|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - eyeCatchLight
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10
201
« on: November 04, 2009, 16:03 »
oh well yeah I didn't mention that these prices are Canadian.......
ebay from the US will cost me import taxes in addition. :-( why can't i live in the us??? (Ok canada is better heheheh)
202
« on: November 04, 2009, 01:14 »
first of all: thanks for your incredibly useful post(s)!!! Now I really understand more.
It seems for pure photographers IPS is the choice. For people that also watch movies, PVA seems better.
For me I guess both is fine. I am watching movies, yes, but I am not a purist tracking down all the noise and rattle and so on :-) I just enjoy the movie.
hm... i am now trying to narrow down my options...
either taking a 22 inch cheap one like the Dell - or taking the Samsung 245T, which is big and good. And then I also found the Acer 26 inches at the same price of the 24ers, it seems its either IPS or PVA.
What do you think about this? Isn't a 26 inches monitor too big?
thank you!
simone
203
« on: November 03, 2009, 22:58 »
hm...so the quality order is TN - PVA - IPS ?? then why here the IPS ones are cheaper? OK i found very expensive IPS ones (i think they had 10 or 12 bit or so!!), but in this price range it seems PVA is more expensive. I have also seen the Acer AL2616wd for 620$. It is 26 inches for the price of the Samsung 245T and would substitute my TV  noone has any experience with these cheap ips ones? Simoen
204
« on: November 03, 2009, 22:25 »
oh really, i thought IPS was better than PVA?
yeah....600$ is approx. my upper limit. is that monitor really good? or is a cheaper one sufficient?
205
« on: November 03, 2009, 21:23 »
206
« on: October 30, 2009, 20:12 »
wow, thanks for your fast answers. :-) seems it's affordable!  ------------------------- Strobe setup: ------------------------- the strobes look good to me, I wouldn't lose much trying them first. so you say 150 Ws is enough for such an application? (I have absolutely no idea...) the same power with the alien bees costs almost 4x as much! Do I need a wireless controller or something like that? I read I need two strobes for the background, but one is also ok you say? It would be cool to have this portable with speedlights, but that's really expensive... I also found that support for my SB-900 that can be used to attach a softbox for example. ------------------------- Lightbox: ------------------------- How much do I pay for a lightbox? Do you guys use both? Or do you also put your still life objects into the big strobe setting? ------------------------- Thanks for your help!
207
« on: October 30, 2009, 18:35 »
Hello,
I would like to buy myself a basic sort of equipment for making isolated shots. It should also be a little versatile for other purposes (portraits and such).
I read Zack Arias' tutorial - it is great!!!
Anyhow, as it is my first time I am dealing with studio lights, I have a lot of doubts. (If I am in the wrong forum, please just tell me).
1) I need three lights. I have one SB-900 up to now. What should I add for the other two? Are other two Nikon Speedlights enough power? (This solution seems however a bit expensive...) I read also about AlienBees... I am thinking of lighting the white background with the lights and use my flash for the foreground. What do you think?
2) What is the cheapest, and what a comfortable solution for these lights? (I'd like to save some money).
3) OK and now the most stupid question....are these units all flashes or continuous lights? When do I use what, what is better? (sorry the basic question).
4) How much will it cost me? (the lights plus their supports and the things i need for the lights; I already figured out a support for the white background roll)
Oh and I don't have so much space. I don't need a huge setup. It has to be small, thus maybe less power needed.
Thank you!
Simone
208
« on: October 30, 2009, 15:36 »
No, I uploaded a batch of 4 photos again, among them the three without comment of last time, and one new photo. So I guess in your case you can upload the one that has no comment along with three new ones. :-))
209
« on: October 30, 2009, 07:03 »
Hey guys, I can confirm what we said: only the pictures that are marked fail. I subsituted that picture with a new one and passed QC. BTW I submitted yesterday at midnight, and this morning at 8am I had a look and it was fine, so fast!! Last time it took a week! Now I only need to understand the license types and choose the right thing  . Have fun! Simone
210
« on: October 29, 2009, 21:28 »
I think I have used this service many years ago. It worked well as far as I remember, I think sometimes it was a bit slow. But it is so long ago that all this is not valid anymore I guess (back in 2004). Now I have a cheap service, I pay very little, and backups and other things are guaranteed. That time it was just a small personal webpage with PHP and so on, so it wasn't that important. If you do something important on that webspace, I'd pay for it. It costs sometimes just 50$/year or so. Mine (that is an Austrian host) offers me 15 GB, unlimited traffic, a high number of databases, and so on and on for 4.90 Euros / month, which gives around 6$ (tax included).
Just try this service if you like it. You can always change later. But make backups.
Simone
211
« on: October 29, 2009, 18:35 »
Thank you!!
I will check out these books.
I know David Hobby's blog a little, it is really great.
Everything seems so much about blogging in the microstock world...wow, is that modern now?
212
« on: October 29, 2009, 06:59 »
oh well i can afford a reflector, it's not that bad i would also like to buy some lighting equipment, for example to isolate subjects. but there it gets a space problem pretty soon also, as my flat is quite small.... but i am so interested in the lightning aspect of photography, how to control light, or use the available one. now my things are mostly outdoor, and some things with a wireless off-camera flash. thank you for everything, i like this group so much, you're great people!
213
« on: October 29, 2009, 05:24 »
wow, so fast, thanks! i adore these things, wish i had the space and money for lighting equipment!!
214
« on: October 29, 2009, 05:17 »
What does the guy mean in this video with feathering? I can't see it well, quality is a bit bad. Sorry for the stupid question, haven't used reflectors before, thanks for this video!
215
« on: October 29, 2009, 05:01 »
yes...i guess i will simply try that, so other people also know for the future how it works.
216
« on: October 28, 2009, 23:36 »
hm....this kind of implies that the non-commented ones were ok, what do you think?
217
« on: October 26, 2009, 14:49 »
Hello,
thank you so much for all your answers.
I have a 12MP camera (Nikon D90) with the 18-200mm lens. I have also other lens equipment, but the zoom lens is on most of the time... Now that lens is not the sharpest maybe...I can see for example that the f1.8 50mm is much sharper.
I did all the things you wrote, I thoroughly read the instructions and guidelines and so on.
I think the picture just had a too blue sky, that's the only thing I changed apart from making the sky less noisy. I would like to post it here, but from my office flickr does not open, so I can't connect :-(.
I can use the original with the normal sky maybe...as they only look at quality.
I don't mind to be rejected, I'll just resubmit something that is already perfect out of the camera :-).
Thanks!
Simone
218
« on: October 26, 2009, 05:52 »
Hello,
I submitted 4 photos to Alamy for initial test submission. I got an answer, where for 3 files nothing was written, and for the fourth file, "noticeable retouching" was given.
Does it mean I can resubmit the other three and only change the fourth? Or do they mean that this reason is for all four pictures?
Simone
219
« on: October 24, 2009, 04:53 »
if you use lightroom, you can enter the keywords, title and description already there, and then when uploaded they will appear.
220
« on: October 24, 2009, 04:49 »
yes, I will try. is there also a 30 days waiting time if you're not accepted like in istock?
221
« on: October 23, 2009, 16:01 »
yeah yeah yeah got accepted at stockxpert... now i have to try also the others.
was that supposed to be at least a little bit difficult? (so that i can be a little bit proud....)
222
« on: October 22, 2009, 19:09 »
I also use Win7 since its Beta Test phase. It works great. (after Vista nothing can be worse). I have 4 GB of RAM and the 64-bit version, that's good for photography, even if I'd wish more memory sometimes.....
223
« on: October 22, 2009, 11:27 »
as I am a newbie: where is Yuri's keyword page?
thank you!
Simone
224
« on: October 22, 2009, 09:02 »
yes, i would like to do the keywording well too. i thought it was good to put more keywords, but it seems not. i will remove some of mine at least apart from FT where you can't edit them 
225
« on: October 22, 2009, 05:25 »
Is it better to put less keywords? What is your strategy? I kept using close to the maximum but I read it is worse....so I would like to hear your opinion. :-))
Thank you!
Simone
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
