Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 61 of 61

Thread: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

  1. #51
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Update, completed my first paying job with the Multi-Shot ...

    Did some GM wheels which I do 5 or 6 times a year. Previously did them with the H3D-II/39 ... this time I used single shot for all the pops to refine the lighting, and once I got the lighting exact used the 4 shot for the final images. This keeps the number of 4 shots to a minimum.

    The final was much more detailed and required less of the minor retouching I used to do to some details like the logo in the center cap, etc.. Saved lots of time compared to previous similar shoots. I did notice that you MUST REALLY blow off anything you shoot with this MS back because any dust is rendered sharply.

    Sorry, I can't show any images as the products are all advanced models for 2011 and 2012 vehicles, and I am working under a non-disclose agreement.

    I also found out that I don't necessarily need an automatic shutter to use the Rollie Xact2 and the Digitar lenses. The software allows you to set any delay you want between shots ... which on a limited basis means I could set enough delay to manually cock the lens and allow the camera to settle down between each of the 4 shots. Since I do not need to use the Rollie very often, especially after getting the HTS/1.5, I doubt I'll need to upgrade the shutter system. If I were doing volume production, yes ... but for my limited applications ... no.

    -Marc

  2. #52
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Marc:
    nice to hear this is working for you who serves as an inspiration.

    I do have a general maybe historical question for discussion, however. it seems like there is always a perceived need to improve quality, more res, multi-shot, MF, live-view and fast preview, etc. but by comparison, what did the art director's settle for in the old days when you were shooting 4x5 chromes, polaroid proofs and waiting for the chromes from the lab?

    at what point has digital achieved that quality, can anyone tell the difference, do they care, etc. clearly dig is way more convenient and probably more economical, but how far does it have to go?

  3. #53
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Part of the issue is in the old days. The wait for the trannies coming back 2 days later or even 1 day later was the set was struck, everything packed up and more important the AD forgot what it it looked like. So accepting what came in was it is what it is . Digital adds issues to this scenario. You don't walk away everything gets viewed at 100 percent and if it is not right you work it till it is right than you strike the set. So now different environment and the tables turned . Now Guy's philosophy screw the client on this it does not matter crap. Sure I will do what the client asks but I am shooting for me also and I want to deliver the best I can regardless if they are using it in a 4 x 4 inch ad or not. I do not buy into it is good enough for there purpose BS. That's never been or will never be my style from this old man. I want to produce the highest quality images period be it they use it or not. I have been screwed , burned and chastised for something delivered blown up way beyond it's original intended purpose. Im out to cover my butt. If 40 mpx back is not going to do it than i got a problem. I think not. LOL

    Bottom line thinking these days is its about what I want to deliver to my clients. End of day i know what they need better than they do almost every time.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  4. #54
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Quote Originally Posted by jlm View Post
    Marc:
    nice to hear this is working for you who serves as an inspiration.

    I do have a general maybe historical question for discussion, however. it seems like there is always a perceived need to improve quality, more res, multi-shot, MF, live-view and fast preview, etc. but by comparison, what did the art director's settle for in the old days when you were shooting 4x5 chromes, polaroid proofs and waiting for the chromes from the lab?

    at what point has digital achieved that quality, can anyone tell the difference, do they care, etc. clearly dig is way more convenient and probably more economical, but how far does it have to go?
    To add to Guys spot on reply:

    Not only was the set struck, but if there was a reshoot, all the models had to be paid again ... and the PAs, and any rentals (gear or studio), and rental props ... all paid for again. Half the time now, the client walks with the images ... if it's a shoot without a client on-set, the shots can be FTPed to them for approval before striking the set and releasing the models. (Not to mention the cost of shooting 4X5 Polaroids for every set up).

    However, the real issue is that all media is now digital ... so even IF you shot film it has to be scanned. Good commercial scans can be $50 or $70, on top of film and processing. Do a catalog with 100 shots and that's an extra $5,000. to $7,000. line expense added just to shoot film. Then you wait for the processing ... then wait some more for the scans before the images can be retouched. Most Clients not only won't pay for scans anymore, they won't wait that long.

    Instead of paying a scanning service, we charge a digital capture fee (like a rental charge), and if you own your own MFD kit, that fee goes into your pocket rather than to the scanning service like before. $300. to $500 fee per day digital capture fee is chump change compared to scanning costs ... so, do 100 jobs over 2 or so years, added to the depreciation write offs, and the MFD system is paid for clear.

    Until the more recent economic downturn, I never paid a dime for the MFD kit out of my own pocket ... the fees eventually paid for it before I upgraded. Which is why, this time, I bought a used "upgrade" unit rather than go new. Gotta keep it real and in balance based on projected work and cash flow. Nothing personal, just business

    -Marc

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Update, completed my first paying job with the Multi-Shot ...
    The final was much more detailed and required less of the minor retouching I used to do to some details like the logo in the center cap, etc.. Saved lots of time compared to previous similar shoots.
    -Marc

    Especially the part of saving on minor retouching is a big saving. Over a couple of hundred images this is money in the pocket as well.

    My clients also love the ability to crop out any detail they like from anyplace in the image they see fit.

    I don't need to make additional captures for details in most cases

    Another thing your clients or their studio will like you for is when something needs to be set free from its background. This is a total breeze with the lovely transitions that MS provides.

  6. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    156
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Quote Originally Posted by Dustbak View Post
    .......

    Another thing your clients or their studio will like you for is when something needs to be set free from its background. This is a total breeze with the lovely transitions that MS provides.
    May I ask why?
    Are you setting the lightning in a different way with MS backs?
    Can you clear the background more effectively in camera, or is this a matter of easier post?

  7. #57
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Quote Originally Posted by T.Karma View Post
    May I ask why?
    Are you setting the lightning in a different way with MS backs?
    Can you clear the background more effectively in camera, or is this a matter of easier post?

    Smoother rendering (less stair-stepping) of edge detail, especially compared to same or lower resolution single shot. The degree of this varies with different capture devices.


    Steve Hendrix
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar Authorized Reseller

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Exactly, also less color contamination as with single shot which of course can be seen as smoother rendering as well.

    It is easier to select the edges. Much easier...(in post work naturally).

  9. #59
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    interesting comments. seems like the most valued improvements as MFDigital evolves are those that lead to less post processing and MS gives you more of that compared to single shot

  10. #60
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Quote Originally Posted by jlm View Post
    interesting comments. seems like the most valued improvements as MFDigital evolves are those that lead to less post processing and MS gives you more of that compared to single shot
    Yes, when comparing the same meg back to another with multi-Shot. The Wheel job was a good example of this time savings as I also had to knock out the backgrounds to pure white for the catalog use. Selecting the edges at 200% was much easier and much cleaner than it was with similar shoots previously ... cut the outlining time in half.

    What I do not know is how the super high meg backs like a 60 does for this type work ... or even a 40 that has the same sized pixels ... I've never used one yet for shooting wheels. My bet is that they are also better for this type of post work. Next time I will shoot the job with my 40 also just to see. I didn't have time to screw around with this job, they release the wheels to me for a very limited amount of time.

    -Marc

  11. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    156
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Single Shot verses Multi-Shot: Test

    Thank you for the answers.
    Anyone tried already the new selection tool of CS5 in this context? I am wondering if the difference for edge separation will be still the same between single and multishot. For sure the better edge definition will be still there, but does it still have effect on the speed of separation from background?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •