TLW Photographers make your interest known

[JaminKibbler]

 

Took this today whilst bored

[Tom R]

Just got back from Rome and have been trying out a few longer exposure shots - 5, 10 and 15 seconds - at night.

I've yet to buy any filters, so not yet managed any day time shots.

 

 

 

 

Got this one on about a 3 or 4 second exposure when the Mrs was just staring in to space. Quite pleased with this one, as despite how it looks it was actually a spontaneous shot. She genuinely was just staring in to space, and i don't have a tripod so was just holding the camera as steady as I could.

 

 

And this was just a nice shot of the Dome in St Peters

 

 

And I've no fucking idea how I did this one, but I think it looks quite cool!

 

[Bobby Hundreds]

 

Is that Gary Oldman?

 

That top Rome picture is cool with the shoe, I half expect a detective narrative over the top.

[aikido]

Just got back from Rome and have been trying out a few longer exposure shots - 5, 10 and 15 seconds - at night.

I've yet to buy any filters, so not yet managed any day time shots.

 

 

 

 

Got this one on about a 3 or 4 second exposure when the Mrs was just staring in to space. Quite pleased with this one, as despite how it looks it was actually a spontaneous shot. She genuinely was just staring in to space, and i don't have a tripod so was just holding the camera as steady as I could.

 

 

And this was just a nice shot of the Dome in St Peters

 

 

And I've no fucking idea how I did this one, but I think it looks quite cool!

 

 

Great Job Tom. Did you use a tripod for the long exposure photo's?

[Tom R]

nah man, I don't have a tripod yet.

 

the one with the wine and the candle and the Mrs was done just by holding it rock steady and holding my breath!! It was only 3 or 4 seconds that one.

That's the one I'm most happy with, as like I said earlier it was believe it or not a spontaneous shot. I was dicking about with my camera, and she was bored just staring in to space and I nailed it!

 

The others were with the camera just rested on the edge of the balcony, a bin or on the floor.

 

Need to get a remote and a tripod next, as when you press the button it's impossible to not move the camera even a tiny, tiny amount.

 

The one with the foot in the foreground was also a total fluke to be honest as well. It was the first long exposure I'd tried and I just stuck it on the floor and aimed it up the street at a little Fiat 500 car. But when i looked at the image I'd managed to get some dudes shoe in that leads you in to the shot perfectly.

Ace.

[Tom R]

Speaking of tripods and stuff.

 

I was thinking of getting one of these wide angle lenses: 58MM WideAngle Lens FOR CANON 350D 400D 450D 500D 1000D | eBay UK

 

What do you guys reckon, is it too cheap to be any good at all or what?

 

There's also this one which is both a macro lens and a wide angle in one. What do youse reckon? 72mm WIDE ANGLE PRO LENS for CANON XH-A1 XH-G1 HVR-Z1U | eBay UK

 

Also looking at a tripod and have seen one for a tenner, brand new??

 

Universal Camera/Camcorde​r Tripod Stand ALL MAKES | eBay UK

[Torvald Utne]

Lowepro Altus 120 Shoulder Bag for DSLR Kit - Black: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics

 

Will work perfectly mate, I've got one for my 550d and so have a few of my friends for their DSLR's. A little smaller than others buy it will be able to fit perfectly with space for another lens or battery in a seperate pocket. And it's got a bargain price too, could cost up to £25 in shops!

 

Had a look at this in pcworld today and it looked perfect, came back to order off amazon and it's sold out! (it looks big enough for the d3100 with and 18-200 attached and a 35mm in the side pocket)

[Tom R]

I've got that bag as well! Came with the camera off the lad I bought it from.

[migs]

I was thinking of getting one of these wide angle lenses: 58MM WideAngle Lens FOR CANON 350D 400D 450D 500D 1000D | eBay UK

 

What do you guys reckon, is it too cheap to be any good at all or what?

Well, for a starter, 58mm doesn't even come close to being wide angle. Wide angle is less than 24mm, generally. You also need to understand the crop factor of most consumer/prosumer dSLRs, when buying lenses. Canon, for example, have a crop factor of 1.6x, so you need to multiply all lengths by that number to get a true reflection of what you will see through the eyepiece.

 

I'm a Nikon user, so aren't best placed to give specific advice, but anything like the Nikon 12-24mm or 10.5mm fisheye is great. The 10.5mm isn't useable for everyday use, but I love it.

 

Also, you generally get what you pay for in a lens. Cheap usually means just that. Save your money, do a bit of research and buy a lens that you won't be using as a paperweight in 3 month's time.

 

Also looking at a tripod and have seen one for a tenner, brand new??

Again, you'll get what you pay for. Tripods usually show a maximum weight rating. Look for something substantial, say 2.5kg+. Anything less will be unstable in even the lightest wind. For a tenner, you're getting a tenner's worth of materials.

 

Welcome, my friend, to a hobby which will suck money out of your wallet faster than a Playboy Bunny ;)

 

Don't worry, though, if you sometimes get your purchases wrong, we all learn the hard way. That's what ebay's for. I've bought and sold great lenses on ebay, and also sold some truly shite ones.

[migs]

I need to revise my answer, now I've read the links.

 

The 58mm will be the thread size of the lens that the attachment will fit. That will limit how many lenses you can use it with. It's not a lens in itself, and the description is misleading in that sense.

 

Frankly, avoid it. The reason good filters are expensive is simple. The more glass the light has to get through, the more degraded the image becomes. I'm guessing that a tenner's worth of glass and metal aren't going to improve the quality any.

[setreal]

Just bought a D3100 and 8 - 55 mm VR lens. Looking at bags for it now. What do you guys recommend? Lowe Pro or caselogic still the ones to go with or something totally different?

 

Got myself that very same one last week (I guess you meant 18-55). Im an utter newb, though, but got some decent results with the auto settings so far. Reading myself into the whole mumbojumbo right now. Could do with more zoom soon-ish.

[Karl_b]

A Flickr set of my recent day photographing the Southbank Centre and Barbican in London.

 

London - Southbank and Barbican - a set on Flickr

[Anubis]

 

This one is titled "Put The Fucking Camera Away!"

[Torvald Utne]

These aren't mine, was just wondering what you would need to recreate this type of photo...

[Nick Leeson]

Tom, until you get a remote, use the self-timer. Just set it steady click the button and let it rest in the 5 second pause between you clicking and it firing.

 

Another priceless investment is a little beanbag to rest your camera on as you can manipulate it to point in far more directions and still be solid than you could a table or whatever.

[Sandman]

These aren't mine, was just wondering what you would need to recreate this type of photo...

 

Are you referring to the color tone? You can get this 'look' by choosing an appropriate film-stock, or if you're shooting digital, by tweaking the colors in photoshop.

 

If you're referring to the out of focus areas in the background, then you should set your camera to manual mode and shoot at a fast aperture, ideally with a fast lens.

[Torvald Utne]

Would you need some sort of ND filter as they're almost shooting direct into a sunset? So the tone is just colour grading in photoshop, well that's disappointing.

[ChrisM]

So the tone is just colour grading in photoshop, well that's disappointing.

 

Virtually all photographic styles / techniques are the result of manipulation though, both digital and film photography. At the moment of capture it could be simply aperture size, filters, type of film loaded into the camera, iso etc that affect the image captured on the film / sensor. Post production is not really that much different between the two formats, many digital techniques in photoshop et al are based on old film processing techniques, such as split toning, dodging and burning etc. The beauty of digital is that you can go 'fuck that, it doesn't like right', and simply hit the undo button and start again.

 

I'd be interested to know what Post-Production the TLW Photographers do on their images, I know some people feel that PP is in someway 'cheating', but it's been going on for years and years in film labs around the world. I have a theory that because digital processing can be very simple and straightforward with instantaneous results many view it as cheating.

[Sandman]

Would you need some sort of ND filter as they're almost shooting direct into a sunset? So the tone is just colour grading in photoshop, well that's disappointing.

 

You wouldn't necessarily need an ND filter. If you shoot wide open, then your highlights will blow out like in those 2 photographs.

 

In terms of whether those photographs are digital or film - you can check their EXIF data on flicker. In fact I'd recommend doing that for any photos that you like - as you'll get to know what lens was used, what the metering mode was etc.

 

You can get that look by shooting film as well, with minimum color correction in post. All I do for my stuff is contrast adjustments to compensate for scanning issues.

[Sandman]

[Sandman]

 

I'd be interested to know what Post-Production the TLW Photographers do on their images, I know some people feel that PP is in someway 'cheating', but it's been going on for years and years in film labs around the world. I have a theory that because digital processing can be very simple and straightforward with instantaneous results many view it as cheating.

 

 

Personally, I think having the ability to post produce your images at no cost with instantaneous feedback is brilliant. I just don't do this for my photographs as I do enough digital manipulation at work and like to just shoot my images clean. This is also why I haven't switched over to digital for personal stuff.

 

But for those who're just beginning, digital is a fucking godsend. And those who look down on it are just being snobs. All that matters is the image, no-one gives a fuck about whether you shot on digital or on film, or whether you tweaked it or not.

 

If the image works, it works.

[Chairman Meow]

Thanks to those who gave me pointers with the issue I had on my Kodak point and click. Seems I must have been pissing about with the settings and cocked something up because it's been fine since I had to take the battery out to charge it.

 

Been having a tidy up of files transferring stuff to my new pc and found this among many that I had stored on the old computer. I'm not overly competent with the camera, it's a Fuji S5500 which is supposed to be like a step down from an SLR but I get the odd one I quite like out of it.

 

[RedinSweden]

Lytro Is Developing a Camera That May Change Photography as We Know It

 

Really interesting shift in technology

[Chairman Meow]

Few more from me, recurring theme so I'll leave it after these as they will get very repetitive for you all.

 

I was trying to get the shadows and the like and then have the people blurred from motion but it went a bit (very) wrong but I kind of like the ambience of it.

 

Photo isn't grainy that's the snow coming down.

 

A rare photo not actually including a car, I absolutely love it up in Kielder. Photo is about 7 in the morning on a late winters/early spring day, just off Forest Drive.

[Chairman Meow]

A few from many I have from Mitsubishi testing.