charlottereeves

Haha - no problem! Apart from the initial bouncyness, he was a total star, very photogenic dog. :)

Thanks everyone who replied! I have my model organised now. :)

There's another couple of replies there for you Fit for a King, just in case you didn't receive notifications again... :)

No worries, thanks for your reply!

I'm definitely interested Fit for a King! I sent you two replies but no answer? Did you not receive them?

Thanks Alibi - the dog does need to be able to stand and stay in a studio photography setting. :)

Thanks Greytmate, I think I'll need something a little less fluffy! They are a lovely breed though. Still looking for the right dog guys - breeds such as Chihuahua, Yorkshire Terrier, Fox Terrier, Italian Greyhound, Chinese Crested, Miniature Pinscher, West Highland White Terrier - you get the idea!

Thanks donatella, that would be great. Any other takers?

fuzzy82 - If your dogs meet all the criteria, please fill out an application. While this job on Saturday requires purebreds, I have new commercial modelling jobs coming up all the time that your dogs might be suitable for. Thanks!

Oh no, that's a shame! Do you know of anyone in Brisbane you could recommend, dogsaremyworld?

Thanks donatella - I'm sure she'd be a gorgeous little fluff ball! But yes she does need to be able to 'stay' at the very minimum.

I'm a Brisbane pet photographer currently looking for a very small dog for a shoot this coming Saturday morning (22nd Sep) in Brisbane. If you have a small purebred dog (a show dog would be perfect), and it meets the criteria outlined on this page, please send me though a modelling application asap! http://www.charlottereeves.com.au/commercial-model-call.html Also taking applications for any other breeds/sizes to add to my continuously expanding database of potential commercial doggy models.

I don't post much but thought I would just jump in on this thread and share my experiences... I recently (Nov last year) photographed the Great Dane speciality shows down in Melbourne (not sure what the grounds are called? the ones near the showgrounds) indooors and having shot only outdoor daytime shows before I was a little apprehensive as I knew light would be an issue. The very best decision that I made was to include a monopod in my equipment list. I took flash gear (Speedlite 430EX and 580EX) but only really used them for BIS and award photos with the judge. I was shooting with a Sigma 100-300 F4 lens 99% of the time. I just love this lens, cheaper and with a bit more range than the Canon 70-200's, and not too far off quality-wise. Sigma APO 100-300mm f4 EX IF HSM Reviews - pretty sure the lens retails for around $1700 I photographed pretty much the entire 2 shows (open and champ) which ran from about 3pm to about 9.30pm, didn't get many movement photos as the shutter speeds were just too low and panning is a bit difficult with a couple of kilos of body and lens attached to a monopod. Did get a couple of lucky ones but not many! I was however really happy with the way the stacked shots of the dogs in the ring turned out, considering the conditions. Another thing that helps with shooting indoors, is shoot on manual. One definite advantage of shooting indoors and especially at night is that the light remains fairly consistent - no clouds going over the lighting and messing with your exposures! Means you can choose your settings and stick with them, knowing they will be the same for every shot which also helps a lot with editing them later. Also I think shooting at the lenses maximum aperture isn't a problem, as at that focal length and distance it should be just enough to blur out distracting details in the background somewhat and still have the dog in sharp focus. Here's some example pics at different times showing the settings used. Keep in mind that the sun was moving around and coming through the skylights at various times in different spots in the ring so until the sun actually sets, the exposures don't really show a clear progression. 3.30pm, ISO 800, 180mm, F4.5, 1/250 sec (handheld) 4.12pm, ISO 800, 137mm, F4, 1/400 sec (handheld) 5.15pm, ISO 800, 117mm, F4, 1/640 sec (handheld) 5.46pm, ISO 800, 300mm, F4, 1/320 sec (handheld) 7.00pm, ISO 1250, 150mm, F4, 1/100 sec (monopod) 7.28pm, ISO 1600, 137mm, F4, 1/80 sec (monopod) A couple of very lucky panning shots: 8.05pm, ISO 1250, 100mm, F4, 1/80 sec (monopod) 8.06pm, ISO 1250, 100mm, F4, 1/80 sec (monopod) 8.37pm, ISO 1250, 150mm, F4, 1/80 sec (monopod) The settings stayed virtually unchanged for the rest of the night, using that lens and the monopod. I later changed to a 24-70mm lens and flash for the BIS and awards photos. Hope this helps! ETA: Links to the rest of the photos if anyone is interested: http://www.charlottereevesevents.com.au/ - the last 2 shows and then some outdoor show galleries for reference.

Might give you some of the answers you are looking for... http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showpro...at=2&page=2

Mac's rule! I will email you some links to some great Photoshop actions.

I agree completely. Before last year, I had a 5 or 6 year break from photography as I pursued a career in web design and graphic design. At the start of last year a photographer friend asked me to do a project with her - 365 Photos of 2007. It involved taking a photo a day, and posting it on a blog. It was FANTASTIC as it FORCED me to pick up my camera every day and shoot. I shot everything - my dogs, people, friends, family, myself, my hobbies, places, holidays.... It was probably the best thing I could have done to get myself back into the swing of being a photographer. I thought I already knew most things about photography but boy was I wrong, I learnt so much, especially about post-processing/editing. Ruthless if you tend to think about post-processing as 'cheating' then I have this to say. Photography has evolved over time, quite rapidly over the last 10 years or so. There have been massive changes! Instead of photography enthusiasts setting up darkrooms and playing around with different papers and enlarger settings, dodging and burning their images, they instead install programs on their computer to do what is essentially the same thing. Post-processing is definitely not a new thing! It's been around as long as photography itself has been, it's just the method that has changed. And with change has come progress! Embrace it!

Hi Ruthless, just found this thread of yours! Thanks for the PM. Without giving away all my secrets lol, I can give you a basic rundown of the techniques I use and the process I go through to create a lot of my images. I did start off with film, developing and printing black and white and colour photos, however I love love LOVE digital and opportunities it presents. I do however have to practice some restraint as I tend to go a little overboard at times! I shoot with a Canon 5D and lenses including a Canon 24-70mm F2.8, Sigma 100-300mm F4 and a cheap little Canon 50mm F1.8 prime lens. It's definitely not all about the camera used, however you do notice a difference in sharpness and details when using a good setup. I shoot in RAW which enables (as kja outlined) greater flexibility with regards to post-processing options. I do my initial edits in Adobe Lightroom (LOVE that program) then decide whether to continue in Lightroom or move to Photoshop. The beauty of Lightroom is that the editing is non-destructive. I can make some edits, close the program, then come back to it again and start over with a blank slate. I've developed a few different Presets in Lightroom which I usually run my shots through just to test what might look good, so if I hit something that I like, I can refine it a little more and might not even take it into Photoshop. If I can't settle on a 'look', I will take the image into Photoshop, play with some settings and run some more actions and eventually come up with the final look. Quite often I will envisage the look I want to achieve at the time of shooting, but it's also fun to leave that open then experiment with a few different looks on a particularly co-operative image. So I might end up with a neutral colour version, a jacked-up colour version, plus black and white and sepia versions. One thing to remember though is that you can rescue an average image to make it good, you can make a good image great, or a great image outstanding, but if you start out with an average image, it's quite difficult to jump up more than one level! And if you start out with a bad image, the best you are ever going to be able to do is make it 'average' (in most cases). So my philosophy is to nail the exposure, sharpness, depth of field and framing in-camera, then work upwards from that. Regarding the vignetting, the cheapo 50mm lens I often use creates that effect all by itself. It's one of the side-effects of using a cheap crappy lens on a good full frame SLR, you get light drop-off on the edges. My other lenses also do it to a certain extent but not nearly as much, and yes I often increase the effect when editing. Love my vignette's, like I think you noticed! Another I need to practice more restraint on sometimes. I never use filters on the lenses when I shoot, as I find it can limit what you can do with an image later. Much better to get a nice clean well exposed image to start with, then go from there. Regarding saturation, yes you can do this in-camera. There are custom functions in mine that allow you to set the level of sharpness and saturation. I've played around with this but much prefer the results I can get from editing in Lightroom/Photoshop - MUCH more control over the end result and again, once you have an over-saturated image from the camera, you are stuck with it. You can desaturate while editing yes, but it's never the same and tends to degrade other aspects of image quality. PHEW, long post. I hope this answers your questions (and some you probably didn't even ask lol) Ruthless!

In answer to the original question, it changed when Dr Billinghurst diverged from Tom Lonsdale's original 'Raw Meaty Bones' and started marketing and commercialising the 'BARF' diet. This is an excellent link to read: http://www.rawmeatybones.com/petowners/whynotBARF.php As well as the rest of the website. The original book 'Raw Meaty Bones' is well worth a read for those who are considering BARF, raw or prey-model diets.