Video University: Video University Forums: Digital Photography for Videographers: Post deleted by Brackish

VideoUniversity.com
Home	Free Library	Store
Free Catalog Please support VU by making your B&H purchases and links through this B&H ad. Doesn't cost a penny more.

Giving Thanks to All.
A little thanksgiving humor.

To post in the forums see the Forum Guidelines.

Join or Renew Today.
New Benefits for all VU Members

Forum Guidelines and FAQ
Main Index	Search Posts
Who's Online	Log In

Home: Video University Forums: Digital Photography for Videographers:
Post deleted by Brackish

Brackish
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 7:27 AM

Post #1 of 19 (1245 views)
Shortcut

Post deleted by Brackish

Bill Kinkle
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 12:20 PM

Post #2 of 19 (1228 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Brackish] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

Would you consider this obtrusive?

In all fairness this is an optical illusion. The photo below was the focus point, not the back of the kids head.....just looks funny.

(This post was edited by Bill Kinkle on Feb 1, 2007, 12:22 PM)

GmElliott
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 12:36 PM

Post #3 of 19 (1224 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Bill Kinkle] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

hahah...I knew you were waiting for JUST the right time to use that pic. It sure does look obtrusive. Trust me the macro shot of the kid's shirt tag came out awesome!

Glen Elliott
http://www.GmElliottVideo.com

Bill Kinkle
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 12:42 PM

Post #4 of 19 (1220 views)
Shortcut

Re: [GmElliott] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

Luckily Brack asked the question. I couldn't wait to post that pic, although I did keep it anonimous... That is, until you chimed in Wink

GmElliott
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 12:45 PM

Post #5 of 19 (1216 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Bill Kinkle] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

Luckily Brack asked the question. I couldn't wait to post that pic, although I did keep it anonimous... That is, until you chimed in Wink

doh! hung MYSELF. lol

Btw, you and Diane coming down Saturday? How about staying for the UFC in the evening. Darrell may be coming too- he needs a ride from Temple. I think he's going to ask you. Tongue

Glen Elliott
http://www.GmElliottVideo.com

Bill Kinkle
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 12:51 PM

Post #6 of 19 (1213 views)
Shortcut

Re: [GmElliott] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

I think we are coming. Temple is pretty much in the opposite direction of us, but I think we can work something out. You S. Jersey folks always think everything in PA is right around Philly. Tongue

Thread Hijack over...

DarrenS
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 1:10 PM

Post #7 of 19 (1209 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Brackish] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

They haven't brought it up with me yet, but I will talk about it later on when the conversation gets past all the business stuff and we're just chatting like friends.

imo it's only important during the vows and the first couple dances. After that it's not important. It's one of the reasons I invested heavily in the 200/2 for ceremonies. Just met with a priest monday for a wedding this summer. He said 'anything goes but please don't take pictures during the actual vows'. I had my lens with me and explained how it works at a distance and without flash. He said it was ok for me to shoot the vows and that he never lets anyone shoot them. Smile

That sucker is worth it's weight in gold.

GmElliott
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 1:15 PM

Post #8 of 19 (1202 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Bill Kinkle] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

I think we are coming. Temple is pretty much in the opposite direction of us, but I think we can work something out. You S. Jersey folks always think everything in PA is right around Philly. Tongue

Thread Hijack over...

Hey it wasn't me who thought that- I asked Darrell last night- "Why how far ARE they from you".... Darrell replies, "Like 20 minutes." lmao

Don't sweat it man- don't feel obligated to pick that punk 19 y/o up. He doesn't deserve it. Tongue

Glen Elliott
http://www.GmElliottVideo.com

GmElliott
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 1:16 PM

Post #9 of 19 (1201 views)
Shortcut

Re: [DarrenS] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

Nice! I love the large black lenses. My next lense is going to be a 70-200 2.8L IS but it's WHITE bleh! Crazy

Glen Elliott
http://www.GmElliottVideo.com

Bill Kinkle
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 1:35 PM

Post #10 of 19 (1189 views)
Shortcut

Re: [GmElliott] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

http://www.mapquest.com/...PA&2z=19122-6003

I guess if I drove like a 19 year old it would take 20 minutes...lol.

Postal Boy
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 6:08 PM

Post #11 of 19 (1176 views)
Shortcut

Re: [DarrenS] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

Eh...doesn't it COST more than its weight in gold? Tongue

Darrell Aubert
Veteran

Feb 1, 2007, 7:16 PM

Post #12 of 19 (1165 views)
Shortcut

Re: [GmElliott] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

YO! Don't mess with me Gelliott. I'll freakin put you on by list. Yeah.... that list...

Darrell Aubert
Ron Paul for President
Worried About A Nuclear Holocaust?

DarrenS
Veteran

Feb 2, 2007, 5:13 PM

Post #13 of 19 (1132 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Postal Boy] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

heh heh...yeah it's pricy but the pictures are oh-so beautiful, especially for headshots. It just makes people look really good. Those two lenses are the biggest reasons I stuck with Nikon. Some say the Nikkor 200/2 is the finest lens ever made, by anybody. It's certainly the finest Nikkor lens ever made. Canon, as a massive-monster-huge semiconductor company, makes better chips but there's nothing in their lineup that can compete w/those two primes (not to mention their flash system is way behind). The smaller one is the famous 85/1.4 'cream machine'.

Jordan O.
Veteran

Feb 2, 2007, 8:15 PM

Post #14 of 19 (1121 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Bill Kinkle] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

Does the Kinkle express make stops near King of Prussia Laugh

I probably won't make it tomorrow, got some projects dragging

(This post was edited by Jordan O. on Feb 2, 2007, 9:10 PM)

GmElliott
Veteran

Feb 2, 2007, 10:26 PM

Post #15 of 19 (1110 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Jordan O.] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

Does the Kinkle express make stops near King of Prussia Laugh

I probably won't make it tomorrow, got some projects dragging

Darrell and I knew it. Frown

Glen Elliott
http://www.GmElliottVideo.com

videochicke
Veteran

Feb 5, 2007, 11:24 AM

Post #16 of 19 (1069 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Brackish] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

We all know how most videogs proclaim loud and high in
their advertising materials that they are "unobtrusive".

I was wondering if this is something a lot of photogs
are also doing? For those of you who have had
actual dealing with photo clients, how often
do the clients bring up concerns related to
whether or not you'll be unobtrusive?

Brides really vary with this. Some come up to you all night and say "I want a picture of this". Others want more of the fly on the wall approach. It is all about knowing the client. I wouldn't advertise one way or the other for photo because you will turn off 50% of customers who want the opposite. The last thing a bride for an ultra Orthodox Jewish wedding would ever hire is an unobtrusive photographer. Many brides love feeling like the star with the photographer capturing her every move. And there is less pressure being photographed than taped. If she doesn't like a picture, she doesn't use it. If she makes the same face during the first dance, it is a little different with video.
Julie

Brian M
Veteran

Feb 9, 2007, 7:06 AM

Post #17 of 19 (1029 views)
Shortcut

Re: [DarrenS] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

Canon, as a massive-monster-huge semiconductor company, makes better chips but there's nothing in their lineup that can compete w/those two primes (not to mention their flash system is way behind).

Pay no attention to the $3,800 Canon 300mm behind the curtain. Wink

And speedlight 580EX way behind?
Brian M

________________________________________________
Photographer & Videographer

(This post was edited by Brian M on Feb 9, 2007, 7:45 AM)

DarrenS
Veteran

Feb 9, 2007, 11:25 AM

Post #18 of 19 (1014 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Brian M] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

Hi Brian, don't get me wrong...Canon makes awesome gear. They just don't (currently) have an equal to the Nikkor 200/2, and even if they did they'd have to work overtime to make one as sharp at all apertures as the Nikkor. They used to make a 200/1.8 but discontinued it for some reason. And Nikkor makes a nice $4500 300/2.8 as well (to compare to your example), but at the end of the day I don't like full-frame as much as the smaller dx format for several reasons. Most tests have shown the smaller sensor to produce sharper images across the entire image, due to the fact it only uses the center of the lens; the sharpest part.

Here's two images from the edge of two photos, one shot with the Nikkor 200/2 @ 12MP (D2X) and one with the Canon 300/2.8 @ 16MP (1 DS Mk. II) with all sharpening and other in-cam enhancements turned off. The difference is amazing.

As far as stobes go, I'm not 100% sure but I think the higher Nikon performance comes from the body not the strobe its self. On all the forums even the Canon camp doesn't disagree Nikon is way ahead in flash performance (unlike the sensor size debate, which goes back and forth, back and forth) Smile

http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X_rev06.html

GmElliott
Veteran

Feb 13, 2007, 11:55 AM

Post #19 of 19 (938 views)
Shortcut

Re: [DarrenS] How important is "unobtrusiveness" to the photo client? [In reply to]	Can't Post

I've heard that Canon is known for better glass and Nikon for better bodies. Personally I feel it's just as much as a dead end as Mac vs PC. They are both great tools. It's more so HOW you use it than WHAT your using, IMHO.

Glen Elliott
http://www.GmElliottVideo.com