Canon EOS-1D Mark III autofocus problems...

[Shepherd Wong]

Canon EOS 1 RS
AF SLRs all use passive AF: contrast comparison. Basically a computer analyzing a split image prism with a sensor underneath.

Actually they use Phase detection, not contrast comparison.

[Tippster]

As you have already gleaned from my posts in this forum, I'm an absolute Strobe and AF JONG. We had photo voltaic slaves and radio slaves in my Studio classes for our strobes, but I never use flash in any non-standard way these days. In fact I have none for my film cameras - the battery corroded the terminals in my Sigma flash that I had for my old Nikon setup. Guess I prefer natural light....

[Tippster]

IMOP most newspaper photogs are hacks. Sure there are a few good ones, but generally speaking most newspapers A, can't afford great photogs, and B, the type of photography generaly used in newspapers is just plain old ducumentation...

You know, I've been chewing on this for a day and decided I have to say something.

If it was so easy, Gunder, then even some schmuck who works in a camera Shop in the PNW could do it. The fact is it's a shitload harder than it looks. Yes, the best guys end up working for an Agency or big newsmag/paper, but that's probably the top 5% of the guys out there trying their damndest, like you, to make a living JUST TAKING PICTURES, something that only one person on this board, AFAIK, does -- and she doesn't shoot skiing.

Don't believe me that it's hard to shoot breaking news? Imagine this scenario for what you enjoy shooting:

You are given a location
You have 15 minutes (tops) to get there
You don't always know who you're shooting or what they look like
You don't know exactly where they're going to be
You might have people trying to beat the fuck out of you
The cops really don't want you there
You have one shot to take a picture. No do-overs.

Oh - your picture better not be merely a snapshot, there wil be 20 of those. It needs to tell its own story... like the Paris Hilton crying in the back of the cop car pic. Ut got some shit - from people who don't understand - about that shot, especially since it was taken on the Anniversary of his Pulitzer winning shot from Vietnam. Fact remains that the picture captured the essence of the story in one frame. Not one of the other 30 hotogs there got anything close to that, and it ran everywhere.

The AP was pleased, I'm sure.

But it was merely documenting.

[truth]

Don't believe me that it's hard to shoot breaking news? Imagine this scenario for what you enjoy shooting:

You are given a location
You have 15 minutes (tops) to get there
You don't always know who you're shooting or what they look like
You don't know exactly where they're going to be
You might have people trying to beat the fuck out of you
The cops really don't want you there
You have one shot to take a picture. No do-overs.

Oh - your picture better not be merely a snapshot, there wil be 20 of those. It needs to tell its own story... like the Paris Hilton crying in the back of the cop car pic. Ut got some shit from people who don't understand about that shot, especially since it was taken on the Anniversary of his Pulitzer winning shot from Vietnam. Fact remains that the picture captured the essence of the story in one frame. Not one of the other 30 hotogs there got anything close to that, and it ran everywhere.

The AP was pleased, I'm sure.

But it was merely documenting.

I agree with ya tip, though the vast majority of the images run in papers are total crap.

[Gunder]

[QUOTE=Tippster;1323270]You know, I've been chewing on this for a day and decided I have to say something.

If it was so easy, Gunder, then even some schmuck who works in a camera Shop in the PNW could do it. The fact is it's a shitload harder than it looks. Yes, the best guys end up working for an Agency or big newsmag/paper, but that's probably the top 5% of the guys out there trying their damndest, like you, to make a living JUST TAKING PICTURES, something that not one person on this board, AFAIK, does.
QUOTE]

Actually I made $45K last year just off of licensing my pics....

The camera shop gig is now somthing that I judt do in the summer mostly to A, kill time and because believe it or not I actually like helping peeps. Plus I'm trying to purchase a house, and its a hell of a lot easier to get a decent loan when you can show consistant income from the same source.

"You are given a location
You have 15 minutes (tops) to get there
You don't always know who you're shooting or what they look like
You don't know exactly where they're going to be
You might have people trying to beat the fuck out of you
The cops really don't want you there
You have one shot to take a picture. No do-overs."

Fuck, REALLY?????

Try doing the same shooting ski pics...... trust me its 100 times more difficult for obvious reasons.

[cj001f]

A whole $45k? You are a big shot. Everybody move the fuck over.


Most of even excellent photographers images are mediocre. Ever looked at the lesser images of Ansel Adams or Galen Rowell.

[Gunder]

A whole $45k? You are a big shot. Everybody move the fuck over.
.

When you can do that from basically only working 6 months a year, while skiing, than speak.

Trust me its not easy making any $$$ off of actions sports it's even more difficult to try and make a decent leiving, just ask midget.

[anotherVTskibum]

I agree with ya tip, though the vast majority of the images run in papers are total crap.

...which may not always be the fault of the photographers, as they're generally not the ones who pick which photos run. A better photo may get sidelined because the lesser photo makes the subject look meaner or smarter or richer, which is the editorial slant the paper is using, or because there's an event sponsor logo in the better photo that the paper doesn't want to show, or simply because the editor(s) prefer the other photo. And then they get printed in a low-quality reproduction setting, where colors and contrast may or may not match what the photographer expects. Or the photo may have been submitted with the expectation of being printed color and the B&W conversion just doesn't convey the same things.

[Tippster]

Fuck, REALLY?????

Try doing the same shooting ski pics...... trust me its 100 times more difficult for obvious reasons.

"Let's go up and do it again."
"OK"

That doesn't happen in my world. You either got the shot and you get paid, or you didn't and hope to God you will get it tomorrow.

I'm not slagging on what you do. At all. I am standing up for a profession I know quite a bit about. Painting every News Photog with a local paper Dog Park Story brush is a bit ignorant - that is my point. It's like saying Ski photography isn't so hard - look at all the folks with TRs in this forum.

[dipstik]

I'm gonna have to side with Tippster on this one.

I've been into news photography for about a year now, the last 2 months interning full time at a legit mid-size paper, and I have learned quite a bit...

The difference between the type of photography GG is into and what news photogs are into are totally different animals. GG's job is to produce high quality, artistic work. The quality of the image is the most important thing.

For news photos, quality is a secondary issue. Its about capturing a moment, and telling a story with a single image, all under enormous time constraints, and multiple jobs per day. I bet ZERO of the photos you see in Powder were organized, shot, processed, and mailed off to the magazine within the same working day.

Both types of photography are respectable, and both are difficult.


That being said, there is a reason news photographers win pulitzer prizes.

[summit]

I agree with dipstick they are both difficult but very different animals. The demands on the output of each is so different they are hard to compare. They are not competing disciplines any more than aerial photography is to studio still life.

Sometimes you can redo a ski photo, sometimes you cannot. Usually the line or the landing is douched or a redo is too dangerous. Again, it isn't worth comparing to photojournalism.

Tippster has mentioned the many real difficulties of PJs. There are many for ski photography. I think the greatest difficulty is that the mountain dictates, usually quite narrowly, where you (the photog) are allowed to be.

PS: I think underwater photography is the hardest type of photography out there (short of being a war photographer)

[bklyn]

...make a living JUST TAKING PICTURES, something that not one person on this board, AFAIK, does.

Ahem... (raises hand).
Although I am also the marketing/PR rep, accountant, assistant, bag carrier...

[midget]

"Let's go up and do it again."
"OK"

That doesn't happen in my world. You either got the shot and you get paid, or you didn't and hope to God you will get it tomorrow.

I'm not slagging on what you do. At all. I am standing up for a profession I know quite a bit about. Painting every News Photog with a local paper Dog Park Story brush is a bit ignorant - that is my point. It's like saying Ski photography isn't so hard - look at all the folks with TRs in this forum.

Hey Jamie, go jump off that 180 foot cliff again and land on your head again ok?

No, a good portion of the news stuff that is seen everywhere from the AP/other news wires is really good stuff. However, that is done by a small portion of the photography community, at the national level. The good portion of the crap that is seen is the regular local crap done at the local and regional level. Same with any industry.

[Tippster]

Ahem... (raises hand).
Although I am also the marketing/PR rep, accountant, assistant, bag carrier...

I had gone back and edited that part, m'lady.

[bklyn]

I had gone back and edited that part, m'lady.

oops...