Bridal show - Toronto

[danielchtong]

Kjell, Ira & Harriet,

Thanks for the undeserved compliment.

Duck Dodgers wrote:

Very nice, Daniel. And, dare I say, a bit different response to them here, than on that "other photo site."

Duck Dodgers,

The other forum has become a lot less friendly I believe. This fellow, apparently a 77mm Ltd owner, thinks that I should have used a 77mm of wider aperture instead.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=25765713

I got good raw material for photography (tall, new, beautiful girls) but made just documentally average pics. As usual I asked for picture for enlightenment. Of course, there will not be response (from a 77mm Ltd owner with no pict to show?).

You are right re different response.

Daniel , Toronto

[WackyRoger]

WOW!!! you are a licky guy and you also got some great photos.


TOTALLY WACKY roger

[mtngal]

This is one time I don't think the 77 limited would be better. I don't have the lens, but the reason I've always wanted it is that the examples I've seen shows it to be an extremely sharp lens (probably sharper than anything I have except for maybe the A300). I think it might have been too sharp for this application. And I'm not sure that shooting at a somewhat shorter focal length and a larger aperture would have given you any better results, DOF wise. It would have been aninteresting photographic exercise if you had both lenses, but only that. What you have here is certainly successful.

[Dal1970]

As usual, that forum seems to attract the real muppets.



Totally hung up on the technical bits and not looking at the pics at all.



Dal

[Keithw]

WackyRoger wrote:

WOW!!! you are a licky guy

Hmmm, the mind boggles! :lol:

Excellent shots Daniel, especially when you see the surroundings

Keith

[danielchtong]

mtngal wrote:

This is one time I don't think the 77 limited would be better. I don't have the lens, but the reason I've always wanted it is that the examples I've seen shows it to be an extremely sharp lens (probably sharper than anything I have except for maybe the A300). I think it might have been too sharp for this application. And I'm not sure that shooting at a somewhat shorter focal length and a larger aperture would have given you any better results, DOF wise. It would have been an interesting photographic exercise if you had both lenses, but only that. What you have here is certainly successful.

I never manage to judge the degree of sharpness needed for people's shot. Some feminine input is necessary as my wife always complains about blemishes here and there (she hardly allows picture hereself) . I respond typically that is what it is there. Photoshop can take care the major ones anyway.
I can use wider aperture like F3.5. But that leaves me very little DoF at 135mm. The sharpness factor is just right on as far as I can see. Not overly.
77mm is marginally better off on DoF likely also with better bokeh. Also I had to cut off all the bottom for the distraction/clutter
As you said, a good photographic exercise.

Daniel

[NonEntity1]

Very nice shots Daniel. I think the narrow DOF worked very well for these shots and you did a great job isolating your subjects from the background. As far as the comments on the other forum, I would think that the measure of a photographer is what he does with the equipment he has!

Tim

[trilou]

Hey now, we aren't all being nasty in the other forum...don't let one bad apple spoil the whole bunch, as they say! As I said there, anyone who can master "people" photography in that kind of challenging lighting situation deserves kudos in my book!

[danielchtong]

trilou wrote:

Hey now, we aren't all being nasty in the other forum...don't let one bad apple spoil the whole bunch, as they say! As I said there, anyone who can master "people" photography in that kind of challenging lighting situation deserves kudos in my book!

Roger, Tim, Dal & Keith: Thanks for taking time to comment


Trina (I believe),

Welcome to this friendly forum
As you can see, these are photographic exercise of free shots of beauties all dressed up for the occasion. I have no worry of getting permission or release paper. And no fee unlike an ideal studio setup with cost for the model and MUA. The only negative is the crowd and set up. Nowhere near the trouble in chasing after elusive birds in this winter time.

Daniel, Toronto

[Vaards]

danielchtong wrote:

Welcome to this friendly forum....

Daniel, Toronto

WOW... :blah:



Daniel is walking around and crying about one freak who wrote neutral coment about his pics. Unbelievable!



Ok, that freak is here now!

You can work out that question now :P

> As usual I asked for picture for enlightenment. Of course, there will not be response (from a 77mm Ltd owner with no pict to show?).


Whata terrible style - to place pics for others and then start to cry in other places that somebody guessed - it is snapshots ? Why just not ask questions directly?

And even worse - it is terrible to ansver to your viewers - "and your pics"? Your valuable pics? Stupidity.



> This is one time I don't think the 77 limited would be better.

Hey - you are thinking about Daniels thoughts? Two philosofers are thinking what some other freak told. Why not just askquestion to stupid freak who does not understand nothing from girls ?

So 77mm has more DOF, and more aperture - thats mean faster shutter. There is obvious motion blur in some of Daniels pictures. Besides -longer focal length lenses flatten perspective, making background better blurred but main subject in wider sharp area. I mean - with FA50 and Fa 77 portrait shots has some blurred parts on them. It adds some extra glamurous feeling. So - in Daniels case I just felt that closer contact with girls and faster shutter was important things. Discussion was ended at the moment when he told that he do not have 77mm lens. Somehow I guessed that he has.



> As usual, that forum seems to attract the real muppets.
> Totally hung up on the technical bits and not looking at the pics at all.



Hmmm... I will tell you one secret. Places where everybody is friendly, helpful etc. There is sooo low level of skills, abilities and results offered to others. That is so.

Look on Daniels case - Most of you told him, WHOOOW, WHATA SEXY CHINESE GIRLS !!! Does it helps to improve? Nop... But about my task hi is thinking for shure. He even come here with all this. Thinking is the most important part. And also WILL to show to that idiot that he does not understnad nothing (so he coppied link to this forum. Hope next time he will show better pics:lol.

But DP Review is not that place. It is the same "WOW place with average pics like here.

Ok, I am going to sleep now. But I got an Idea - it would be interesting to make forum fighting: DP review pentaxians against Steves pentaxians. Both armies shooting portraits and placing on photo.net. :idea:


At the end wins that forum who has better performance, better score. etc. But there would be problems - seems there is less users. So, we might think about all this. Of course - after you will do work with me!