Ah bummer

So then what, manual blending? If I have layers with different focus to max dof, just wondering.

And done.

stack>edit>auto-blend layers

who'd a thought it would be so simple.

Thanks. :rolleyes:

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/09...d6d3276468.jpghttp://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/09...9f9b8f4561.jpg

Some shots with a tripod and 30" exposures. Canon 6d with 16-35f/4 @f4


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Its super simple. As long as you've got good images, the blends are pretty flawless.

Yea so I had a stack of ... um ... two ... to experiment with.

And it worked great. Gonna work this some more.

Depending on what you and how you shoot it, 2 images can be enough, such as landscapes. You can create huge DOF from just 2 stacked shots. Macro on the other hand often can require many different images.

Yea it was a macro of dew on a rose that I was playing with. No where near enough shots to cover the depth I wanted. But still ... cool to see that it can be done automagically. I imagine the processing time for 5 or 6 shots will take some time. I have two good nvidia cards so that should help.

Can I play

Yes.

Buddies Z

Another

Last one for today

Very nice:tiphat:

:tup:

Testing some stuff out with my strboes.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5673/2...fe2d4d57_b.jpg

What strobes are you using Red?

Nice looking shot, btw :tup:

Right now I just have two B1 500's. However at the end of the year I do plan on possibly picking up a Acute2 2400 Generator and a pair of heads. That should help me get more fill with less ambient.

Yeah we have a lot of Grungy spots around here, just hard to find nice luxury spots haha.

This just went public today so I can show. Uses same concept as photography with lighting and all but the trucks are cgi.

So did you shoot this? Or just do the processing?

I actually did the trucks. They are completely CGI.
Ford gave us backplates and cad data for the trucks, I was in charge or getting them to look photoreal and putting them into place where they belong.

Gotcha, that's pretty cool mane

Ive always wondered why they did manufacturers vehicle photos this way? Why not stage the shot with a real vehicle? There must be a cost factor there or something. Can you shed some light on this? Those are amazing btw and you are and your team are true artists!

What kind of LED strip did you use, looks insane!!

Need opinions. Cannon 5D Mark III or Nikon D610? I really want the 750 or 810 but honestly I'm not that into photography. I'll get a speed light and a couple of lenses and that'll be it. Just want a solid, full-frame camera. Thought about the 7200 but still hate the crop factor so that's out. And the cost is a marginal increase when stepping up to the 610. Anyone here use that camera? Advice?

I prefer canon for the lens selection and the feel of the camera. Can't go wrong with the 5d mark iii. There is a reason its pretty much the most used camera in the photography industry. But the price is still high. You can get great performance from the 6D, and you won't miss any of the features the 5D has unless you're shooting professionally. Look at it this way, no matter what you buy, its going to be a great camera. Pretty much everything out there is so good nowadays.

alright! fair enough! thanks for the input. i was at the store again earlier looking at all of them again. Something about that 810!!! I'm gonna wind up spending far more than i should. those sexy little bodies and those smooth lenses. yum. lol. i need a different hobby

:tup:

You know whats funny is they actually do place vehicles there, but we obviously replace them with cgi. So there are some factors that come into play.

1. This job for instance, the truck isn't really made yet except for a few prototypes so we couldn't get access to a truck to drive around USA to shoot without anybody taking photos etc...

2. Lighting, its easier for us to grab a backplate during magic hour and then spend hours getting the vehicle perfect in the render, special highlights, etc...

3. I also do think its cost effective, esp if you pay for location, again same as number 2. We shoot the setup real quick and then spend hours getting it perfect haha.

Other than those things I am honestly clueless myself, however it gives me a job to do and I cant complain haha.

Ohh and the other thing is, if they ever need a base changed to platinum its easier to do in 3D vs trying to find the right trim to bring onto location.

We actually shot a whole superduty commercial before with a dummy truck which had tracking markers all over it, and afterwards replaced it with a cgi truck. That was a pain!

I have D750. Love it. It has most advanced autofocus system that Nikon can provide. Better than D810's. Especially in low light. And it's faster than the D810 too. But if you care about the megapixel and image quality, D810 is the way to go.

My friend shoot D610. It's a nice full frame camera. I like it. But between the D610 and Canon 5D mark III, I'd go with the 5D mark III.

http://i1037.photobucket.com/albums/...psz4jcmlm3.jpg

http://i1037.photobucket.com/albums/...psailrqqla.jpg

Dat second shot doe... :drool:

That makes sense, very good info and insight:tiphat: Its amazing what CGI can do, I mean you'd honestly could never tell it was CGI. I've seen more real photos from manufacturers that look faker than the CGI which is ironic:icon14: You guys do a bitchin job thats for sure!

Thanks for the info. Low-light shooting is super important so the 750 still sounds like the way to go.

Why not just rent both and try em out?

didn't know you could do that. But at what cost?

I use borrowlenses.com. You can set a rental period for as short as two days to cut costs.

Rent professional cameras or camera lenses for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Leica and Pentax

Honestly, if you're just starting out, spending that much on a body is kind of pointless. There are advantages to shooting full-frame...heck medium format or even film. Buying the most expensive camera a company makes only gets you a lighter wallet. I think people forget why they even need the extra pixels and high ISO settings in the first place. The best night photographs are captured using low ISO and the right techniques. You don't need a billion trillion megapixels or ISO 1 billion for that. Just about any DSLR out there can do what you want.

Lenses are where you should really be spending money on. It's a better investment and they tend to hold their value. It's also the most important aspect of your gear. It's what that dictates what your sensor sees. That's not to say a good body isn't a good investment....just don't get caught up in the spec sheet or price. The D810 is a great camera.... but so is the D750, D610 or D7200.

Personally, I'd buy the D610 since it doesn't really hurt to go full frame if you can afford it. If you have more money leftover, buy a really nice zoom lens with a fast, continuous aperture or a bunch of fast prime lenses. I'd also grab the SB-910 speed-light. Comes in handy for indoor low-light shots and you won't need stupid high ISO's. ISO 6400 is plenty if you can't use a flash. Unless you're some wannabe paparazzi or someone shooting a once in lifetime event where for some reason you don't have a fast lens, can't use a flash, can't use a tripod/monopod and the only source of light is a flashlight 200' away, you really don't need to be shooting at that high of an ISO. The majority of my shots...especially the night shots are done at ISO 200 or less and with a longer exposure or with a flash. Once you understand the concepts, you can decide for yourself if its worth spending the extra cash.

Your gear accounts for a 1/4 of what makes for a great image.... and that's being generous. The rest is talent, technique, patience and a little bit of luck. I guarantee you you'll get better shots buying a used DSLR, a 50mm prime and taking 10,000 shots than you ever will buying the most expensive gear the camera store has on display. If you must spend money on the top of the line gear, there's also nothing wrong with refurbished or used gear. Adorama or B&H usually sell them with warranties which takes the worry out of the equation.

I honestly wouldn't bother. Renting gear is great if you just need one for a shoot, but not if you're in the market to buy one. Try it in the store and just buy the camera which feels right. Return it if you're not happy. Even if they charge an open box fee, it's still cheaper than renting both cameras. Unless you have a nice lens already, you'll probably have to rent one of those too. That's probably around $150-$200 that could be going towards a piece of gear you're going to own.

thanks!!!

Thanks man :tiphat:

Yea the D750's auto focus is so good at night. It's very accurate. My buddy and I was shooting under the bridge the other day. Both of us has aperture wide open at f1.4. He was shooting the D610 and had to use tripod. He was so surprised my image came out sharper than his without the tripod and flash. But then again, my lens is 24mm 1.4 which is superb in the low light too.

If you do decide to go with the D750, however, there is a known issue about unusual flare under the intense lighting condition in the early batch. But Nikon has addressed this issue by adjusting the auto focus unit position.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ncN6ceeX1A