post processing – What goes into making smooth, crisp, fashion magazine worthy shots?

Smoothness often comes from a large lightsource (i.e. a softbox or umbrella) The first link you posted isn’t what I’d call crisp fashion photography so I’m not entirely sure what you’re after.

Crispness comes from the lens, and from post processing. The balance switches as you reduce the image size. Don’t be swayed by sharp looking but tiny images! For images downsized or the web e.g. 600x400px you can take an out of focus 16 megapixel image and make it look tack sharp!

edit 3

Looking at the NYE photos it seems you’re after high contrast high key images. I was immediately reminded of this shoot:

All you need for this is a bright source approximately dead on to the subject. The light I used was a small softbox which gives a softer look than the one in the gallery you posted. I also used a background light as the background was further away.

Here is the unedited version (note that you can get this look, or at least very close on camera by turning the contrast way up in the picture style or whatever the Nikon equivalent is!)

edit 2

Here is an image from a wedding which is at least similar subject matter to the Sardinia image. Here I have pushed the local contrast as far as I can:

It’s not as good as the lighting was totally different (direct late afternoon sun, vs. diffuse sunlight from above) but I am getting warm? Here’s the original for comparison:

edit

From this image: http://www.pbase.com/compuminus/image/28657593 it seems like sharpness and contrast is mostly what you’re after. If so then post processing is the best way to achieve this, especially when you’re downsizing images for the web. Here is an example of what you can do with sharpening:

Here’s an image reduced to 600 pixels and aggressively sharpened:

Here’s the same in focus 12 megapixel image with the same high quality macro lens and same complex lighting, but without sharpening:

And it fails to pop in the same way. In reality I would go halfway between the two!.


As for fashion photography, you can’t say it’s more about the setup/capture, or it’s more about the post processing. The truth is you need both for fashion photography. If either is not there it’s very hard to make it up with the other.

One thing to bear in mind, you need a lot of space! Cramped indoor conditions give you very little control over your lights. Light bounces off the walls/floor and you get a muddy light with lots of different colours in it. What you want is a nice directional white light. A black walled studio is ideal, failing that shoots outdoors in a large enough space will suffice!

dnd 5e – Can I build my level 6 Ranger so that his bow shots never miss?

This is dependent on level and magic items. It is also dependent on the target’s AC. A rather high modifier can be obtained with +6 proficiency, +5 dexterity, archery fighting style, a +3 bow, +3 ammunition, and ioun stone of mastery for a total of +20, making a attack roll result of at least 22 (a 1 misses anyway, vide Supra), sufficient for AC 17 with Sharpshooter. (But see note below). Further increases can be achieved using epic boons. Other bonuses such as bardic inspiration are also useful, but those rely on limited resources running contrary to the desire to always hit.

The maximum possible modifier on your current level is of course lower, even with appropriate magic items (which are probably difficult to come by, especially so at level 6). With +3 proficiency and +4 Dex you can have only +19 with the calculation above.

Like a rolled natural 20 will always hit, a natural 1 will always miss. Therefore, even with a very high modifier, there is a 5% miss chance. Of course there are features which allow rerolls. For example the Halfling’s Lucky allows rerolling a 1 once. This with a very high modifier would mean that only one in four hundred attacks would miss. It is not a human however and it does not let you avoid rolling entirely. (Incidentally, a halfling also cannot efficiently use a longbow.) There a ways to avoid the attack roll entirely, such as the clockwork amulet or the rogue’s stroke of luck. These cannot be used consistently however.

Also, in 5e, there are no basic rules which would make a bow break.

nikon – Does the Interval Timer on the Z6 (or Z7) automatically disable after each sequence/series of shots?

I have the Canon RP and am disappointed to find that the Interval Timer disables itself after each sequence and must be re-enabled for every new sequence. So, every press of the shutter requires going into the menu again. I’m hoping the Z6 remains enabled until disabled by the photographer. Better, I hope it might be able to remain enabled after powering the camera off and then on again. Can anyone please advise on the Z6’s function regarding the Interval Timer? Thanks

pathfinder 1e – Are Called Shots worth the investment?

I have been searching for interesting rules systems to make Pathfinder сombat more cinematic in an E6 campaign and to make classes relying on mundane attacks a bit more powerful. At first, Called Shots seemed like exactly what I needed. Indeed, the effects they can inflict are sometimes actually crippling.

However, I was shocked by the investments required to make use of this mechanic.

  1. Like many mundane mechanics in Pathfinder, it requires two feats to function properly: Improved Called Shots and Greater Called Shots. Yes, Called Shots offer a greater array of available effects than, say, usual combat maneuvers do, but two feats is still a huge investment. Even for an E6 campaign.
  2. Those feats require Combat Expertise as a feat tax, so Called Shots actually cost three feats to work properly.
  3. Those feats require Int 13, which is not always the best choice for a martial character and doesn’t really make a lot of sense for an aiming feat (Dex 13 would make a lot more sense). Alternatively, you could take Dirty Fighting, which is indeed a solid feat on its own merit, and many characters should actually do that, but that raises the total cost of Called Shots to four feats. Also, you need to read the rules in a way that includes the Called Shots feats into ” the various improved combat maneuver feats”.
  4. There is a big opportunity cost in making a Called Shot even if you have both related feats. When you decide to make a Called Shot, you accept a huge penalty to your attack roll if you want to achieve anything significant (“Challenging” shots), quite likely just missing your target and achieving nothing at all.
  5. “Easy” shots, on the other hand, don’t threaten your opponent too much.
  6. However, speaking about crits, they are unreliable. Even when you build your character around crits.
  7. Debilitating blows’ effects are mostly amazing, but I plan to use those rules in E6. At CRs close to 6, 40 points of damage from a single attack are likely to guarantee this creature dropped within a turn or two, even without any additional debuffs.
  8. Most significant effects achieved by Called Shots allow for a saving throw to partially or fully negate them, to make the mechanic even more unreliable.
  9. The standard rules make True Strike turn your Called Shot into a normal attack, although the rules explicitly say that it could be allowed.
  10. If you target touch AC, you lose this benefit when using Called Shots, so Gunslingers and magic users stop being as accurate as they usually are.

In my games, I want to buff Called Shots significantly because they seem to be useless, those feats being trap options. The only possible way to use them now is to take Improved Called Shots, take an Easy Called Shot every time you make a full attack, and just hope for the best (the penalty from the shot will be offset by the bonus from a feat). However, I am not an expert in Pathfinder, so I am asking:

Am I misunderstanding something and underestimating the potential of Called Shots, or are they indeed yet another feat-intensive, trap option present in Pathfinder?

pathfinder 1e – Are Called Shots actually good options given all the costs and penalties associated with them?

I have been searching for interesting rules systems to make Pathfinder сombat more cinematic in an E6 campaign and to make classes relying on mundane attacks a bit more powerful. At first, Called Shots seemed like exactly what I needed. Indeed, the effects they can inflict are sometimes actually crippling.

However, I was shocked by the investments required to make use of this mechanic.

  1. Like many mundane mechanics in Pathfinder, it requires two feats to function properly: Improved Called Shots and Greater Called Shots. Yes, Called Shots offer a greater array of available effects than, say, usual combat maneuvers do, but two feats is still a huge investment. Even for an E6 campaign.
  2. Those feats require Combat Expertise as a feat tax, so Called Shots actually cost three feats to work properly.
  3. Those feats require Int 13, which is not always the best choice for a martial character and doesn’t really make a lot of sense for an aiming feat (Dex 13 would make a lot more sense). Alternatively, you could take Dirty Fighting, which is indeed a solid feat on its own merit, and many characters should actually do that, but that raises the total cost of Called Shots to four feats. Also, you need to read the rules in a way that includes the Called Shots feats into ” the various improved combat maneuver feats”.
  4. There is a big opportunity cost in making a Called Shot even if you have both related feats. When you decide to make a Called Shot, you accept a huge penalty to your attack roll if you want to achieve anything significant (“Challenging” shots), quite likely just missing your target and achieving nothing at all.
  5. “Easy” shots, on the other hand, don’t threaten your opponent too much.
  6. However, speaking about crits, they are unreliable. Even when you build your character around crits.
  7. Debilitating blows’ effects are mostly amazing, but I plan to use those rules in E6. At CRs close to 6, 40 points of damage from a single attack are likely to guarantee this creature dropped within a turn or two, even without any additional debuffs.
  8. Most significant effects achieved by Called Shots allow for a saving throw to partially or fully negate them, to make the mechanic even more unreliable.
  9. The standard rules make True Strike turn your Called Shot into a normal attack, although the rules explicitly say that it could be allowed.
  10. If you target touch AC, you lose this benefit when using Called Shots, so Gunslingers and magic users stop being as accurate as they usually are.

In my games, I want to buff Called Shots significantly because they seem to be useless, those feats being trap options. The only possible way to use them now is to take Improved Called Shots, take an Easy Called Shot every time you make a full attack, and just hope for the best (the penalty from the shot will be offset by the bonus from a feat). However, I am not an expert in Pathfinder, so I am asking:

Am I misunderstanding something and underestimating the potential of Called Shots, or are they indeed yet another feat-intensive, trap option present in Pathfinder?

is live view or mirrorless suitable for telephoto shots of moving subjects?

(I know we’re straying into the world of video here, but I feel it’s still relevant)

Why is live view harder than “TTL”?
because you are not using the senses you were born with – that your eye & hands are easily co-ordinated to match direction, distance, speed & focus (of attention, not sharpness of image).
Catch a ball. No maths required, you just do it.
Catch a ball whilst watching your live view… maybe not.

Will you improve over time?
Yes, otherwise the entire movie industry would be full of missed shots. Almost no cinematographer has his eye right through the lens these days, there’s always some remote aspect to it – in effect, live view. Watch a steadicam operator, gazing towards his feet, where his monitor is, whilst his camera is pointed firmly at the action in front of him.
There’s a dual purpose in that, he can see what he’s shooting whilst not falling over anything.
Many pro video cameras have the same as DSLR or mirrorless cameras, a TTL & separate moveable screen(s) for remote viewing. The use of the eyepiece is becoming much more rare, the remote ‘live view’ is more common.

So, for stills what does it mean?
Mirrorless cameras currently still have both options.
The “TTL” viewfinder is a teeny TV screen, but it’s still really “through the lens”, with your face pressed against the camera, the same as ever..
The live view you’ll still have to train towards, just like every ‘movie’ cameraman working today.

Your potential pitfall, for fast action, is the frequency with which your live view updates on your screen. Modern high-end cameras have truly ‘as live’ playback; no discernible delay at all. An old entry-level consumer DSLR is going to be pretty laggy by comparison.

cleaning – sensor / dust test – should the test shots be exposed right?

I recently bought a new camera and did some stain / dust detection tests. In some sites / guides / videos, apart from the usual configuration (ISO 100, F / 22, infinite focus, shooting on a blank white wall, etc.), they specifically mention that the shutter speed should be set long enough so that the histogram would be moved to the right as much as possible without clipping. In others, nothing about it is mentioned.

So I tried both. A test shot with the shutter speed decided by the camera, which resulted in a gray image with the histogram mainly in the middle; another test shot with a sufficiently long shutter speed, resulting in a white image with the histogram mainly to the right. I did it several times and found that the gray shots always had more spots than the white ones (again, the histogram does not indicate that clipping has occurred).

I'm curious as to why this is the case? I assumed that the number of spots in the image would be the same for the two test shots. Plus, is it really necessary to expose right for these spot tests?

Rings in SOME of my 5D mIV cannon shots

enter description of image hereNew camera – old lens. I took these photos with the Sigma Art 35mm on my new Canon. It is not every time. has anyone seen them already? It seems that this could happen with a shallow depth of field. Thoughts?

performances – Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III: Is there a way to get the number of shots in continuous shooting before filling the buffer?

Many interchangeable lens cameras provide some sort of display of the buffer capacity when shooting, usually indicating the approximate number of remaining images that can be stored in the buffer, and so how many more photos can be taken in continuous shooting mode before the camera slows down:

However, I cannot find similar functionality on my Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III. Does such functionality exist in the camera? If yes, where could I activate it? I have already contacted Olympus, including on Twitter, on a display function of the buffer capacity.

overexposure – Nikon D5200 overexposed shots in "auto" modes

I recently (2 months ago) bought a Nikon D5200 as my first digital SLR. Everything was fine until a few days ago, but now it seems that every day shot I take in auto mode (including different modes like Landscape / Portrait, etc.) is completely overexposed and washed out. The only way to get a regular shot is to go into "A" or "S" mode and manually set the exposure compensation to something big and negative (for example -5, 00).

In automatic mode, ISO is set to auto, WB is set to auto, as it is for most things, so I'm baffled by what is causing the overexposure and why this problem is suddenly appeared. Even in aperture priority mode, "A", when I manually set ISO to 100 and set white balance to "Direct Sunlight", photos are still too white / washed out, except if i'm bothering to adjust the exposure compensation.

I tried to do the factory reset by pressing and holding both buttons, and I also reset the shooting menu, and everything else I could find to reset, but photos are still overexposed in "Auto" mode.

Does this mean my camera has been hit and needs to be repaired or is there something else I could try?

Here is a photo of the camera lens attachment area:

mounting area 1

fixing area 2