The Official Photography Thread - Vol. 3

[swaggdaddy]

Just being honest -- I'd rather shoot w/ my phone rather than an old rebel w/ standard 18-55mm kit lens combo.

And save to get equipment that is suited for my shooting needs.

A friend of mine threw her rebel t2i at me and said "Here you're a photographer that shoots canon, take our group pictures" :x my phone turned out better... couldnt even figure out how to change the settings in the rebel :x

Thing is super tiny!

So you're saying your ohone quality is better than the t2i?

 

[djyoung08]

In all honesty, I'd recommend saving till you can afford ~500. You'll spend more in the long run if you buy small and continually upgrade.

What are you shooting that requires a DSLR that you can't accomplish with a phone?

A phone is cool but I always enjoyed taking pics of any or whatever. But keeping up with this thread has really got me wanting to get serious with it. But I'm not trying to start out with a thousand dollar camera since im just a beginner trying to get his feet wet first.

I feel it.

I dont think you should start out with a thousand dollar camera either.. i said maybe you should save up and expand your budget to ~$500.

I'm just saying the optics in the 600-900 phone most of us carry around are technically superior at the equivalent focal length of a kit lens.

Just being honest -- I'd rather shoot w/ my phone rather than an old rebel w/ standard 18-55mm kit lens combo.

And save to get equipment that is suited for my shooting needs.

A friend of mine threw her rebel t2i at me and said "Here you're a photographer that shoots canon, take our group pictures" :x my phone turned out better... couldnt even figure out how to change the settings in the rebel :x

Thing is super tiny!

So you're saying your ohone quality is better than the t2i?

Than a t2i with an 18-55mm kit lens in the situation I was in, yes. My phone out shot the rebel because I simply couldn't figure out how to use it and technically at the effective focal length, the optics on my phone are superior to the 18-55 kit lens.

Now where the t2i outshines any phone is the ability to put good lenses on it.

As I said in my other post, the real investment is in the lens as thats were a large portion of the magic takes place.

You can cop a canon 50mm 1.8 STM brand new for $125 and that will be a much better option than the 18-55 kit lens.

A t2i will run you around $200
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0035FZJI0/?tag=niketalk0e-20

a 50mm 1.8 STM will run you about $125
Amazon product ASIN B00X8MRBCW
But that still exceeds your $250 budget.

Thats why I recommend saving until you can afford around $500 because on top of that you'll want memory cards, maybe a new strap, a bag, maybe a tripod, etc.

 

[HankHill]

swaggdaddy If you can find a D90 for cheap go for that instead. Its still pretty old (it's the predecessor of the D7000), but its a capable camera. It'll probably be around the $200 range.

I think @Benssick shoots with it as well.

 

[djyoung08]

swaggdaddy If you can find a D90 for cheap go for that instead. Its still pretty old (it's the predecessor of the D7000), but its a capable camera. It'll probably be around the $200 range.

I think @Benssick shoots with it as well.

'

d90 is a dope camera.

I started with the d7000 last year but eventually switched completely to canon w/ a full frame.

 

[s-blaze]

Can anyone recommend a site for watermarking multiple photos for free?

If you have Lightroom there is a setting for watermarks. Make sure your logo has a transparent background and save as a .png file.

I don't. And I probably should make the investment soon.

What work do you need watermarked?

A birthday party I just shot for my coworker/ client. over 300+ no duplicates

My man

Honestly you should invest in Lightroom if you're doing that much editing / shooting. It will allow you to export with your logo / watermark.

Also this is just a question from the business stand point... why are these images being watermarked? Are they proofs that the client is going to selectively purchase?

I've completely abandoned using mine.

What version of Lightroom should I pursue? Is this the current http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1132136-REG/adobe_65237578_photoshop_lightroom_6_download.html

And the client has paid me in full for the doing the event and services.

 

[djyoung08]

Can anyone recommend a site for watermarking multiple photos for free?

If you have Lightroom there is a setting for watermarks. Make sure your logo has a transparent background and save as a .png file.

I don't. And I probably should make the investment soon.

What work do you need watermarked?

A birthday party I just shot for my coworker/ client. over 300+ no duplicates

My man

Honestly you should invest in Lightroom if you're doing that much editing / shooting. It will allow you to export with your logo / watermark.

Also this is just a question from the business stand point... why are these images being watermarked? Are they proofs that the client is going to selectively purchase?

I've completely abandoned using mine.

What version of Lightroom should I pursue? Is this the current http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1132136-REG/adobe_65237578_photoshop_lightroom_6_download.html

And the client has paid me in full for the doing the event and services.

I use the adobe CC
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-lightroom.html

Gotcha. I guess im just wondering why you need to watermark the images if they've been purchased from you already.

 

[s-blaze]

Can anyone recommend a site for watermarking multiple photos for free?

If you have Lightroom there is a setting for watermarks. Make sure your logo has a transparent background and save as a .png file.

I don't. And I probably should make the investment soon.

What work do you need watermarked?

A birthday party I just shot for my coworker/ client. over 300+ no duplicates

My man

Honestly you should invest in Lightroom if you're doing that much editing / shooting. It will allow you to export with your logo / watermark.

Also this is just a question from the business stand point... why are these images being watermarked? Are they proofs that the client is going to selectively purchase?

I've completely abandoned using mine.

What version of Lightroom should I pursue? Is this the current http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1132136-REG/adobe_65237578_photoshop_lightroom_6_download.html

And the client has paid me in full for the doing the event and services.

I use the adobe CC
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-lightroom.html

Gotcha. I guess im just wondering why you need to watermark the images if they've been purchased from you already.

Thanks!

And I know what you're getting at, if they paid for them why watermark it?

I'm just taking extra measures, and pushing my brand.

 

[djyoung08]

Can anyone recommend a site for watermarking multiple photos for free?

If you have Lightroom there is a setting for watermarks. Make sure your logo has a transparent background and save as a .png file.

I don't. And I probably should make the investment soon.

What work do you need watermarked?

A birthday party I just shot for my coworker/ client. over 300+ no duplicates

My man

Honestly you should invest in Lightroom if you're doing that much editing / shooting. It will allow you to export with your logo / watermark.

Also this is just a question from the business stand point... why are these images being watermarked? Are they proofs that the client is going to selectively purchase?

I've completely abandoned using mine.

What version of Lightroom should I pursue? Is this the current http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1132136-REG/adobe_65237578_photoshop_lightroom_6_download.html

And the client has paid me in full for the doing the event and services.

I use the adobe CC
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-lightroom.html

Gotcha. I guess im just wondering why you need to watermark the images if they've been purchased from you already.

Thanks!

And I know what you're getting at, if they paid for them why watermark it?

I'm just taking extra measures, and pushing my brand.

Gotcha

So far, to my knowledge, i've only seen one of my images pop up on a clothing company website that didnt ask or pay me to use my image. But the client did pay me and they very well could have given them the image

I just generally assume nobody is trying to steal my images

 

[djyoung08]

A few from a set on sunday

Her top is so

 

[southcitydon]

sup fam.

a lot of dope stuff up in here lately as usual!!!

a couple recents:

OG

EDIT

OG

EDIT

OG

EDIT

 

[amitt5504]

How did you guys come up with your logo/logo watermark? I legit got bored one day and starting playing in Photoshop

watermark

logo

 

[s-blaze]

Hand drawing, scanning, etc.

 

[djyoung08]

I created my logo it myself in photoshop. The concept was to combine "J" and "Y" in a minimalistic way. I wanted the logo to represent me which is why I chose my initials. I also wanted to stay away from cliche logo concepts like using a camera, aperture blades, roll of film, etc.

I don't use it any longer as a watermark for my photos. It never redirected any traffic my way and it never prevented anyone from stealing work that the client already paid me for.

But here are some watermarked images

I do put my logo on other stuff though like cover page of my website:
JamesYoungPhotography.com

My lens hood on my 70-200 2.8

On my PS4

On my car

 

[Nawzlew]

In all honesty, I'd recommend saving till you can afford ~500. You'll spend more in the long run if you buy small and continually upgrade.

What are you shooting that requires a DSLR that you can't accomplish with a phone?

A phone is cool but I always enjoyed taking pics of any or whatever. But keeping up with this thread has really got me wanting to get serious with it. But I'm not trying to start out with a thousand dollar camera since im just a beginner trying to get his feet wet first.

I feel it.

I dont think you should start out with a thousand dollar camera either.. i said maybe you should save up and expand your budget to ~$500.

I'm just saying the optics in the 600-900 phone most of us carry around are technically superior at the equivalent focal length of a kit lens.

Just being honest -- I'd rather shoot w/ my phone rather than an old rebel w/ standard 18-55mm kit lens combo.

And save to get equipment that is suited for my shooting needs.

A friend of mine threw her rebel t2i at me and said "Here you're a photographer that shoots canon, take our group pictures" :x my phone turned out better... couldnt even figure out how to change the settings in the rebel :x

Thing is super tiny!

So you're saying your ohone quality is better than the t2i?

Than a t2i with an 18-55mm kit lens in the situation I was in, yes. My phone out shot the rebel because I simply couldn't figure out how to use it and technically at the effective focal length, the optics on my phone are superior to the 18-55 kit lens.

Now where the t2i outshines any phone is the ability to put good lenses on it.

As I said in my other post, the real investment is in the lens as thats were a large portion of the magic takes place.

You can cop a canon 50mm 1.8 STM brand new for $125 and that will be a much better option than the 18-55 kit lens.

A t2i will run you around $200
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0035FZJI0/?tag=niketalk0e-20

a 50mm 1.8 STM will run you about $125
Amazon product ASIN B00X8MRBCW
But that still exceeds your $250 budget.

Thats why I recommend saving until you can afford around $500 because on top of that you'll want memory cards, maybe a new strap, a bag, maybe a tripod, etc.

If you're ok with used gear, you can get that 50mm STM for a little cheaper.

I've seen 50mm STM's on PotN for ~$90.

 

[swaggdaddy]

Sorry for the late reply, but I want to thank you guys for the help. Reps to all you! Look forward to posting pics in here one day!

 

[eugenile gts]

some pics from my crappy t3i same sensor, image processor, and af as t2i

 

[khankussionz]

What's a scrim?

its a large diffusion panel

 

[mylesp]

Here's an article all about STM especially vs USM
http://petapixel.com/2013/08/26/vid...-and-stm-lenses-using-the-70ds-dual-pixel-af/

The magic is in the lens... A kit lens is obviously better than not having a lens at all, its good for getting your feet wet, its good for deciding whether or not you want to move forward with this, etc.

But in all honesty, you'll be much better off with superior optics. But don't get me wrong, you can still create compelling content with kit equipment.

Cool thanks. Btw you said your phone was better then a t2i. I have a t1i and with raw editing and everything I like what I get. I can shoot raw with my Samsung s7 edge and pretty soon I'll be editing something from it to test results. although I like my camera for what it's worth its not that good, but more so good enough. T1i raw edited Picture quality is better then the average picture taken in auto. I just wish I had something better as I have quickly out grown my camera smh. So rebel cameras are good enough, but I'd rather get a budget friendly camera from nikon then a rebel. So if anyone is starting out either save for the camera you really want or go nikon. Thats my opinion. I just feel nikon does better for low budget cameras

 

[mylesp]

some pics from my crappy t3i same sensor, image processor, and af as t2i

Are you being sarcastic?

 

[Nawzlew]

some pics from my crappy t3i same sensor, image processor, and af as t2i

I shoot with a T2i

Sup! #oldassrebelsquad

 

[Nawzlew]

Sorry for the late reply, but I want to thank you guys for the help. Reps to all you! Look forward to posting pics in here one day!

NP.

Let us know what you decide!

 

[djyoung08]

I hope you guys don't think I'm saying the older rebels are bad cameras

If you read my posts, I'm saying those cameras paired with 18-55mm KIT LENSES are bad setups. & can be outshot by modern day camera phones. They are bad setups, period.

eugenile gts -- those images are fire... because of the lenses you're using (obviously YOU are taking the photos and they're dope because you clearly have an eye for a good shot.. but this is a gear conversation). You could not achieve those looks shooting @ 18mm f/3.5.

I said numerous times, that the investment will be in the glass.

 

[djyoung08]

Here's an article all about STM especially vs USM
http://petapixel.com/2013/08/26/vid...-and-stm-lenses-using-the-70ds-dual-pixel-af/

The magic is in the lens... A kit lens is obviously better than not having a lens at all, its good for getting your feet wet, its good for deciding whether or not you want to move forward with this, etc.

But in all honesty, you'll be much better off with superior optics. But don't get me wrong, you can still create compelling content with kit equipment.

Cool thanks. Btw you said your phone was better then a t2i. I have a t1i and with raw editing and everything I like what I get. I can shoot raw with my Samsung s7 edge and pretty soon I'll be editing something from it to test results. although I like my camera for what it's worth its not that good, but more so good enough. T1i raw edited Picture quality is better then the average picture taken in auto. I just wish I had something better as I have quickly out grown my camera smh. So rebel cameras are good enough, but I'd rather get a budget friendly camera from nikon then a rebel. So if anyone is starting out either save for the camera you really want or go nikon. Thats my opinion. I just feel nikon does better for low budget cameras

You guys are really misinterpreting what I am saying.

GLASS GLASS GLASS GLASS GLASS

My phone will beat out a KIT LENS.

You can put a $5,000 lens on a rebel and you will get phenomenal results... because the LENS is.

When I first started out I was using a nikon D7000 I got for like $500 w/ a $2,000 Nikkor 70-200 and was getting great results. The magic is in the LENS... especially for photography specifically.

 

[djyoung08]

When receptions are lit >>>>>

Dead receptions are so annoying

 

[tokes99]

Here's an article all about STM especially vs USM
http://petapixel.com/2013/08/26/vid...-and-stm-lenses-using-the-70ds-dual-pixel-af/

The magic is in the lens... A kit lens is obviously better than not having a lens at all, its good for getting your feet wet, its good for deciding whether or not you want to move forward with this, etc.

But in all honesty, you'll be much better off with superior optics. But don't get me wrong, you can still create compelling content with kit equipment.

Cool thanks. Btw you said your phone was better then a t2i. I have a t1i and with raw editing and everything I like what I get. I can shoot raw with my Samsung s7 edge and pretty soon I'll be editing something from it to test results. although I like my camera for what it's worth its not that good, but more so good enough. T1i raw edited Picture quality is better then the average picture taken in auto. I just wish I had something better as I have quickly out grown my camera smh. So rebel cameras are good enough, but I'd rather get a budget friendly camera from nikon then a rebel. So if anyone is starting out either save for the camera you really want or go nikon. Thats my opinion. I just feel nikon does better for low budget cameras

You guys are really misinterpreting what I am saying.

GLASS GLASS GLASS GLASS GLASS

My phone will beat out a KIT LENS.

You can put a $5,000 lens on a rebel and you will get phenomenal results... because the LENS is.

When I first started out I was using a nikon D7000 I got for like $500 w/ a $2,000 Nikkor 70-200 and was getting great results. The magic is in the LENS... especially for photography specifically.

I get you...but fam you are buggin...some phones these days may indeed have quality optics and yes glass is what really gives images that extra pop, however sensor size factors as well and modern kit lens are pretty decent; i definitely think most people would rather use a phone than a dedicated camera because the quality is better than good enough but for anything that you'd want to isolate a subject in camera or excercise granular level of control any dslr is going to smash a phone camera...