TTL here, it almost never misses exposure. Something I never got out of sony. Now the sony, like any mirrorless, had issues in darkness too. But throwing a 1.2 lens on there usually solved that to the point where I could focus reliably. Not so with the z9. Thing just doesn't find faces, and I found actually the best way is not to just do 3d or center AF point only, but throw it in wide. At which point it finds a face it can actually focus on, and then I just recompose and get the face it picked. It's not perfect, but it works like.. 40% of the time?

A workaround that's annoying is throwing on the video light on my v1/v860iii and illuminating people to focus. I usually do this for groups because I'd have to shoot at 2.8 or above and there's no way the z9 is focusing at that f-stop. But I can't do it all the time because I'd be a beacon and annoy the crowd.

So if anyone has tips, tricks, the secret sauce.. please let me know! I'm not the only one having this issue, my boss also has a z9 and is complaining, and I've seen complaints on facebook groups too. I've been shooting events for almost 20 years and mirrorless for 5ish so it's not a skill issue.

Should I just bite the bullet and grab a d850 and an F mount 50 1.4? Would my zf do any better? I hear it's better in low light, but I tried it and the colors weren't popping as well as the z9. It's also unbalanced with the 50 1.2, which is a beast, and then add a pro flash and its like.. not a great setup to carry.

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

I masked for years until the mask became the routine. Like most social things for us, practice, practice, practice.

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

Hi, full time sports photographer here and former photojournalist. The only way you're shooting anything above d2 ball is with a media credential and a reason to be there. If it's your dream go for it. It was my dream to shoot the Red Sox and.. yeah, never did that, but I did get into Gillette at one point. So go for it, put in the 20,000 hours. If you really want it bad.

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

serves him right. dirty fucking player clappin like that you're gonna get someone hurt

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Sure, if you're work for hire.

It's a corporate event. Who cares? I doubt some random dude speaking at a podium or giving out an award for 10 years of service is going in your portfolio.

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

Yep these pro outlets usually help you out next day if there's an issue. Why I still print with them instead of Amazon or whatever

[–] nataliephoto@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

When I printed for work I had good relationships with bayphoto, millers, whcc, and h&h color. Disclaimer this was like 7 years ago but I don't know why their quality would have changed in the meantime.

view more: next ›