i knew that............................Originally Posted by Janke
Duuhhh, "cable release"...???? What that? Duuuuhhh, Mongo think you foolin' him......This will always paste in the same position it was copied from. ( This of course only works if both images are the same size, and the camera wasn't moved... Ever heard of a cable release? They are electronic nowadays! $5 or so...)
So much for my brilliant discovery...
Oh well, I should have known. My memory is gone.
Cable release? That is soooo 90s! Wireless, baby, wireless!
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
Yep, I checked that out and there's a little accessory called an RC6 mentioned in the manual. Never thought to look for a remote control before. Even in my old film days, I never used one. Had one, used it once, but never bothered again.
But I will get one of these infra-red ones. A photographic store near me has them in stock.
Unfortunately, unlike in the Nordic Paradise of Finland, where digital equipment is given out in your change at the supermarkets, in Australia they cost AUD$33, not the $5 that Mister J paid for his.....
Just reading this thread. Anyone thought of asking ShaunP? He did a good one with a highway in one of his shorts for the contest. It was nicely done and the feeling was present.
That, and it was video (after a bit of After Effects help!) and there was portions that wind was visible on grass, which helped to sell the effect.
Basically, I'd shoot the video with the cars (for the sky & wind in the grass) and then I'd try to take a couple of stills (as you did) to "merge" a clean plate of the road. Then (provided you shoot the video on a tripod) I'd add the clean plate of the road over the video, using mask and feather option, to hide the cars while having an "animated" LIVE footage "behind". If you need to color correct then, use an adjustment layer to color all the portions equally. Then use the wiggler tool in AE to give a random handheld effect if you don't want it to look too static, which can also help to sell the effect. But a good framing (like in the photos you've posted) doesn't need to have such effect: they're so good to start with that they're amazing!
Good job! I'll have to try it for myself soon!
Thanks, Drapes. Actually, I've thought about doing exactly what you describe.
I did something like that with my old camera in SD, using a shot with a "lower third" containing long grass, and compositing a retouched still from a frame of the same footage in the upper two-thirds. It looked passable.
With the shots that I already have, it's too late to do that, as I'd never be able to get precisely the same angle again now. These shots have just been experiments, to see how effective the process can be. With these, I probably would just add some rising smoke, or maybe a bit of "destruction" to the street surface.
But yes, the next stage will be doing exactly what you described.
Next thing I'll do will probably be something similar to this! I'll post the results in here if you want?
Looks not so difficult to do as far as I can see!
No, it's not difficult at all. Just takes time and concentration, and it's a lot of fun!
The only part of the whole process that requires any real effort is standing for ages on a bridge or a street corner with an expensive camera, and knowing that everyone who drives past you is gaping at you! At the bridge location I had to stay there for about 45 minutes while tourists strolled by incessantly, turning to stare at me in the way tourists do. And every driver who came off the bridge gaped at me. Probably thought I was taking photos of them especially!
I was occasionally a bit worried that my presence might cause a few tail-end shunts!
I can see now! Nothing to worry about much here though.
I'll try to give it a try later next week, I'll have 2-3 days off. Looks like a nice project to experiment.
I look forward to seeing them, Drapes.
Well, that's what I actually meant...
I didn't buy mine in Frostland, I got a "generic" one* on eBay. Some in the below link, some are even less than $5 including shipping...
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_stpo...rt=nc&LH_BIN=1
* Not Canon branded, those are trademark rip-offs... mine is called "Shoot" !
My local big photographics store had the Canon one, the RC6, so I went with that. Available immediately, and without the anxious wait to see if you've been ripped off or not. I'm a bit paranoid about eBay, to tell the truth.I didn't buy mine in Frostland, I got a "generic" one* on eBay. Some in the below link, some are even less than $5 including shipping...
* Not Canon branded, those are trademark rip-offs... mine is called "Shoot" !
But all's well that ends well.
Now, the next thing I need is a Hoodman loupe. Although, they're as rare as hen's teeth here. And some people I've spoken to tell me that they used to stock them, but not any more. Apparently they got a lot of "returns" because they obsruct camera controls, and so on.
I'm going to make up a small box with two open ends, using styrene, weld-glued together, and maybe hung off the viewfinder via the hot shoe, somehow. I reckon all you need outdoors is something to block sunlight from four sides, and your head would serve to blocks the light from behind.
I'll post pics if it works. If it doesn't, I'll deny I ever mentioned it.....
I was too, until I started to use it. I've bought some 10 to 15 shipments (all of them small, under $40) of accessories for my T2i (filters, remote, interval timer, battery grip, step rings etc), and never has anything gone really wrong. Sometimes, shipment takes time, but if you don't expect to get it tomorrow, then no problem. Everything always arrived within 3 weeks, usually 2.
Once, a supplier sent the wrong "focus confirm chip", but after getting my complaint, he re-shipped the right one, letting me keep the wrong one - which I found use for...
I bought a loupe for $18, the "V2" model, with 2.5x enlargement. It works really well, but doesn't have an adjustable eyepiece, so if your eyes can't focus anymore (like mine), then you may need to add an additional diopter (from an optician) if you want to use it without glasses...
I suppose they can't all be scam artists, eh!
I would definitely need a diopter. With my eyesight I can't get a really sharp image through the 550D's eyepiece, no matter how far I wind the little diopter. Tried a couple of stronger diopter adapters for the eyepiece but none did the trick. And they didn't have any others in stock. So I gave up on it and I just use the LCD viewfinder all the time.
Well, I have to keep my glasses on when looking into the 550D's viewfinder. But I've been used to glasses since age 7...
I think you could try a V2 loupe - at $18 or even less, including shipping, you won't lose much if it doesn't work for you. And, it most probably will, if you keep your reading glasses on... The rubber eyecup is a boon outside, in bright light.
Here's a link: http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=...rom=R40&_clu=2
I usually check the percentage and the negative feedbacks of the seller, and disregard complaints from people who haven't waited even a week for their order to arrive...
Well, at that price I guess it's not too much of a risk, is it.
One question; the specs say "magnetic mount". I thought those things were never actually fixed to the camera, but were brought up and placed against the LCD just to check the frame.
It would be great if they actually attached to the screen, though. Is that how they're used, J?
Last edited by Jim E; 2012 April 12th at 06:36.
If you look closely at some of the pics on eBay, you can see a square steel frame with round corners. This is attached to the camera (self-adhesive tape on the frame), and the loupe just snaps on to it, the magnets in the loupe holds it tightly enough for normal handling.
The frame is pretty unobtrusive, and is intended to be left in place - I have no problems with it.
At that price, I can definitely recommend one... if no good, you can get a focusable one for $250 or so...
Yes, I noticed that frame but I thought it was a spare flange/gasket for where the loupe meets the LCD.... should have read the whole ad.If you look closely at some of the pics on eBay, you can see a square steel frame with round corners. This is attached to the camera (self-adhesive tape on the frame), and the loupe just snaps on to it, the magnets in the loupe holds it tightly enough for normal handling.
The frame is pretty unobtrusive, and is intended to be left in place - I have no problems with it.
At that price, I can definitely recommend one... if no good, you can get a focusable one for $250 or so...
I will try one of those. If it doesn't work for my eyes, I can always give it to one of my mates who owns a similar camera as mine.
The DIY "box" that I had in mind to make was going to be attached to the LCD by very thin strips of adhesive velcro. As long as I could remove the strip from the camera if I ever needed to, without removing the black finish.
Last edited by Jim E; 2012 April 12th at 19:44.
Okay. Just ordered one. See how much influence you have, Mister J?
Now, it should arrive in just a couple of days, right? Won't take, like, a whole week, will it? 'Cause I can't wait that long!!
It works the same as you velcro idea, but with magnet. I have one (LCDVF 3/2) that Lunchbox put with the T2i package when I bought it and it's just great. Absolutely necessary when shooting outdoor. But it's basically a loupe holding on an LCD screen, which I would have done myself instead of paying the price they sell it (this version).
I just checked yours out on youtube and that looks pretty cool. Of course, I assume it magnifies the LCD a bit more than the one I'm buying. But really, the main thing is to block out sunlight. With my glasses I can already focus with the LCD perfectly well indoors, so all I need is the shade, really.
With the current value of the Aus dollar, mine cost $16.
I hope all goes well for you. (Past performance is not a guarantee for future performance.
I doubt that you will be able to remove the adhesive frame without bending it, causing it not to stick very well on the next camera...
For this reason, take care when originally positioning it on your camera! (I suggest you position the "removal tab" on the left side, otherwise it will partly cover a button...)
Let us know what your experiences are!
Indeed, Captain, that would not be logical.I hope all goes well for you. (Past performance is not a guarantee for future performance.
Yes, I saw the handy hints from the Seller. Affixing the frame certainly seems to be an operation not to be rushed! I noticed that the tab would have to go on the left hand side. It'll be a job for a steady hand, and some patience.I doubt that you will be able to remove the adhesive frame without bending it, causing it not to stick very well on the next camera...
For this reason, take care when originally positioning it on your camera! (I suggest you position the "removal tab" on the left side, otherwise it will partly cover a button...)
Let us know what your experiences are!
But if I do have to give it away, I expect the new owner could attach it to his camera using my velcro idea. I wouldn't even try to remove the frame.
I'll let you know how I go, Mister J.
And now, for your delectation and amusement, some more empty streets in Brisbane.
In the last one, called "springhill", I also had to resort to a little bit of cloning, (after I had removed all the other traffic), because there were three cars parked at the bottom of the hill for the entire shoot.
storeyB.JPGalex.JPGCreekRd.JPGspringhill.JPG
Thanks, Drapes. I'm pleased with them. Now, all they need is some cool grading and dramatic sky and smoke etc etc..
They're actually more "Corel Photo-paint"ed than Photoshopped. But I did resort to my antique Photoshop for the little bit of cloning in #4, because I'm more familiar with Phototshop's clone tool.
Here's a challenge: See if you can tell where the parked cars used to be, in #4.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote