sbell111 said:
You need not spend a ton of money to get good pics. Your Nikon is actually 'better' than the old 20ds that Martin and I use. You likely have the 18-55 VR lens for it. That's sufficient.
Instead of Martin's $100 light tent, pop over to ebay or amazon and pic up a photo tent/box for 20 or 30 bucks.
As far as lights, I went with a couple gooseneck lamps that I think I paid five bucks a piece for. I added mini spot bulbs from home depot and they work fine for my purpose.
I would like to respond to this... with the hesitancy of shifting this thread in a direction that better fits a different forum section.... (this topic has been covered 100 times in the photography section - just go there and start reading!)
It is certainly true that there are cheaper methods that make for great photos. I would argue that a good setup and knowledge of white light balance and metering can make a big difference in how much time is spent AFTER the photo is taken. With my light tent (nothing really special about it) and my lighting (5600K cool lights ARE special) and my light metering (19% gray with the ExpoDisc) I spend NO time adjusting or correcting exposure or light balance (color) after the photo is taken. I upload to Lightroom and get rid of dust with a few clicks and hit a button with auto export functions to post on IAP.
I am a graphic design and photography nerd.... so it is necessary for me to believe that my process is special! : ) : ) And I believe that it was well worth the cost to be able to take five quick photos and upload a great pic online under 10 minutes. And for marketing purposes, I want the customer to say "It looks just like the photo!" That includes colors and detail.
Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner