Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 44

Thread: tcs still as jialat as ever...

  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sehsuan
    no doubt that it isn't very nice, but hopefully the photog learns more than take mugshots for candidates. there's no need for studio strobes, but surely there must be some way to make the ladies appear better, right? only one or two of the candidates managed to have their picture taken in a pose, kind of pity the rest were not too flattering for them.

    hmmm myab you can care with us how would u do it instead since wat u have been saying here seem like you can do a veri gd job even without studio strobes.

    I would like to learn from u

  2. #22

    Default

    Then sehsuan, perhaps you'd like to offer some advice via email to Mediacorp? Or perhaps even volunteering your service?

    I don't really see what you're trying to prove here, especially with that haughty tone you've chose to adopt. That you're better than some staff who have no training in photography fundamentals? Doesn't seem like anything to be proud of, try comparing yourself to one of the greats before acting like a know-it-all (again).

    Please remember what Wolfgang has said, this isn't a place for you to masterbate your ego.

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reno77
    I still call them SBC.
    What? SBC? What's that? Si Bei Cham?

    Nah, I remember them as RTS...

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PixMan
    What? SBC? What's that? Si Bei Cham?
    ..........

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    I agree that the Sample Picture given was really a bit too jialat.

  6. #26
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,601

    Default

    if you look at the shots of the company for their regular "stars", most are distinct studio shots. but for their website, most of their coverage photos are pretty lacklustre - two vastly varying standards. they are just really, shoot-for-the-sake-of-shooting shot. as on other threads i've posted before, i admit that i can't shoot portraits to save myself, but surely the person shooting should have been able to do something more to defuse the possible nervous situation of the candidates, by asking them to smile at least for the picture. what i do think may help is not to use the square-on "mugshot" framing, that's all i can see. at least if there's a little turning of the torso to either side, that may compliment the candidates.

    jeffgoh, please do not add your intuition or your set of deducive skills until you have read me word for word and digested all of them properly. YSLee has cautioned me a few times about wrongly inferring other people's words, and this time i believe i have to remind you of it as well. unfortunately, i don't foresee myself using studio strobes at any point in the future. curiously, off-topic, how come you're posting to get a canon? i was starting to have some build-up of faith in the nikon metering system of late, because of the d2h...

    YSLee, i wouldn't mind emailing the publicity/website people from mediacorp, but i posted this thread in "kopitiam" because it's likely to be banal banter, of which i started off in the first post, anyway. my words may be high-handed and unfair, but not haughty - at least, that's the last thing on my mind i would want to accomplish. the main thing why i posted this topic is because i thought the standards of photography for their site really varies a lot.
    Last edited by sehsuan; 12th September 2003 at 06:05 PM.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    beebox
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    treat people the way u want to be treated.
    same principle for everything else.

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sehsuan
    jeffgoh, please do not add your intuition or your set of deducive skills until you have read me word for word and digested all of them properly. YSLee has cautioned me a few times about wrongly inferring other people's words, and this time i believe i have to remind you of it as well. unfortunately, i don't foresee myself using studio strobes at any point in the future. curiously, off-topic, how come you're posting to get a canon? i was starting to have some build-up of faith in the nikon metering system of late, because of the d2h...
    Then again then wat the point of u commenting here abt the shots?? Are you able to do a better job then?? sounds to me tat you can and if yes wat wrong with wat i post abt learning from you?? i think u have 4got wat i told you b4 oso "think before you talk". i just gone into your gallery to see your recent works and to see 4 myself if you have improve and having seen your lastest bike shots. wat i would say you have not understand or learn anything from any1 here apart from thinking tat you are good. Pls this is not a place to masterbate your ego and it doesnt matter wat cam you have if you fundementals suck it still suck equipment is secondary. go take a look at your shots you posted for sales to the biking communtity AKA SACA. Do you expect to sell a OOF shot and pass it off to your client as a decent photo?? As a photographer do you think you have done justice to your clients? you could cheat them by thinking it is gd but can you fool yourself just so simple.

    My point is if you cant produce or relate better then y bother to bring it up?? and if u are able to make so much comments on their shots then you should be able to share with others and give sound advises when other ask if not wats the point??

  9. #29

    Default

    Oh really, doesn't seem to be the case. Let's take a look at your first post:

    hotos of candidates from the ford dont-know-what supermodel thing, the pictures are soooo unflattering!

    worse still... most of the candidates' "portraits" have a dose of red eye... urks!

    really still like the last time i mentioned their inhouse events photographer ought to get shot.... sigh.
    Nothing about commenting about the varying standards of photographs on the site, is there? It's more like a very haughty criticism on a situation you have NO idea of. Perhaps they were taken by the staff? Maybe with a cheap digital P&S? Budget, deadlines, lack of personnel all can be part of the problem, and not the photographer. It might have been unprofessional of Mediacorp, but certainly the person behind the camera doesn't need to be condemmed like this?

    And if you want to shoot their photographer, perhaps you should take a look at your own blurry shots from the recent SACA road race.

  10. #30
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffgoh
    *snip*

    go take a look at your shots you posted for sales to the biking communtity AKA SACA. Do you expect to sell a OOF shot and pass it off to your client as a decent photo?? As a photographer do you think you have done justice to your clients? you could cheat them by thinking it is gd but can you fool yourself just so simple.

    *snip*
    apologies. SACA is a NSA (National Sporting Association), they do NOT buy shots from me. if i put it in another way, i am working in a related line myself, so it's better still that i help them out as much as i can, instead of being there once and not appearing anymore. that's the enjoyment i derive from assisting the organization. free-and-easy shooting, plenty of action, what's there not to like? in fact, if they want any of the shots, assuming it catches their eye, i will provide it free to them. that's our standing agreement.

    as to why i put all the OOF shots etc on my site, it is because i believe most athletes would want to catch a glimpse of themselves in the heat of the action, no matter how blurred, OOF it is/are. but before that, most of the OOF shots, i have already removed them in the first place. most are just motion blurred, because i have a liking for panning shots. perhaps you do not see the point there. also, if you look at my site thoroughly, i do encourage the riders to freely download the larger versions of the pictures, which are dimensionally limited to 500 pixels for personal usage. why do i do that? because not everyone wants to pay for OOF shots. please make a distinction of being a camera equipment/technique guru and miss out the action, which is what majority of people would like, myself included. for all those people who have ordered prints from me, i do look at the photos individually, and do some touch-up/editing so that i can bring out a certain feel from it, and i personally correspond with them and tell them if the photo shouldn't be printed at what size etc. this is stated clearly in my "prints faq" section.

    as for severely motion-blurred shots due to bad panning, i was given a very useful pointer by a very experienced photographer using the Nikon system, that a motion-blurred picture may not be bad after all, because it's up to individual tastes. if it's the last section of the photos (aka Open category) you are mentioning, i have to mention that it was my first time (and a great favour) of a fellow CS'er who lent me his 70-200 f/2.8 - i was more excited about having the view through it than anything else, so pardon me for the same framing for every shot.

    by the way, please do not infer so much about what you don't know and make a fool of yourself. and anyway, since i've responded to your query, how about my query of you posting for a canon?

    YSLee, i do apologize for the lack of tact from my first post. indeed, what you have just mentioned, i have failed to think of the various possible reasons for being so, thanks for suggesting them and helping to make me aware of them
    Last edited by sehsuan; 12th September 2003 at 06:50 PM.

  11. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sehsuan
    as to why i put all the OOF shots etc on my site, it is because i believe most athletes would want to catch a glimpse of themselves in the heat of the action, no matter how blurred, OOF it is/are. but before that, most of the OOF shots, i have already removed them in the first place. most are just motion blurred, because i have a liking for panning shots. perhaps you do not see the point there. also, if you look at my site thoroughly, i do encourage the riders to freely download the larger versions of the pictures, which are dimensionally limited to 500 pixels for personal usage. why do i do that? because not everyone wants to pay for OOF shots. please make a distinction of being a camera equipment/technique guru and miss out the action, which is what majority of people would like, myself included. for all those people who have ordered prints from me, i do look at the photos individually, and do some touch-up/editing so that i can bring out a certain feel from it, and i personally correspond with them and tell them if the photo shouldn't be printed at what size etc. this is stated clearly in my "prints faq" section.

    please do not infer so much about what you don't know and make a fool of yourself. and anyway, since i've responded to your query, how about my query of you posting for a canon?
    great i applaude your style and wish you all the best in getting recongised for your style of photography. as like wat you have said those are just motion blur not OOF i rest my case. My bad.

    1st and foremost i mention biking community aka SACA i didnt say anything abt SACA buying your shots.(which i hope they didnt cos there are better panning or motion blurs pics from others listed in thier website)

    2nd my point was if you can comment so much abt the TCS things is there anything wrong 4 me to learn from you?? since you spoken like a guru making comments on their shots. but are you able to produce better ?? and if yes how would you do it? just so simple. if you have no knowledage of studio strobe why are you making comment on this area oso?? what are you trying to prove here?? NATO at work?? NO ACTION TALK ONLI?? Show us wat you are capable of first then i think the lot of us will look at you differently. if not spare us your theory abt photography. we have better people to learn and share from.

    yes i am a fool like wat you say, we shall let each and everyone decided which is which. From your track record here i can onli say unless you know wat you are talking if not i would suggest you keep your comments to yourself.

    as for the canon cam. lol i am posting for someone looking for it cos there is no stock now until late next week.
    yes i do have access to the famous 3 L 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200IS lenses and 10d at my disposal right now so y not. I'd like to see if the 10D is really that crappy after wat i saw abt those "motion blur" shots. and if you think Nikon D2H can help you to achieve wat u wan go ahead.
    Last edited by jeffgoh; 12th September 2003 at 07:18 PM.

  12. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    222

    Default

    I wonder what camera and mode they using to take the photo?

    And i wonder why the green background?? Why not just stick to traditional white which work most of the time......

    By the way,the pictures are a little underexposed and some oily-skin.....

  13. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    beebox
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    maybe the photographer prefers green to white lor,not all photographer shoot the same way mah..
    they each have their own style..

  14. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    222

    Default

    Maybe maybe..

    ! possible way to solve the underexposed problem(i think) is to got out door and take, since the bikini people are trying to look healthy and under the sun type.

    And by the way, they can use those oil removing wipe to reduce the oily shine which is advertised in tv most of the time.....

  15. #35

    Default

    ok i'll stick to the topic. I do agree the shots were taken in a very unflattering manner. Some of them look, erm, like home-made amateur shots if you get my drift. Pls note amateur here doesn't refer to photography amateur, although the spelling is similar.

    But yeah, they probably got one of their crew to take the photos with a simple digicam. Well the pictures appeared on a news article format so I thought it is quite forgiveable. Hopefully on the official website, they'll have proper portraiture shots of a minimum std.

  16. #36

    Default

    OT: I am just curious as it seems like the thread starter is the target of bombardment but not the rest whom have contributed in agreement to the topic of "Not so flattering shots of models on TCS website"

    Can we be more objective rather than personal ? Some of the nuances in the posts are pretty obvious to me.

    Keep those constructive comments flowing

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Some equitorial, tropical isle
    Posts
    2,398

    Default

    Cheap mugshot... what's worst the flash actually illuminated the subject in a unflattering way (translucent effect). I would be ashamed to even post this. Oh well, one man's meat is another man's poison. Wonder if he got paid?

    Enuff said...

  18. #38

    Default

    Personally find the comments at the beginning of the thread sounds exaggerated. The photos does look a bit simple, but it ain't that bad as described.

    Perhaps the thread starter can take some good shots and post, give some details on how to take such shot. That'll definitely serve a much better purpose then just picking some girls photo from elswhere and start finding fault on it.

    And looking at the title, wondering what it takes for 1 to condemn the whole TCS.

  19. #39

    Default

    Just look at the kindda of low class shows they produce, TCS sucks.

  20. #40

    Default

    Some are not bad what. Phua Chu Kang and Under One Roof (Early Seasons) were great. The new ones, Moulmein(?) High looks good.

    Actually, American shows like Alias, Buffy and Friends also look crappy to me.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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