Jump to content

Duncan_Andison

Verified
  • Content Count

    1,049
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Duncan_Andison


  1. No need to decide whether you will go RM or RF. It comes down to the individual image. If it's easy to replicate or copy and was cheap to make then RF might be the right option. If it was costly and hard to get and in demand then I would go RM. RF isn't always a bad thing.

     

    As for .36 sales. If you only pickup 25 of those a day you will struggle to make ends meet. On the other hand, my micro sales are over 100+ a day and range from .38 - $120. But, and that is a big but, you have to pickup your subject matter wisely. There is no one size fits all. Horses for courses etc.

     

     

    Edit

     

    As John Says

     

    " Also, something else to consider is that many RM sales on Alamy are really hybrid RM/RF (e.g. iQ licenses)."

     

    I've had a recent situation where my RM images were sold for $30 with 5 years unlimited use during that time with a magazine. At $2.96 a year I know I wasn't the one getting the good deal there ;-)

    • Upvote 3

  2. The 50-140 lens is a different animal to the 55-200 in that it does not have the reach of the 55-200 so the distortion correction would not be as aggressive. Assuming that the 50-140 even needs to have any distortion correction applied at all that is.

     

    I cannot check that out as I do not have the 50-140 lens.

     

    I looked at Sony, before falling on the Fuji side of the fence, and did not like various aspects thinking the Fuji route was for me. Now having second thoughts.

     

    If Fuji had a long prime lens then I might carry on with them and stick to primes only avoiding zoom lenses. But I still like the convenience of zooms although having to take into account their shortcomings in all makes not just Fuji.

     

    Allan

     

    See if you can hire or borrow one to see how you get on with it.

     

    I personally prefer Fuji Lenses. Other than the 24mm Zeiss I found a lot of the Sony APSC lenses to be lacking but, that was just my experience and opinion. The best thing is to try one for yourself to see how you find it. If nothing else, it will settle or confirm the nagging doubt you have and leave you to concentrate on photography. Otherwise, it will always be in the back of your mind.


  3. Just browsing the web and came across this http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/fujifilm-55-200-3p5-4p8/4 on DPReview.

     

    It would appear that Fuji's distortion correction algorithm for this lens, particularly at the longer focal lengths, is stretching the image in the centre (center) thus causing a blurring/OOF effect.  It is only slight but shows up quite well at 100%.

     

    If the distortion correction is turned off then the centre of the image sharpens up at the expense of pincushioning of straight lines at the edges.

     

    You pays yer money and takes your choice but it would appear that switching off distortion correction would at least, in part, reduce the problem of being failed for SoLD.

     

    What do others think?

     

    Or would it be better to dump said lens.

     

    Anyone know if this occurs with other makes of lens when distortion correction is used?

     

    Allan

     

    Never really had any major problems with the lens that meant dumping it. There were a couple of occasions when it returned SoLD shots but the majority of them were ok. The only reason this lens has now been relegated is due to the purchase of the 50-140. This is very sharp even at f/2.8 @ 140mm.

     

    I'd say there would be only two reasons to offload the 55-200.

     

    1. You want the 50-140.

    2. Don't trust the copy of the 55-200 you have and want to try a new one.

     

    As john says, the 55-210 for the Sony was had issues with rendering distant objects at the long end. As I was using it as a landscape lens with a lot of the frame in the distance, I ended up with a lot of SoLD shots with it. It was one of the reasons I jumped ship, needed a good long lens. 

     

    That Sony 55-210 I found better in manual mode than AF. If you used manual focus you could get really sharp shots. I suffered a couple of sin bins with that lens in AF.

     

    The 50-140 would certainly cut out the SoLD but, there is that weight increase. I don't mind taking the hit because of the increased IQ and the ability to shoot at 1/4sec @140mm but I doubt it would appeal to everyone.


  4. I'm a bit confused by this Duncan,

                                                          Alamy's own definition of the different licence types is very clear. "The customer pays a licence fee each time they use the image."

    A separate magazine within a group or a different issue of the same magazine is a separate use and it cannot be argued otherwise. To argue otherwise is to suggest that it is RF

     

    I personally had the same issue 12 months ago and queried it with member services and got the same stock answer as you, to which I replied quoting the terms below. A few days later the repeat sale popped into my account. Admittedly the within a single issue was in the sale description, but I don't see that as of any relevance as the definition of an RM licence is clear.

     

    This is an important issue, perhaps member service could take the opportunity to clarify what the position is.

     

    http://www.alamy.com/contributor/help/image-licences.asp

     

    If you take a look at the Chart above, basically the IQ licence type can be RF or RM.

     

    I asked MS whether they could reuse the images and there answer was yes, but they are unlikely to? Why not. A walking magazine, a walking image, 5 years to use it time and time again. I've already seen it 3 times in the last 12 months! When I checked my records only one sale. Initially I thought it was just one of those, ah, they haven't included all the conditions on our sheets and contacted them to confirm that it would be one use as many times in one issue. Sadly not.

     

     

     

    "Our sales teams work extremely hard to negotiate on deals with all forms of customers and always try to get the best market value possible for each licence.

     

    As mentioned previously it’s very unlikely that the customer will use the image throughout this duration, they just want to be covered"

    • Upvote 1

  5.  

     

    Very true. It's a time issue now focusing on key outlets and not spreading myself out to thinly.

     

     

    There is no right way or wrong way in this business, we all have different factors affecting us. If I carried on concentrating on my key outlets from 5 years ago I would be in deep doggy doo-doo now. By re-allocating my time from mainly one of my key outlets for whom I was more or less working full time but was failing in returns I have made time for a lot of other potential income streams. I now have 20+ income streams for my creative work. Some have earned their keep, some I dont supply any more but still send out an occasional invoice. None are micro. I have only a handful of RF images. I have become cynical in what I send where. Having more income streams means I am less likely to get stuffed if and when changes happen because of a new ranking or algorythm or SEO policy.  More options also gives more options and may open new markets you may not have thought of.

    Coincidently I sold a video clip this morning. However I am still not convinced that that is the road to riches.

     

     

    Food for thought. I've a load of things that I want to do, just have to make sure I do them and not get bogged down with other stuff!


  6.  

     

    True. Slightly off topic but I have to say I'm finding footage a real interesting area at the moment. Just dipping toes in now but the potential (and fun factor) seems great. I think we need to prepare for an age of high internet speeds and cheap storage that means footage clips will become mainstream. 

     

     

    Only have to look, for example, at the usual splash page for Paypal which has been footage for quite some time now.....

     

     

    Exactly. I was looking at a software package called Motions for Final Cut Pro and it made my head spin at the possibilities. It gave me a buzz to think of what you could do.... easily pleased me man  :D

     

     

    Niels Quist

    "Your selling of video clips and experiments can be done parallel to your imaging without any influence on your choice of image licence. The video clips seem to have their own kind of licence."

     

    Very true. It's a time issue now focusing on key outlets and not spreading myself out to thinly. There are a few places that are really fast at reciving & managing 1-2Gb 4k files.... others not so :)

     

    RF can, as you mentioned earlier, be sold at non micro outlets as well. 


  7.  

     

    The impression I get from Duncan's post Pearl and John is that by converting to RF he can then sell in places that require RF and get better prices at these agencies.  Might be wrong with that mind.

    Yes David, I got that bit thanks but what I don't get is why Duncan thinks the buyers will come here at all if they can buy the same images for micro prices elsewhere. At the moment the deal he is objecting to only applies to certain mags. Another buyer might pay a much higher price.

     

    A couple of years ago I uploaded an image of a cup of tea. I did deliberate as to whether it should be RF or RM but eventually opted for RM even though most of the completion was RF.. It sold for $3600 which would never have happened as RF.

     

    Pearl

     

     

    It doesn't matter how much it sold for, frankly that's for the ego. It's how much it would make over it's stock shelf life and that's the figure from both areas of stock that matters. The RPI per image will tell you that and you may very well be surprised at the result.

     

    Buyers tend, at mags especially, to be limited in the agencies they use. They won't hold accounts at every place they can get images suitable for them.

     

    This is a business and if the OP can get more per image elsewhere using a different license, the answer's pretty obvious. Times are changing and being stuck with a business model that used to work and maybe doesn't any longer require changes, if business is the goal.

     

     

    True. Slightly off topic but I have to say I'm finding footage a real interesting area at the moment. Just dipping toes in now but the potential (and fun factor) seems great. I think we need to prepare for an age of high internet speeds and cheap storage that means footage clips will become mainstream. 


  8.  

     

     

    The impression I get from Duncan's post Pearl and John is that by converting to RF he can then sell in places that require RF and get better prices at these agencies.  Might be wrong with that mind.

    Yes David, I got that bit thanks but what I don't get is why Duncan thinks the buyers will come here at all if they can buy the same images for micro prices elsewhere. At the moment the deal he is objecting to only applies to certain mags. Another buyer might pay a much higher price.

    A couple of years ago I uploaded an image of a cup of tea. I did deliberate as to whether it should be RF or RM but eventually opted for RM even though most of the completion was RF.. It sold for $3600 which would never have happened as RF.

    Pearl

     

    Micro has a lot of low value sales, i.e. Subs but that is only one small part of it. Subs represent about 20% of my income from any one agency. The rest, is higher value sales that net me between $28 - $120 at time ($56-$240 in the world of Alamy). And to be honest, if Alamy are happy giving my images away at the lower Micro price range without the volume, why should I worry if they buy it here or not? 

     

    How often do you get the $3600 sales (is that $1800 net?). I only ask as I can easily make that every month elsewhere but here, I normally Gross $250 -$500. Do I continue hoping for the big one to arrive or do I go for where I know I can achieve the same amount every month?!? Do I concentrate with the agent that sells 70-100 a year at a slightly higher price range (on average) or sell 2-3k a month at a place that gives me a lot better $/per image per year?

     

    But, that's my experience with my port / subject matter. There are plenty of people for who it would the other way around.... maybe

    Duncan I'm just surprised that walking images would sell well on micros. My very limited dabble into the dark side has resulted in sales which are truly micro.

    But more importantly I worry about the long term. Once all the buyers have downloaded all the cheap RF images that they will ever need, what then?

    Pearl

     

     

    Yeah I hear what you say. Sadly that RF ball started rolling some time back. I ignored it to begin with but if I hadn't revised my approach I wouldn't have been able to go full time. Don't get me wrong, it's been hard work identifying areas that yield good results and it takes time etc to work up the ranking systems but, it can be done. I no longer shoot the things I want to shoot, I shoot the things they want and save my spare time for my first love, landscape photography :-)

     

    Also, I'm a tight bugger. I spend no more than £30 a shoot, often a lot less. Now I've built my own studio I have low overheads so I'm quickly into profit. I couldn't, wouldn't spend a lot on shoots / traveling etc for images. Hard to make up the cost and time.

     

    I would say if they haven't stopped buying images after 12 years of being flooded by imagery, then they are unlikely to stop now. Most analysis seems to suggest daily downloads keep going up. The main battle is to keep ahead of everyone else. I'm looking to make more technical (computer generated) imagery / footage that is not easily done.

    • Upvote 2

  9. I can certainly understand your frustration, Duncan. But like Pearl I don't understand how switching to RF will improve things. Wouldn't it make more sense to approach these outdoor magazines directly with your images since you seem to have what they are looking for? Perhaps you've already tried that.

     

    Yeah I do that with a few. They would normally email me and others asking whether we have X imagery. 


  10.  

    The impression I get from Duncan's post Pearl and John is that by converting to RF he can then sell in places that require RF and get better prices at these agencies.  Might be wrong with that mind.

    Yes David, I got that bit thanks but what I don't get is why Duncan thinks the buyers will come here at all if they can buy the same images for micro prices elsewhere. At the moment the deal he is objecting to only applies to certain mags. Another buyer might pay a much higher price.

     

    A couple of years ago I uploaded an image of a cup of tea. I did deliberate as to whether it should be RF or RM but eventually opted for RM even though most of the completion was RF.. It sold for $3600 which would never have happened as RF.

     

    Pearl

     

     

    Micro has a lot of low value sales, i.e. Subs but that is only one small part of it. Subs represent about 20% of my income from any one agency. The rest, is higher value sales that net me between $28 - $120 at time ($56-$240 in the world of Alamy). And to be honest, if Alamy are happy giving my images away at the lower Micro price range without the volume, why should I worry if they buy it here or not? 

     

    How often do you get the $3600 sales (is that $1800 net?). I only ask as I can easily make that every month elsewhere but here, I normally Gross $250 -$500. Do I continue hoping for the big one to arrive or do I go for where I know I can achieve the same amount every month?!? Do I concentrate with the agent that sells 70-100 a year at a slightly higher price range (on average) or sell 2-3k a month at a place that gives me a lot better $/per image per year?

     

    But, that's my experience with my port / subject matter. There are plenty of people for who it would the other way around.... maybe

    • Upvote 1

  11. The impression I get from Duncan's post Pearl and John is that by converting to RF he can then sell in places that require RF and get better prices at these agencies.  Might be wrong with that mind.

     

    That's correct.

     

     

    I mistakenly thought that by setting them to RM that they would receive 1 licence fee per use, unlike RF that would allow any number for one fee. The IQ sales are allowing them to licence my RM images to my main target audience as if it was RF (over a 5 year period) but I myself cannot. So, If they are converted to RF, I can them realise more money from different markets that Alamy don't reach. The ones they can't convert I will delete. There is little point waiting around for a sale on them once every 5 years.

     

    I recently tested out a batch as RF elsewhere and the return in volume and $'s was significantly better than I would get here. Especially as one of these images = $2.96 are year for 5 years (if licensed).

    • Upvote 1

  12. I get the frustration.

     

    But, with an eye to the sticky at the top, its not just an either or question... Alamy or the micros. There are other options.

     

    Very true.... don't get me wrong, I think Alamy do try their best at times to get the best deals, but there are times when they do get it really wrong which is a shame. It's like they work so hard to take one step forward then, do their level best to fall two steps back. 

     

    As we've seen in the past, on many occasions, they will stand by something even when deep down they know it's wrong *cough* contract..... I guess I just don't feel I can trust them to manage RM as RM and not sell them as mini RF over a 5 year period. 

    • Upvote 1

  13. Y

     

    Interesting discussion, I too have been pondering whether I should allocate more of my images RF status, rather than RM. I often have the choice but have given the bulk of them RM status up to now. 

     

    Same here, but I've found it means Alamy have the best of both worlds, the option to sell them via the IQ sale as if they were RF, unlimited usage over X amount of years while making it harder for me to send them elsewhere.

     

    I wouldn't have a problem with the above sale if I had selected RF as the licence type. I would then know that once it has been purchased, it could be used as many times as they feel..... but, I would also be able to sell them elsewhere as RF as well!

     

    Just plodding through my images now, picking out the ones to convert or delete, it's going to take a while but it will be worth it.

    • Upvote 1

  14. That's shocking and disheartening. I feel your pain. You have worked your a** off, for what?

    That license model is a slap to the face. So many of my sales have those extremely long time spans, too.

    Seems to me, agencies are not only slitting our throats, but their own.

     

    Yeah, it's a little disheartening but I know I can use my mountain imagery elsewhere and make good money. It just means I won't send any RM outdoor shots here anymore, just RF. That way I can spread them further to places that return a better $/per image per month/year.

    • Upvote 5

  15. I'll apologise from the off for the length of this.

     

    When I first started here I remember being told, you don't want to upload those mountain images you have to micros, there worth more than that. Well, sadly that doesn't appear to hold true anymore.

     

    A lot of the mountain, climbing and walking scenes I take were aimed at  the outdoor magazine market, for obvious reasons. The images I uploaded were RM and I expected that I would receive a payment for each use unlike RF that allowed customers to use it as much as they want. The value of the RM sales seemed to be dropping (nothing new there really) but today, I noticed something that didn't so much anger me, it just left me feeling sickened, deflated even.

     

    I subscribe to many of the popular walking mags because both me and the better half love going out walking, and I noticed that a few of my images that had popped up but no sales showing. When checking through sales I noticed they had already been sold to them in the past year or so. The license then was.....

     

    Country: United Kingdom
    Usage: iQ sale: Magazine, editorial print and digital use, repeat use
    Industry sector: Media, design & publishing
    Start: 10 February 2015
    End: 10 February 2020

    $ 29.46

     

    The words "Within One Title" no longer included.

     

    I questioned this today and was advised they have a agreements with large publishers and, to quote,

     

    "Our sales teams work extremely hard to negotiate on deals with all forms of customers and always try to get the best market value possible for each licence.

     

    As mentioned previously it’s very unlikely that the customer will use the image throughout this duration, they just want to be covered"

     

    That bit in bold just left me slapping my head and leapfrogging around John Cleese style. The've just allowed a walking magazine to use several of my Walking Images as much as they want for 5 years and they think they are unlikely to do it?!?! They would be insane not to! 

     

    If they have an image showing the Torridon mountains, or, Buttermere, they could use the thing loads of times as there is not an endless supply of regions to talk about each month.

     

    So, my cut gives me $2.96 per year while they can use as much as they want.... on a RM image?!?! 

     

    Of course, while this is a bummer for me, it also means they will start slowing down buying other images once they have a bit of a selection to rotate around with. Buy them once, keep them on their hard drives and pull them out whenever! I feel lost for words, truly do.

     

    Anyway, what I've decided to do is create a new pseudonym and bang all the images that I feel will sell well as RF elsewhere (which I can't do while they're here as RM and being sold like RF). Request them to be changed to RF and the ones they can't, they can delete from my portfolio. I can't afford to have images here that will only sell once every 5 years to one of the biggest buyers for that genre of magazine!

     

    It's even more annoying when a batch of images I sent to the darkside have been returning plenty of sale, including ones between £28 - $120  :angry: It appears the world has turned upside down! Ah well, I know what I'll be doing this weekend!

     

    Anyway, sorry for the length of this, just felt like I needed to vent a little!

     

    • Upvote 9

  16. Duncan, I've just started playing around with the trial version of C1, and you are right, the foliage issue is certainly a lot better. I'm finding it very frustrating at the moment as I have been using LR for so long, and the change is proving very difficult.

     

    Do you set NR and sharpen controls to suit each picture individually, or do you have some presets?

     

    I have some presets that a use to speed things up but when I'm back a little later, I can tell you the principles I apply when sharpening and starting points etc for NR.

     

    If you go to Phase One's website, they also have some really good webinars on how to use various parts of the program but also one specifically for people migrating from LR. I used that one myself when I moved over to them a couple of years back.

     

    I'll post back here later with a details about each slider I use and why etc for sharpening.


  17. I find that a problem with Lightroom or PS Allan. After using CaptureOne I noticed with was sorted out. LR is pretty rubbish actually. 

     

    Yeah, very seldom have any problems with foliage with C1. The NR and Sharpness controls are far better and that is the main cause of the problem.

     

    It's been 2 years since I migrated to Fuji, leaving Sony (nex7) and Canon (5dmkii) behind. I had a selection of L glass for the Canon but in all honesty, Fuji lenses are equal to and often better. Especially the 50-140, 10-24, 23mm, 56mm and.... well, its a long list. Apart from the 18mm... and I didn't get on wth the 18-135.

     

    As far as flash goes, I don't use TTL and as such, use Yongnuo 560III with their remote trigger that controls up to 6 groups of flashes. They are very cheap and have excellent build quality!

     

    I have an X100T which I love for just carrying around for when I need absolute silent shooting or high flash sync (up to 1/1000).

     

    The only dammed thing they aren't so good at is video.... and it looks like I may have to add a Panasonic G7 that is due out soon for the 4k video.


  18. Where is the purple fringe tool? I want that! I have some images taken with another system that has purple fringing.

    And yes, I noticed the edge degradation, too.

     

    Purple Fringing tool is directly under the Lens Correction tools. However, you can also use / find the Purple Fringing tool under layers. Set it to 100% and then use the paint brush to apply it to the affected areas.

     

    Layer control is only available in the Pro version, not the Express one. If you are using the Express version, you will just use the slider under the Lens Correction tools. I find it is very affective for Blue & Purple CA. For magenta CA, I create a layer that selects only that colour and set the saturation to zero and then use a brush to apply it to the problem area. This is easy enough to do but thankfully, very rarely required  :)


  19. Maybe I will pass on new lenses till the super zoom arrives, although I have been eyeing up a couple of cheaper Samyang lenses. :blink:

     

    Allan

     

    Them Samyang lenses are supposed to be rather good. Manual, but good. The only downside (an upside if they increase sensor size in the future) is that they are FF lenses but optimised for the X mount. 

     

    I'm out of the lens market now until that 100-400 arrives!

     

    Just as a side note for anyone using Capture One. You may want to create a preset that "Unticks" the CA adjustment that is automatically applied.

     

    When I was testing the 16-55, I found that not only does it not really work very well (as mentioned by others) but it actually adds CA to the image. As well as this, it also degrades fine detail. I was finding branches, grass and other fine detail taking on a glow/blurred edge to it and when I unticked the CA adjustment, the image looked sharper and lost that slight blur to the edges.

     

    It was happening a lot with the 16-55 but I have found it on other images taken with different lenses. As CA is not really a problem that crops up much with the primes and 2 new f/2.8 zooms, I've just switched it off and use the "Purple Fringe" tool in layers to paint out and CA found. It's normally only about a pixel wide and rarely shows unlike the mess that is left when that CA box is ticked  :D

    • Upvote 1

  20.  

    It won't be available for download until late June which is odd. 

     

    I am guessing they will await the launch of the XT-10. Even though this will be a simpler camera, I wouldn't be surprised if a few of the functions are results of xt-10 development.

    I am with Sony for the moment but really like the xt1 body. Fuji ir runing a test and buy campaign here. perhaps i should give a kit a go.

     

    the campaign  kits are xt1 with 18-55 2.8-4 or xti with 18-135... not sure the 18-125 would make me happy with corners?

     

     

    Apparently the FW is still being worked on, hence the delay. I've just seem rumoured specs of the X-T10 and it won't have the new zone focusing it would seem. If that is trure, then the release of the X-T10 would not affect the release of the Firmware. I think it's just a case that they are, "Still working on it" :D 

     

    I too hope that the eye detect also works on animals / birds etc. It would be really useful. That said, I'm sure I read that the face detect (Which would need to be on) only uses contrast detection and not the high speed PDAF!


  21. New firmware v4 has been announce.... links below for the release notes and a short video of what it all means. Very impressive! Looking forward to this one.

     

    Notes

     

    Video

     

    Details of the changes from the Notes Page

     

    1. New AF System

    (1) New AF system with Zone and Wide/Tracking modes for effortless capture of moving subjects

     

    The AF System complements the fast and accurate 49-single-point autofocus system with new Zone and Wide/Tracking modes, which use 77 autofocus points across a wider area to substantially improve the camera's ability to capture moving subjects.

     

    • The Zone mode allows users to choose a 3x3, 5x3 or 5x5 zone from the 77-point AF area. When combined with the AF-C continuous focusing mode, the camera continues tracking a subject at the center of the selected zone. The 3x3 and 5x3 zones at the center, in particular, offer extra-fast focusing with the use of the built-in phase detection pixels.
    pic_01.jpg
    • In the Wide/Tracking mode, the camera displays the area in focus, identified automatically out of the 77-point AF area (Wide in the AF-S mode) and tracks the focus area's subject across the entire 77-point AF area (Tracking in the AF-C mode). This makes it possible to maintain focus on a subject that moves vertically, horizontally, and back and forth.

    (2) Improvement of AF accuracy

     

    Single-point AF divides the focus area into smaller sections to more accurately determine the distance to the subject for even greater focusing accuracy. The built-in phase detection pixels have the detection range of 0.5EV, an improvement from the previous 2.5EV, delivering phase detection AF performance that enables fast focusing in low-light conditions and on low-contrast subjects.

    pic_02.jpg

    (3) Eye Detection AF

     

    The firmware update provides Fujifilm's Eye Detection AF, which automatically detects and focuses on human eyes. The function allows you to easily focus on the eyes even in difficult conditions, e.g. when shooting a portrait wide open to obtain a beautiful bokeh background.

    pic_03.jpg

    (4) Auto Macro mode

    (5) AF improvement in the Movie mode

     

    The firmware update introduces the Auto Macro function, which automatically switches the camera into the Macro mode while maintaining the conventional AF speed. You no longer have to press the Macro button to initiate a close-up shot. This update eliminates the Macro function assigned to the Macro Button, allowing you to assign a different function to the button.

     

    The optimized algorithm delivers a more natural and smooth AF action during movie recording.

    2. Other improvements

    (1) Improved Shutter Speed Dial operation

     

    When the Shutter Speed Dial is set to T and the Shutter Type to Mechanical + Electronic, you can use the command dial to set a full range of exposure times from 30-1/32000sec. Previously, this was limited to 30-2 seconds. This means you can change the shutter speeds across a broader range without having to change camera position. This is particularly useful when shooting in the portrait orientation with the Vertical Battery Grip VG-XT1 attached.

    (2) Exposure Compensation control in Manual.

     

    You can use the Exposure Compensation dial to make exposure adjustments while shooting in the Manual exposure mode with the ISO Auto setting.

    (3) Finer lines on the framing grid enhances visibility

     

    The lines on the framing grid, which you can choose to display in the Screen Set-Up menu, have been made finer making it easier to view the subject.

    (4) Name of Silent mode changed to avoid confusion

     

    The Silent Mode has been renamed to “SOUND & FLASH OFF”.

    • Upvote 2

  22. 1. A good photographer works off instinct as to what will sell.

    2. A good photographer also listens to the market place, clients and agencies etc and uses this information to develop point 1.

     

    Gut feel, instinct etc comes from experience and listening to what's going on around you. 

     

    The statement, "Good photographers don’t need to be told what customers want" could come from a politician.... i.e. it sounds good but doesn't really mean anything at all.... in fact, is complete BS. Without actually listening to what's going on around you and being aware of trends etc, you would not be aware of where to start or what is more likely to sell. 

     

    Points 1 & 2 help you establish what to put in front of the lens, you then use your own creativity to capture it. You should not need to be told how to do this, it comes from within.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.