Month: September 2013

  • RAW Original Images – Should You Delete Them, Or Keep Them Forever?

      When do you delete your original RAW images? Should you keep your originals forever? Ah, the eternal question. Pun intended?

      My latest Ramblings: (Don’t worry, this topic will be brought up many, many more times I’m sure! But feel free to comment if you have any other questions…

    First and foremost, if you’re a hobbyist then you can do whatever you want. This post is mainly directed at professional wedding and portrait photographers, simply because they are the most likely to experience “hey can you look for more photos?” situations from their clients, even years down the road.

    Yep, as a wedding photographer I keep all RAW “keepers” forever. RAW rejects get deleted after satisfactory delivery of any final product, such as a wedding album etc. If you’re truly OCD you can keep mid-rest JPGs of your reject files too, but I’m pretty liberal with what I keep so I feel this isn’t always necessary.

    However anyways to be honest as a post-production specialist, I feel that if a professional photographer does not make enough money to afford the relatively low cost of a few TB worth of storage per year that it would take to store your keepers permanently, well, there’s something wrong with how much you’re charging compared to the sheer volume of work you’re doing. Or maybe you need to cut back on “spray and pray” with your 36 megapixel RAW files, or if it’s a Nikon you can turn down the RAW bit rate to 12, and the RAW compression to “lossy”.

    In other words on the one hand f you don’t shoot very much, you should be able to fit 1-2 years worth of work onto a single 1 TB hard drive, which go for $70 or so these days. (Even in the small portable form!) Or on the other hand if you shoot an absolute ton of work and you just spray-and-pray like a maniac, you should at least be making enough money to afford the 2-3 3TB externals (usually around $100) that it would take to permanently archive your keepers. If you can’t afford that small expense, you shouldn’t be in business.

    To be clear, I’m not accusing people of running their business wrong, I’m actually just trying to point out a major flaw in most people’s workflow solutions: They let stuff pile up. They assume that every last gig they’ve ever shot right needs to be at their fingertips on their computer or some massive high-tech external device. This is simply NOT a good idea.

    Your workflow should consist of an “INBOX / OUTBOX” type workflow system, and dual external hard drives on a 1-2 year cycle archival solution. You simply cannot afford to let stuff accumulate on your computer, especially after you have fully edited and delivered it. Get it off your computer, onto (preferably two, and stored in separate locations) external hard drives.

    Honestly, do you really need that wedding you shot three years ago, at your fingertips on your computer? Do you really need to have the last 5 years of work at your fingertips on some big-ass Drobo or something? No. In fact it takes me all of 30 seconds to reach over to my archival shelf / drawer, grab my 2005 external, and boot it up. And unlike a Drobo or other massive, high-TB solution, the backup copy of my data is not stored inside a redundant device that could easily be stolen or damaged in a fire etc. …it’s somewhere else entirely, safe and sound. That is why I don’t advise trusting singular devices for long-term archival, even if they brag about how they protect you against hard drive failure. In reality, hard drive failure doesn’t count for NEARLY as much data loss as theft, disaster, or sheer human stupidity.

    Personally, I like to have a computer with a two-drive solution. Even many laptops nowadays can have dual 2.5″ hard drives, but let’s assume a desktop solution for most heavy-duty workflows. Anyways one hard drive, preferably an SSD, is for your operating system and programs only. A 128-256 GB SSD will do here. Then another hard drive, as big and fat as you need, is where all your data is stored. Internal RAID 1 is cool, but not absolutely necessary. You do want to back up all data on this second drive somehow, of course.

    But I digress. Either way, your computer itself it should ONLY contain your current “INBOX” and “WIP” work, nothing else. Maybe if you have a huge hard drive you can also store an “all-time best portfolio” …but I have a simple external 2.5″ RAID 1 device for that. (G-RAID mini, or my preference- the CINERAID enclosure which is BUS-powered via USB 3.0!)

    Anyways, just start storing most of your stuff elsewhere. It doesn’t belong on your computer, nor on one single external drive. For example as a 12-24 megapixel RAW shooting wedding photographer, with a hobby of landscape and timelapse RAW photograpy, I still only need to budget 1-2 TB per year, and I just go out and buy new externals each year on Black Friday. You can either buy the cheap USB 3 externals like WD Mybooks, or you can swap bare HDD’s in and out of a RAID 1 enclosure.

    The bottom line is that you gotta stay on top of your workflow. Since I have been doing private and group workflow coaching for many years now, and have managed post-production for a studio team of 6+ photographers, this is the NUMBER ONE DOWNFALL. You gotta stay on top of your workflow.

    Take care, and feel free to let me know if you have any other questions!
    =Matt=

  • What Should I Buy – Nikon 85mm f/1.8 G vs 50mm f/1.4 G

      Found on a Facebook group – what should I buy, the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 G or the Nikon 85mm f/1.8 G?

      My Ramblings:

    Photographers always seem to break into two camps – 50mm lovers, and the 85+35 or 85+28 lovers.

    Honestly? In my opinion 50mm just gets boring after a while. I like having two primes, a wide and a long. 85mm is incredibly more useful than 50mm during things like ceremonies and toasts, while 28mm or 35mm is just gorgeous for close-quarters type candid stuff.

    Yes, I do own a 50mm, but I barely use it compared to the Nikon 28mm f/1.8 G and 85mm f/1.8 G. Those two babies are just nuts-sharp, and the perfect combo for general photojournalism and portraiture.

    Even if you shoot a lot of medium sized family group photos or something, where 50mm is a great focal length, I don’t really even recommend the f/1.4 G because the new f/1.8 G is so flippin’ awesome! It is just as incredibly sharp as the 28 and the 85, in fact I like the flatness of the focal plane for large group photos more on the 50 f/1.8 G than the f/1.4 G. Bottom line, the new 1.8 G is not your grandpa’s “plastic fantasitc” disposable 50mm f/1.8 lens it even has a weather gasket around the mount, and overall solid construction.

    You have to be absolutely obsessed with 50mm in order to go for the f/1.4, and even then in my opinion anyone who is obsessed with only 50mm simply hasn’t “seen the light” yet.

    So there you have it. Start with the 85mm, if you shoot portraits on a full-frame camera. (Of course the whole discussion goes out the window, if you shoot on a crop sensor camera and you plan ot do so for a while to come. In this case, buy the 50mm f/1.4 G and be thrilled with its approximate similarity to the 85mm f/1.8 on full-frame!

      Then someone asks: But aren’t the Nikon 85mm’s kinda slow?

      My Ramblings:

    It depends on which 85mm you get. The f/1.4′s are slower than the f/1.8′s, and unfortunately, the G’s are slightly slower than the D’s. However the G’s are insanely accurate and consistent in low light, and in my experience on a semi-pro body such as the D700 the 85 1.8 G is incredibly snappy and trustworthy, even for stuff like aisle processionals and dance floor craziness. Although when autofocus conditions get truly abysmal, I must admit I opt for my 24-70 or my 50mm f/1.8, because those two lenses are just like laser beams with low-light focus.

    The reason for all this is that “D” and “G” lenses have different types of autofocus motors in them. The AF-D lenses are an older, “clunky but fast” type of autofocus and the AFS-G lenses are the newer, “slower but laser-accurate” type of autofocus. (Silent Wave Motor, AKA SWM much like Canon’s USM, if you’re interested)

    Basically, there is no reason to buy an AF-D lens unless you are on an extreme budget, or you have some very weird shooting demands for which the AF-D lenses are actually superior.

    Even on a budget, I would rather have a 50mm f/1.8 G than a 50mm f/1.4 D. The same goes for 85mm.

    Bottom line- having shot in all sorts of ridiculous light, from pitch-black to absurdly bright flares, I prefer the G lenses by a long shot, and the f/1.8′s suit my style very well- I prioritize focus speed and snappiness a little bit more than DOF. However if you’re mainly a portrait photographer and your subjects hold relatively still, then f/1.4 is the way to go.

    Personally, I just love these primes so much I wouldn’t mind owning both a set of 1.4′s and 1.8′s, …and just using whichever suited my fancy for the day.

    The 1.8′s are lighter and smaller, which is nice for general around-the-town type shooting. For example the Nikon 28mm f/1.8 G is just about the ULTIMATE “trip to Disneyland” lens… http://www.slrlounge.com/nikon-28mm-f1-8-afs-g-n-lens-review

    Either way, you need to pick the lens that defines your style as a photographer, and invest the most in that lens first.

    BTW, right now both of these Nikon lenses have $100 instant rebates, but you gotta buy a camera body with them. Click HERE. The Nikon 85mm f/1.8 G comes out to be $397, and the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 G comes out to be $369.

    Thanks for reading and take care,
    =Matt=

  • Checking Your Autofocus Accuracy Without Microadjustment / Fine Tuning

      I recently purchased a Nikon 5200, only to discover that it lacked Autofocus Fine Tuning. Apparently there are others out there who are discovering this about their beginner / mid-range DSLRs, as someone posted online about their Canon T3i.

      My Ramblings:

    Yep, I’m very used to doing AF microadjustment with all my pro cameras for the work I do, and when I bought my D5200 a few days ago I was dumbfounded by this omission. Luckily the camera seems to focus perfectly with all my lenses.

    Aside from the fact that your camera simply cannot calibrate your lenses, it would still be nice to know whether or not you can count on this lens to function without any calibration. I especially like the trick where you shoot at an angle to a perfectly flat surface. I’ve never used those fancy charts and graphgs and programs in my life; I usually just go up on my apartment balcony and take pictures at a shallow angle of the grassy area below. The trick is to focus on something that is much larger in the viewfinder than your selected focus point, so that there is no room for error. The important thing is that you compose the shot so that there is a visible transition from foreground to background.

    I also have another tip: turn your in-camera sharpening all the way up to it’s max setting, and use one of the more vibrant picture styles too. This will allow you to check your focus on the back of your camera effortlessly, without using a computer or software to do any silly calculations.

    Of course if you shoot JPG or video, be sure to turn your sharpening and picture styles back to whatever you usually prefer, because while this is great for RAW shooters who like to determine sharpness easily, this will ruin your images otherwise.

    Honestly, I really do think charts and graphs and software are for people who have more money than they know what to do with. A simple test focusing on a tree trunk in the park will be perfectly accurate, as long as you understand simple geometry and get the angle correct.

    Either way, if you set up your test right you should be able to clearly see where focus is, in relation to where it should be.

    As with any test, be sure to eliminate variables that could cause error, and click multiple test shots. I use a solid tripod and a cable release that can perform autofocus. I perform my tests in bright sun and then also in dim light, but bright sun should be a priority of course for the best accuracy.

    And there’s a very good chance that, even without any focus adjustment, your Sigma will shoot perfectly on your T3i. As it is a big chunk of glass, of course, you will want to keep in mind that no super-fast prime can nail every single shot every single time, when used on anything less than a flagship camera. (And even then your keeper rate at f/1.4 and close distances may not be 100%) So, in other words, even when you’re on the job and you know your lens is focusing perfectly, you should be clicking 2-3-4 shots depending on the overall reliability of your camera’s autofocus. I have seen many people get angry at their lenses for not focusing accurately, when it is the body’s overall consistency that is the problem. ;-)

    Good luck!

    =Matt=

  • Shooting Large Groups / Families

      I found a question in a Facebook community regarding using a Nikon D3100 and a 50mm f/1.8 for a large group / family portrait. The concern of course is whether or not this is the appropriate lens for such a task…

      My Ramblings:

    Yep, while the D3100 will do a great job of delivering killer images as long as you shoot sharp and keep your ISO down, I would recommend renting something like a Nikon 24-70 for this.

    Nikon also makes a 17-55 f/2.8 which is great for crop sensor shooting in tight spaces, however the 17-55 can be prone to severe field curvature which means even though the lens may be ultra-sharp, it may not be able to get a flat line of people all in focus at once if you zoom out too far. The plane of focus may curve forward towards the camera and stopping down may not save the day.

    So you could go down to your local pro shop and see if the rental lenses have good off-center sharpness, but in general the safest bet is the Nikon 24-70. That thing is just wicked-sharp from corner to corner on a crop sensor, and as long as you have enough space to backup then 24mm will be more than enough to fit everybody in…

    Shooting 50mm on a crop sensor is fantastic if you have the room, (I’ve shot entire bridal parties on an 85mm on a crop!) …however it is just un-advisable to go into a job with ONLY that focal length, considering it equals about 75mm on full-frame. This is why I think renting or borrowing a 24-70 is the best thing to do. Don’t worry too much about distortion at 24mm on a crop sensor, even if you put a medium weight person at the very edge of the frame at 24mm, (actually, leave a little bit of room for a 8×10 crop!!!) …you’ll still be doing quite well considering that the focal length equivalent is just 35mm. For larger groups, that angle of view is still quite modest…

    Take care,
    =Matt=

  • Real Estate Photography – Crop Sensor versus Full-Frame

      A friend recently asked about full-frame versus crop-sensor with respect to real estate photography. The cameras in question- The Nikon D800 with the Nikon 18-35 G, versus the Nikon D7000 with the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

      My Ramblings:

    Honestly if you use a tripod and stay at ISO 100-400, the D7000 and Tokina 11-16 ought to work out amazingly well. The D7000 still has the greatest dynamic range of any crop-sensor camera ever made, including newer models, and the D800 is only a minimal improvement. Once you get on a tripod and stop worrying about high ISO’s for hand-holding, dynamic range and overall color quality is in my opinion the number one factor in real-estate photography. Any camera with 12-16 megapixels or more is enough for general work, and even publication if you don’t crop your images and shoot sharply enough.

    Of course the D800 is double the resolution, but honestly even if you’re going to do print ads quite frequently the D7000 should be more than enough when shot right. Seriously if I had to choose between the D800 + 18-35 and the D7000 + 11-16, which is a ~$2-3K upgrade, …I’d stick with the D7000 and spend that money on myself, (lol) or just save it…

    If 18-35mm or 11-16mm aren’t wide enough for you, you could also consider the Sigma 8-16 for crop sensors or the Sigma 12-24 for full-frame sensors, but these can have pretty significant field curvature that requires careful use. The Tokina 11-16 on the other hand has a very flat plane of focus, which is great.

    I would try doing the first few shoots with the Tokina 11-16 on a D7000, just emphasizing the use of a solid tripod and maybe doing 2-sec timer or using a cable / remote release so that you can get the ultimate sharpness at like f/8 or f/11. That would give you amazing results. If you don’t yet have a solid tripod, I can make a couple recommendations…

    Most of the time, the lighting and overall conditions are much more important than other aspects of camera quality. You might want to play around with using strobes to light different areas of the room, shooting multiple images and then blending them in Photoshop later.

    Take care,
    =Matt=

Calendar

September 2013
M T W T F S S
« Jan   Oct »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30