MDM

Verified
  • Content count

    2,088
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

749 Forum reputation = excellent

About MDM

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    England

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={EB02977F-FF09-40CC-90CD-0895911A7F63}&name=Michael+Murphy
  • Images
    3275
  • Joined Alamy
    29 Apr 2009

Recent Profile Visitors

3,619 profile views
  1. Best tool for the Job

    As with most things photographic equipment wise, it all comes down to what you use the lens for and what you consider to be worth paying for. You might even wonder if you can afford to be without a certain technology. If you shoot a lot in low light without a tripod, then the wider aperture lenses have a definite advantage and the newer Nikkor 24-70 2.8 has excellent VR (stabilisation). Unless things have changed recently, then the Canon equivalent does not have stabilisation so Doc's argument holds there but not for Nikon. It's not all about wider apertures as well as I said above but also that the focus of development with Nikon appears to have been with the pro lenses. For example, the latest 70-200 f2.8 Nikkor has superior AF tracking to its predecessors (2.8 and 4) but there is a hefty price difference. If you shoot fast action, then it is something to really consider: can I actually get the shot with the older lens? This thinking applies across the board.
  2. Uncheck resize to fit and just export, making sure your JPEG quality is set to 100.
  3. Best tool for the Job

    Even if you never use f2.8, the extra stop can make a difference shooting in low light, as the view through the viewfinder will be brighter for one thing. It may also enable better autofocusing in low light. As far as Nikon lenses are concerned, they have been upgrading the f.2.8 zooms with better focus tracking, image stabilisation and in some cases optical quality (with a big price kick as well) but as far as I know the equivalent f4 zooms have not yet been upgraded (I may be wrong on this).
  4. Once again check out Fixation before you do anything. Get the sensor cleaned by them in the first place (about £60), they will check the camera and give you a sensible and trustworthy quote. They are authorised repairers if there is something wrong.
  5. DNG and raw are effectively the same thing for all practical purposes, certainly if using Adobe software. Dropbox is good for uploading raw files,
  6. If I were you I would get the sensor professionally cleaned rather than mess about. If it is still bad after that then you might have a more serious problem. Your sky in that pic is quite a mess when viewed in PS with a strong s-curve and I am not sure it is just down to jpeg artefacts - it would be necessary to see the raw really. Fixation in London are authorised Canon repairers and do excellent while you wait sensor cleaning. They are owned by WEX in Norwich if that is convenient to you although I don't think they do sensor cleaning in Norwich but I expect you could drop the camera in there.
  7. sky blue tree tops

    I don't think you need to worry at all about blue fringing from sky against leaves for Alamy QC. If it is lateral chromatic aberration then colour fringing will be most visible towards the edge of the frame and it won't be confined to trees. The best way to get rid of this is to use the tickbox in LR or ACR on the raw file. If that doesn't work fully which it may not, then the fringe removal tool as mentioned above can also be applied.
  8. Instagram

    Would you like to elaborate on how that happened and what exactly happened for the benefit of us all? Could it be your own security? You said you were using a computer and some non-standard way to upload images.
  9. Have you tried to Reset Lightroom Prefs That could be your simple fix. However, I do think you should reconsider your workflow as you could save yourself a lot of time using the method I suggested above (synchonising across images having gotten one in the ballpark instead of using auto anything in LR).
  10. The thing with that is you will probably get different settings for images that should really use very similar settings. The auto settings (as it is called in the subscription version now) is like the auto exposure settings on a camera - it will be influenced by changes in the image itself - for example, a bright patch of sky may cause the exposure to darken etc. For batch processing images taken in similar conditions (like a football match as with the OP), then I would think it is best to get one in the ballpark and synchronise as I said above rather than use an auto setting for all.
  11. To clarify, use auto settings by all means if it helps to get your first image right but once you get one image in the ballpark, then just synchronise across the rest of the images and then make minor tweaks - do not use auto settings for an entire batch of images. If you want to really speed up your workflow then you can't worry too much about something that you really don't need not working. I think we are the old proverbial chalk and cheese in most respects photographically. I recall you saying that you use program mode for example which is handing over total control to the camera as far as exposure is concerned whereas I like to be in total control - manual exposure, spot metering and so on. The only time I don't use spot metering is when I am using TTL flash when matrix metering works best. Centre-weighted metering is very outdated really given what modern cameras are capable of but really I would advocate using spot metering for almost everything anyway. I find its interesting to try to figure out problems such as the OP's but I can't replicate it and have no idea what is happening. The bottom line really is that she would be better off to use a different system in any case in my opinion for batch processing large numbers of football images. I somehow don't think the pro football photographers hang about using auto settings on individual images in Lightroom and taking hours to process the pics.
  12. Centre-weighted metering is an ancient hangover from the 70s or thereabouts and is way inferior to the metering systems in modern cameras. You should use matrix (Nikon) metering or whatever the equivalent is in whatever system you are using or preferably spot metering in general when you become adept at it. It's not just for swans and if it was you should not base your exposure on metering the swan itself. Pick an area of the image that is an approximate midtone and work off that - you will never be far wrong but make sure you are in manual exposure mode as well. 
 As for your Lightroom problem, I have no idea what is happening - seems very strange. I agree more or less with Sally's advice. Do not use auto settings. Learn how to judge the settings yourself in conjunction with the histogram. It is not difficult once you get used to it. You can either work off a preset for those conditions or just import using a custom default setting. If processing a batch of images that are all similar, then process one initial image and synchronise across the rest of the images. You can choose which settings to synchronise.
  13. Instagram

    It's certainly not restricted to Apple devices but I don't know that any old (literally) device will work because the software may not run. I am no expert though.
  14. Instagram

    I find Image Sizes very useful. Vertical images tend to look better as they use the full size (1350x1080 pixels I think). As far as I know you need to add tags when posting or the image won't appear under those tags. The purpose of that is so that other people will see them. Play around and you will soon get the hang of it.
  15. Instagram

    Why the red arrow? Please take a moment to explain arrow thrower.