What’s Your Preference?

OsmosisStudios · #11 (**permalink**) 04-30-2010, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonSchap

I placed the "EXIF" base line exposure information under both the initial image and the subsequent one.

I'll be blunt: i was looking for complete EXIF (camera make, model, lens, aperture, serial numbers, etc) because, frankly, I dont believe that you could have taken the second one. After seeing the first.

If your goal in the beginning was to demonstrate the effects of the T/S functionality of a lens, your original post was terrible.

Sime · #12 (**permalink**) 04-30-2010, 09:32 PM

[QUOTE=OsmosisStudios;970509]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonSchap

I placed the "EXIF" base line exposure information under both the initial image and the subsequent one.

/QUOTE]

I'll be blunt: i was looking for complete EXIF (camera make, model, lens, aperture, serial numbers, etc) because, frankly, I dont believe that you could have taken the second one. After seeing the first.

If your goal in the beginning was to demonstrate the effects of the T/S functionality of a lens, your original post was terrible.

Detective? Bit sharp that comment, isn't it?

DonSchap · #13 (**permalink**) 04-30-2010, 10:49 PM

The power of the Tilt/Shift lens is its inherent the ability to AVOID using a PC at all, to make corrections, as it eliminates the need to correct EACH image, again and again.

You simply set it for what you need and take the shot, rendering a good looking and erect posture for your taller buildings. At that point, you can download or print your JPG as needed, right out of the camera.

Is it for everybody? Of course not. It is an option for powerful "in-camera" processing, which is still out there and quite useful, much like having optical filters. In this case, if you are not shooting structures, you probably will not give a care.

DonSchap · #14 (**permalink**) 04-30-2010, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sime™

Detective? Bit sharp that comment, isn't it?

Adam has his own way about him, protecting the "realm" as it were.

I have taken the time to explain how this was done and if he cares to ignore it, so be it. He can file it in the "for what it is worth" pile and be done with it.

My goal was simply to demonstrate the SHIFT correction available with the device and I transferred the un-doctored images from the camera to the website. The lens was fresh from the box, literally. Anyway, that is done.

The second image was a more refined and well-thought approach to taking the same image, with the same lens and making the necessary changes to provide for a much better looking product. I had my metering decision mapped out, I removed problem issues and I took the images. The clear blue sky of the first series offered nothing for the building to aesthetically reflect and they looked rather "blah." On the day of the second series, the sky was quite different and provided a much nicer look.

So, what is so hard to understand? Are you driving your car the same way you did the first time? No, you learn things about your device and adapt.

Adam: ADAPT!

BTW: I am going to assume you (offhandedly, of course) really, really liked that second series.

OsmosisStudios · #15 (**permalink**) 05-01-2010, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonSchap

Adam has his own way about him, protecting the "realm" as it were.

What are you talking about? This is nonsense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonSchap

I have taken the time to explain how this was done and if he cares to ignore it, so be it. He can file it in the "for what it is worth" pile and be done with it.

Filed under G, for Garbage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonSchap

My goal was simply to demonstrate the SHIFT correction available with the device and I transferred the un-doctored images from the camera to the website. The lens was fresh from the box, literally. Anyway, that is done.

The second image was a more refined and well-thought approach to taking the same image, with the same lens and making the necessary changes to provide for a much better looking product. I had my metering decision mapped out, I removed problem issues and I took the images. The clear blue sky of the first series offered nothing for the building to aesthetically reflect and they looked rather "blah." On the day of the second series, the sky was quite different and provided a much nicer look.

As I noted, if your goal was indeed to show shift, you did it poorly. The buildings still arent straight the image is soft, there's heavy vignetting, etc. If this were a tutorial somewhere it would be quickly ignored because the examples arent good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonSchap

So, what is so hard to understand? Are you driving your car the same way you did the first time? No, you learn things about your device and adapt.

Again, nonsense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonSchap

Adam: ADAPT!

Adapt to what? You're not making sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonSchap

BTW: I am going to assume you (offhandedly, of course) really, really liked that second series.

Again, what this comment means baffles me. If you have something to say, come out and say it. Dont beat around the bush and use rhetoric that doesnt actually mean anything.