seanfoulkes wrote:
This speaks volumes that people seem to ignore about the legitimacy of technology, even if it's ten years old.
I cross-linked your image and some of the information in your post to make a statement on my University's School of Photography blog to make a point about exactly that.
WHAT?!?! I DON'T have to abandon my hobby/business b/c I don't have a D800 and therefore can't be competitive? Would you mean to imply that I can take superb pictures like this one with less than 4000megapixels? Be careful, sir, because if these are indeed what you are implying then I might be tempted to think I can get an image of something that moves without an AF system run by a super computer. To date, everything I have read on the internet is quite to the contrary.
My favorite image I have ever taken was done with a Canon 300d. It is a waterfall, and hanging in a 13x19 print in my living room. Don't let the internet get you down people! The gear you have is not obsolete and can take great images just like this one!
seanfoulkes wrote:
This speaks volumes that people seem to ignore about the legitimacy of technology, even if it's ten years old.
I cross-linked your image and some of the information in your post to make a statement on my University's School of Photography blog to make a point about exactly that.
http://msuphoto.blogspot.com/2012/04/quit-worrying-about-your-camera.html
While there is some validity to your point, Adding off camera lighting with the use of any type of camera will get you similar results. It is because of the lighting. Take the same or any other old inexpensive camera and without the help of studio lighting and the short comings will be seen very quickly.
But even the lightng in this case is about as basic as you get. The total cost of this set up, camera and all, would be competitive with a single high end studio strobe. Anyway you cut it, a 6mp camera and a couple of speedlights did this job, capturing vibrant colors and excellent detail some would have you believe isnt possible to do without brand x's newest multi thoudand dollar camera, and thousands more in lights and modifiers.
bbasiaga wrote:
But even the lightng in this case is about as basic as you get. The total cost of this set up, camera and all, would be competitive with a single high end studio strobe. Anyway you cut it, a 6mp camera and a couple of speedlights did this job, capturing vibrant colors and excellent detail some would have you believe isnt possible to do without brand x's newest multi thoudand dollar camera, and thousands more in lights and modifiers.
-Brian
That wasn't my point....actually you helped validate my point
Well, I rarely frequent the People forum and have no useful critique to offer, other than to say this is one of the most striking images I have ever seen on FM. Considering the tools used to make it, I am left completely awestruck by your vision and skills. Bravo!!!!!
All excellent points, however please don't tell my wife. I just love new toys, but I still keep my 5D1 and nifty 50 because there are times when nothing I have can better them. (At least not in my feeble hands)
seanfoulkes wrote:
This speaks volumes that people seem to ignore about the legitimacy of technology, even if it's ten years old.
you're kidding with the gear list right? please say yes, you're making me feel bad haha
amazing shot, I love it.
if I had to give any tips, I'd say if you were going for magazine cover / beauty shot perfect, you could do some cloning on the nose and moth to make things perfectly symmetrical.
.
I'll keep that in mind