Tintin Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 can you do a symmetrical shot of him I'll try when it's light enough. I have an old symmetrical nose picture of him when he was a kitten, but it was with my ancient crappy camera. It's the shift in focus from the nose to the eyes that does it for me. P.S. Say the boat's yours. I'll steal it and become a captain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bs Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 (edited) I'll try when it's light enough. I have an old symmetrical nose picture of him when he was a kitten, but it was with my ancient crappy camera. I'll steal it and become a captain. Commandeer - nautical term! [/piratesofthecaribbean] Should be uploading a bunch of photos tomorrow, so I'll get some up here. Edited November 6, 2013 by Bs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazybobbles Posted November 6, 2013 Author Share Posted November 6, 2013 so much beef on my Facebook post i shared never seen so much cross over between muser friends, photography friends and gig friends Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polythenelucy Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 I wouldn't be surprised if you got rid of the 24-105, if you can find a nice deal for a 24-70: do it! haha that is the plan. I'll go for the 85mm if the price drops again, but the 24-70 seems most ideal. just need the moneys so much beef on my Facebook post i shared never seen so much cross over between muser friends, photography friends and gig friends was it something to do with how not to be an asshole when shooting a gig? http://www.diyphotography.net/photographer-flashes-camera-band-crowd-annoyed-photos-are-sweet Love this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inn Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 so much beef on my Facebook post i shared never seen so much cross over between muser friends, photography friends and gig friends All worlds are colliding! It's a good discussion mind. Meaty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthijs Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 I don't think I've seen it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dramatic Hammer Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 All worlds are colliding! It's a good discussion mind. Meaty Some guy called me out for a fight! Edit: All amusement aside, it's interesting to see the photographer side of things and how they've built up this legend of ettiquette/etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazybobbles Posted November 7, 2013 Author Share Posted November 7, 2013 (edited) Some guy called me out for a fight! Edit: All amusement aside, it's interesting to see the photographer side of things and how they've built up this legend of ettiquette/etc. Serves you right for calling him a berk Most of the "etiquette" was built by tour managers and artists who felt photographers being a form of distraction from their show. I know folks who absolutely ban photographs and would mid show tell someone to stop or get them thrown out. The extreme cases you can accept because ultimately it's down to the artist and how comfortable they are performing with photographers. The rest have pretty much been down to the legacy default restrictions led by Bruce Springsteen. Now.. one thing I've learnt from photography is that the limitation of things improve their skills. Back in the days, any shitmuncher could get a photopasses and the photographers (rocking analogue) had shit all idea how their photos would come out, so they would swamp the band with flash to make sure they'll get a decent shot and end up ruining it for the later generation. With these limitations it makes us think outside the box in how to overcome it. Everything from holding the camera a way to reduce camera shake to working with the existing lights on stage. Flash just makes most people lazy as every angle should work ok and a lot of them use it because they just don't know how to make a good shot without it. Not to say flash is bad! The guy in question needs the flash because of the high speeds and aims it at subject to create an isolation effect on the surroundings (but ouch it hurts my eyes). That's fine, but not everyone knows how to use a flash and again lifting such restrictions will end up screwing the band and fans. Small gigs are easier to manage because there's a closer bond between photographer and artist, you can contact them and ask this stuff, try asking muse about using flash. For the 3 song rule, the limitation makes sure the photographer is making every second count. you're more likely to take loads of boring shit shots if you have the whole set to shoot them, when you only have 3 songs you're working your asshole to get the good stuff out. it's a challenge! Basically, think of all the shitmuncher photographers if these limitations were no longer in place. For small venues there isn't much policing of these rules and tour managers generally don't give a shit if a photographer is merking the shit out of their band with light. Good place to practice flash and learn how to compose for the entire set (BUT fuck me, some people know how to shoot loads of samey shots) I don't know what my point is... Rules are good Edited November 7, 2013 by crazybobbles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dramatic Hammer Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 The silly thing is, from looking at some of his other gig photography, he clearly knows how to work within the conventional framework. I can see why at a big gig, having a shit load of people all flashing away would be a) annoying for punters and b) potentially ruin the lighting effects/etc but for this sort of thing where it's one chap working with boring/non-existent venue lighting and with a high-energy act, I reckon the more the merrier In some cases I think it adds to the live vibe - don't think this: would have been quite the same without loads of disorientating strobe. Band/crowd/photographer all stumbling around the same space Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazybobbles Posted November 7, 2013 Author Share Posted November 7, 2013 The silly thing is, from looking at some of his other gig photography, he clearly knows how to work within the conventional framework. I can see why at a big gig, having a shit load of people all flashing away would be a) annoying for punters and b) potentially ruin the lighting effects/etc but for this sort of thing where it's one chap working with boring/non-existent venue lighting and with a high-energy act, I reckon the more the merrier In some cases I think it adds to the live vibe - don't think this: would have been quite the same without loads of disorientating strobe. Band/crowd/photographer all stumbling around the same space yeah as long as he adapts all is well. it would be hypocritical for me to actually say he should limit it to 3 songs because I pretty much break all the rules when i have the opportunity, photography is a very selfish role where there are times, you need to be a complete dickhole to get the shots you want. The real silly thing is when he puts the camera on his head explain all you want but people will think you're silly for doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dramatic Hammer Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 Yeah I don't really get that either Would be cool on a big dark stage to have people lighting you up with flash - making it part of the lightshow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazybobbles Posted November 7, 2013 Author Share Posted November 7, 2013 Yeah I don't really get that either Would be cool on a big dark stage to have people lighting you up with flash - making it part of the lightshow Guess it depends on the show. Fever Ray gigs are notoriously moody dark which helps for the mood and green lasers but any flash photography would make a crappy shot that kills the atmosphere. Best to avoid those kinda gigs haha. Beach house are like that too. I only endure shooting them because I want a free ticket and it's sold out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inn Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Some guy called me out for a fight! Edit: All amusement aside, it's interesting to see the photographer side of things and how they've built up this legend of ettiquette/etc. Haha aww. When both music and photography are quite passionate topics for people who care about them. In response to the flash usage thing Bob was going on about. I don't see using flash as a sign of lacking in skill and ability. I think it takes just as amount skill to use flash well than not using flash. That's something I wished I could get tuition on. So I think not using flash in a gig scenario is more about it being more pleasant for the band/artist/whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bs Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 In response to the flash usage thing Bob was going on about. I don't see using flash as a sign of lacking in skill and ability. I think it takes just as amount skill to use flash well than not using flash. That's something I wished I could get tuition on. I tend to get annoyed by people who use flash generally to be honest, haha! Usually because it fucks up the lighting on the picture I'm trying to take of something and I have to wait until they stop, or try and time mine between their pictures. Unless used really well, flash makes everything look unnatural anyway so I don't know why some people insist on using it all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polythenelucy Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 so uhhhhhm i just found a hairline scratch on my 24-105, aka the lens i wanted to sell. it's hardly visible and out on the edge (lens cap must've touched the glass ) so would Amazon accept it if I wanted to make a return? that would be my last resort if i can't make any money from selling it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthijs Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 It's probably not even visible on photos is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bs Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Can't imagine it would show up on pictures, but in terms of returning it, it would depend how thorough they are on that - I returned a CD because it had fingerprints (mine) on it once, and didn't have any problems, haha - I was actually just returning it because I didn't like it, but I'd assume a scratch on an expensive lens might be a bit different though. Could try a local camera shop and ask for advice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polythenelucy Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 yeah it seeeeems Amazon is fairly nice about returns? and nope, scratch is not at all visible in photos. i can only see it when i'm directly under a light source, so it is tiny. not to mention the glass isn't perfect and shiny anymore since i had to use a cloth on it to clean up my fingerprint smudge . Craigslist ad is up now so I'm just hoping someone will want to buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bs Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Wouldn't it make more sense to try and return it to Amazon first, unless you're trying to sell it for more than you paid for it? Worst case scenario and you don't get your original money back from point of purchase if it was rejected for some reason, you can still then try and sell onwards for as long as you like, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mipanda Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 I upgraded Got a 60D 2nd hand, seems to be in pretty great nick except some nob put stickers on it. It came with the kit lens, couple of batteries, a cute little tripod, bags etc. Paid $500, so I'm pretty happy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polythenelucy Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 Wouldn't it make more sense to try and return it to Amazon first, unless you're trying to sell it for more than you paid for it? Worst case scenario and you don't get your original money back from point of purchase if it was rejected for some reason, you can still then try and sell onwards for as long as you like, no? yeah I'm selling it for a little more, I'm just not confident that someone will buy it. a lot of "like new" 24-105 lenses have been listed for cheaps in my area (about $50-150 less than what I've listed) but none with warranty and packaging slip, which I'm offering. I'm keeping my price competitive so I won't be making too much if it sells, but at least it's something. not sure if i can even list it as "Like New" at this point. I said "great condition". I could just make occasional use of the lens until I find a buyer, assuming i won't add anymore scratches and smudges. congrats on the camera, miranda. good deal, indeed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthijs Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 I upgraded Got a 60D 2nd hand, seems to be in pretty great nick except some nob put stickers on it. It came with the kit lens, couple of batteries, a cute little tripod, bags etc. Paid $500, so I'm pretty happy! Nice, that's what I'm using! Happy shooting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bs Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 I upgraded Got a 60D 2nd hand, seems to be in pretty great nick except some nob put stickers on it. It came with the kit lens, couple of batteries, a cute little tripod, bags etc. Paid $500, so I'm pretty happy! Bargain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mipanda Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 it seems pretty cool so far, haven't had much time to play with it yet though Definitely need to get used to the different layout with the controls. The screen on it is amazing after using a 400D for so many years. So vibrant and sharp! Wondering how much I can try to sell my 400D for. Its pretty battered but still fully functional, no weird issues with it at all. hmmmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazybobbles Posted November 12, 2013 Author Share Posted November 12, 2013 Haha aww. When both music and photography are quite passionate topics for people who care about them. In response to the flash usage thing Bob was going on about. I don't see using flash as a sign of lacking in skill and ability. I think it takes just as amount skill to use flash well than not using flash. That's something I wished I could get tuition on. So I think not using flash in a gig scenario is more about it being more pleasant for the band/artist/whatever. It's not a sign of weakness, but it's definitely easier to spot if someone is a n00b based on how they use it than the ones who don't use flash. I've seen some raging n00bs rocking an assistant holding a flashgun once. Their shots were shite and the band afterwards contacted me to use my photos instead. So yeah, I definitely view it on a photographer by photographer basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now