• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Photography

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
Thanks to Lord Gagger I've a new interest in Photography. He encouraged me to apply for accreditation with the Reds and I borrowed a camera and gave it a bloody good go. I've done most of the Reds home games this year and the two lions tour matches in Brisbane and a couple of premier rugby games. And I love it!

Now the season is drawing to an end of started looking for other things to photograph and I've posted a few on Facebook etc. But I noticed the 2nd last photo I posted had had all it's metadata removed. Now I'm not a professional but I was still pissed off about it so today I watermarked a picture I put up.

Am I being a bit precious? I think I should be allowed to maintain ownership of my Photos no matter where I post them but I'm interested in other photographers points of view.
 

boyo

Mark Ella (57)
I'm not a professional photographer, and I don't know the rules about photographs on Facebook.

No, I don't think that you are being precious. They are your photographs.

EDITED.
 

2bluesfan

Nev Cottrell (35)
I'm not a professional photographer, and I don't the rules about photographs on Facebook.

No, I don't think that you are being precious. They are your photographs.
Actually, I'm not sure that they are still "your photographs" once you publish them on Facebook but I'm sure that someone who can be bothered to read the current T&Cs will rush on to inform us.

I guess you have a choice - publish on a site such as Facebook and be subject to their rules, or publish on a site you control. The latter is not all that expensive really. The choice can be, I think, quite a simple one depending on each individual's motivations for publishing their photos.
 

Moses

Simon Poidevin (60)
Staff member

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
Sorry Moses I've been to all those places and I should have put the links up and saved you the trouble of searching.
  1. Sharing Your Content and Information

    You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy and application settings. In addition:
    1. For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.
    2. When you delete IP content, it is deleted in a manner similar to emptying the recycle bin on a computer. However, you understand that removed content may persist in backup copies for a reasonable period of time (but will not be available to others).
    3. When you use an application, the application may ask for your permission to access your content and information as well as content and information that others have shared with you. We require applications to respect your privacy, and your agreement with that application will control how the application can use, store, and transfer that content and information. (To learn more about Platform, including how you can control what information other people may share with applications, read our Data Use Policy and Platform Page.)
    4. When you publish content or information using the Public setting, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture).
    5. We always appreciate your feedback or other suggestions about Facebook, but you understand that we may use them without any obligation to compensate you for them (just as you have no obligation to offer them).
 

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
Okay I'll put something up for Critique. Tell me what you think?
SSM_4195.jpg
 

Scoey

Tony Shaw (54)
Nice Sully! I will preface my 'critique' by saying that I am not a photographer but I like taking photo's. ;)

There are so many points that that you could've used as the centre of your focus in that shot. Many people probably would've picked the centre of the flower or the water droplets and then it would've been. "just another photo".

I really like where you have focused. It creates a certain interest (or did for me at least) that leads me to appreciate aspects of the shot that I would've perhaps otherwise ignored. The depth of field is just great enough that it drew my eye from the top of the flower to the bottom again over and over to really appreciate the effect of the focus and how it leads you to the centre, but then pulls you back away at the last moment.

Can I ask what gear you used for the shot? The last time I took photo takery even remotely serious I had an SLR that used film. I am almost at the point of taking the plunge in to the DSLR world and having a go again. The thought of getting to photograph the Reds etc would be a sweet sweet deal!
 

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
Wow Scoey that's a lot more than I expected! Thank you.
I used a Nikon D7100 with a Sigma 70-200 F2.8 lens at 200 mm. Which accounts for the focus and depth of field stuff. Massive great lens at about 2 metres.
btw. I didn't mess with the colurs at all except to pull back on the white a bit. It really is blindingly white in real life.
 

Scoey

Tony Shaw (54)
No worries! Take it with a grain of salt as I don't really know a lot, just commenting on what I liked. ;)

I was looking at the D7100 but money is tight and if I can't get my dollar to stretch that far I may go with a Canon 60D. My old SLR was a Canon so they are familiar but by the looks of things these days, the Nikon's and Canon's would be both good options.
I haven't looked at that lens in particular but one that has caught my eye is a Tamron 18-270 f3.5-6.3 PZD. For the cash it seems like a really solid lens and the piezzo drive AF is so fast and quiet. I used to use some Sigma lenses back in the day and really liked them. Never used Tamron but from what I've read they are not too bad.

Having never really had much to do with digital photography I've never been able to play with colours at all. That's an element that could really take taking photo's to a new level.

EDIT: Just Googled your lens (hmmm that sounds weird) and that is a serious bit of kit! I may have to settle for my little ol' Tamron for now!
 

2bluesfan

Nev Cottrell (35)
Nice Sully! I will preface my 'critique' by saying that I am not a photographer but I like taking photo's. ;)

There are so many points that that you could've used as the centre of your focus in that shot. Many people probably would've picked the centre of the flower or the water droplets and then it would've been. "just another photo".

I really like where you have focused. It creates a certain interest (or did for me at least) that leads me to appreciate aspects of the shot that I would've perhaps otherwise ignored. The depth of field is just great enough that it drew my eye from the top of the flower to the bottom again over and over to really appreciate the effect of the focus and how it leads you to the centre, but then pulls you back away at the last moment.

Can I ask what gear you used for the shot? The last time I took photo takery even remotely serious I had an SLR that used film. I am almost at the point of taking the plunge in to the DSLR world and having a go again. The thought of getting to photograph the Reds etc would be a sweet sweet deal!
Great critique Scoey.
Personally I think the focus is a little soft but this is probably intentional and a matter of personal preference. And I probably would have (simplistically) tried to get a greater depth of field, but flowers are not my usual targets!

It's my rugby lens.
How do you find it for rugby? I'm a Canon guy - I use a 70-300 L series on a 7D. I think a shorter lens would require discipline I don't possess!

For anyone particularly bored you can see some of my rugby photos on the Two Blues site Some of these were take by my better half. I've submitted this to the Samsung ARU competition but I suspect it will be lost amongst a sea of great photos.
 

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
The 7100 is a cropped sensor so the 70-200 stretches out to about 100-300 but keeps its F2.8 aperture.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
 

2bluesfan

Nev Cottrell (35)
The 7100 is a cropped sensor so the 70-200 stretches out to about 100-300 but keeps its F2.8 aperture.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Love the 2.8, wouldn't mind that myself :) I've heard good things about the 7100 but I haven't played with one. The spec sheet is impressive and the Nikons are well regarded in terms of noise.
 

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
that's amazing cyclo!

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 4 Beta
 

boyo

Mark Ella (57)
Sully, have you seen this?

ARU email
Your chance to be sideline as an official photographer at the Bledisloe in Sydney
Are you a keen Rugby photographer who dreams of being sideline shooting a Bledisloe Cup match? Then you’ll want to be part of this! The Samsung Photographic competition is looking for your photos that capture the essence of Rugby, on and off the field. Send us your classic moments of Rugby from any aspect of the game, whether it be the team, in the crowd or at the local Club Rugby sausage sizzle. Upload your photos now for your chance to win this experience of a lifetime.
 

doleq

Allen Oxlade (6)
Finally got an email this evening from the camera store telling me my sigma 2.8 70-200 is ready to be picked up. Sony body, so have been waiting for eight weeks to get my mitts on it. Will be taking it straight out to the rugby tomorrow. Looking forward to being able to stand behind the try line rather than on the sideline.
 

Scoey

Tony Shaw (54)
Just made my purchase! I bought the Canon EOS 60D. Waiting for the battery to charge so I can play. Waiting..... waiting..... ;)

Scored a very good deal I thought. Single lens kit (18-55mm) from Aus shop front with Local warranty for cheaper than I could buy a body only out of Hong Kong!
 

I like to watch

David Codey (61)
The 7100 is a cropped sensor so the 70-200 stretches out to about 100-300 but keeps its F2.8 aperture.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

That's impressive!
what sort of money are these worth?
I've only got the canon f4 70 -200, I like it bought because it's an L series.
but I am severely frustrated about it's performance late afternoon in winter.
edit: it's only f4 @ 70mm, at 200mm it's out to at least 5.6
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top