| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/12/2005 04:17:18 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by Falc:
woops - wrong thread - sorry ;-) |
Get out of here falc ;) You are the last person who need to be in the Basics/Theory thread ;) |
|
|
|
07/12/2005 05:12:57 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by jseyerle:
Originally posted by Falc:
woops - wrong thread - sorry ;-) |
Get out of here falc ;) You are the last person who need to be in the Basics/Theory thread ;) |
slinks away into a corner to listen quetly!! ;-)
|
|
|
|
07/12/2005 05:20:11 AM · #53 |
Originally posted by Falc:
slinks away into a corner to listen quetly!! ;-) |
Hey, wait a second there, Falc! I don't see any reason why we can have a guest mentor to give us the basics of fitting a giant daisy into a tiny water drop.
;-)
(edited to add the "basic" shot - our thread needs more images)
Message edited by author 2005-07-12 05:22:13. |
|
|
|
07/12/2005 06:25:34 AM · #54 |
| Falc i dream to take shots like your latest ribbon. Would love to have you as guest mentor as well or i will be selfish and ask you to go comment on my portfolio =) |
|
|
|
07/12/2005 07:20:45 AM · #55 |
Originally posted by jseyerle:
Falc i dream to take shots like your latest ribbon. Would love to have you as guest mentor as well or i will be selfish and ask you to go comment on my portfolio =) |
NO its not fair to Oly and Deapee to hijack this group. I can maybe do something outside this thread when I get back from India next week.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2005 10:59:28 AM · #56 |
I know exactly what you mean Pidge, when I got my first dig camera I just went out and shot like "there was no tomorrow" :) and I would come home and be dissapointed in the results. I think the answer to your question below is that your approach of a personal vision in a photograph depends on the situation you're in, the subject matter, and your purposes and intentions for use of the photograph to be made. When doing candids, action or photojournalism, you certainly don't have the time to be doing extensive and detailed planning and in most instances a photographer will have to put their camera in one of the automatic and fast-firing modes to shoot away hoping that of the shots they are lucky to record that one or two of them (or hopefully more!) will be acceptable. I have read many times that it's not uncommon for professional photographers to find just a few successful shots out of more than 100 they have taken. This is why digital photography is so so valuable as we don't have to worry about limitations of film (in the number of shots on a roll or the cost of post processing). Instead, we can put the camera in sequence mode (a rapid-fire type of operation in which we continually press the shutter and the camera fires off picture after picture in rapid succession). Then, while we are still at the scene when the action stops, we can quickly review our results on the rear LCD screen and delete those pics that don't meet our expectations. There is probably not the plodding, planning and meticulous tweaking of camera settings, or manipulation of lighting in this kind of shooting as one does not have the time for fear of missing a shot, like you have already said. Probably an important aspect to this type of shooting in applying a personal vision is in the post processing in which cropping out extraneous detail is a godsend.
When shooting for more artistic purposes such as in landscapes, still lifes and studio and architectural photos that is when the we would apply a more planned out vision where we take the time to apply our technical know-how to manifesting our personal vision. As you gain increased technical knowledge you will be able to accomplish this with greater ease and confidence.
Neither way of shooting is right or wrong, but just different styles, and knowing when and how to apply them is what we need to learn. I think we can learn alot more for improving our photography technique and in developing personal vision is instead of the rapid-fire type of shooting to plan out and develop just one or two scenes. It may be a good idea if our first field exercise would be to go out and take a scene we find interesting and photograph it using the more planned out approach and then discuss and critique the results.
A couple of important questions to be asking when either taking or critiquing a photograph is what does the photographer want to convey and communicate and how well is he/she accomplishing this.
At this point I think it would be helpful to post on composition, so I'm going to do that and then we can go out and start shooting!
Originally posted by pidge:
... How long do you take to form visions and images in your head? I find myself always doing a quick point and shoots because I like candids, and I always think the moment will be lost. But I often feel like I've taken tons of pictures and none of them are good because I always feel I'm 'chasing' the thing I'm after. Should one, in any situation, take a moment (long or quick) to assess the situation and then start shooting? |
|
|
|
|
07/12/2005 01:02:10 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
I know exactly what you mean Pidge, when I got my first dig camera I just went out and shot like "there was no tomorrow" :) and I would come home and be dissapointed in the results. I think the answer to your question below is that your approach of a personal vision in a photograph depends on the situation you're in, the subject matter, and your purposes and intentions for use of the photograph to be made. When doing candids, action or photojournalism, you certainly don't have the time to be doing extensive and detailed planning and in most instances a photographer will have to put their camera in one of the automatic and fast-firing modes to shoot away hoping that of the shots they are lucky to record that one or two of them (or hopefully more!) will be acceptable. I have read many times that it's not uncommon for professional photographers to find just a few successful shots out of more than 100 they have taken. This is why digital photography is so so valuable as we don't have to worry about limitations of film (in the number of shots on a roll or the cost of post processing). Instead, we can put the camera in sequence mode (a rapid-fire type of operation in which we continually press the shutter and the camera fires off picture after picture in rapid succession). Then, while we are still at the scene when the action stops, we can quickly review our results on the rear LCD screen and delete those pics that don't meet our expectations. There is probably not the plodding, planning and meticulous tweaking of camera settings, or manipulation of lighting in this kind of shooting as one does not have the time for fear of missing a shot, like you have already said. Probably an important aspect to this type of shooting in applying a personal vision is in the post processing in which cropping out extraneous detail is a godsend.
When shooting for more artistic purposes such as in landscapes, still lifes and studio and architectural photos that is when the we would apply a more planned out vision where we take the time to apply our technical know-how to manifesting our personal vision. As you gain increased technical knowledge you will be able to accomplish this with greater ease and confidence.
Neither way of shooting is right or wrong, but just different styles, and knowing when and how to apply them is what we need to learn. I think we can learn alot more for improving our photography technique and in developing personal vision is instead of the rapid-fire type of shooting to plan out and develop just one or two scenes. It may be a good idea if our first field exercise would be to go out and take a scene we find interesting and photograph it using the more planned out approach and then discuss and critique the results.
A couple of important questions to be asking when either taking or critiquing a photograph is what does the photographer want to convey and communicate and how well is he/she accomplishing this.
At this point I think it would be helpful to post on composition, so I'm going to do that and then we can go out and start shooting!
Originally posted by pidge:
... How long do you take to form visions and images in your head? I find myself always doing a quick point and shoots because I like candids, and I always think the moment will be lost. But I often feel like I've taken tons of pictures and none of them are good because I always feel I'm 'chasing' the thing I'm after. Should one, in any situation, take a moment (long or quick) to assess the situation and then start shooting? |
|
I appreciated your comments here Olyuzi.. Cheers... insightful |
|
|
|
07/13/2005 10:52:11 AM · #58 |
Thanks Olyuzi!
Before we go to composotion, can you give a quick run down of the aperture/shutter aspect? Figure it will help so we don't get a bunch of OOF pictures, but nicely composed :P
Cheers
Kiyoko |
|
|
|
07/13/2005 09:34:56 PM · #59 |
BLAH -- I've been super busy with work and taking pictures.
Well, here's how digital cameras work...it's not in my own words, but it's probably 10 times better written and more thought out than I could ever do. If you have any questions, please ask.
//electronics.howstuffworks.com/digital-camera.htm
--------------
edit:
Thanks to everyone for looking at my Pittsburgh photo. You all seem like you have a good idea of what you like and don't like when looking at a picture (composition-wise). That's a good thing. One of the biggest steps in composition is learning to look through the viewfinder (or the LCD for some of us non DSLR owners who choose that method) and frame the image in our minds.
It's a big step going from a point and shoot to a DSLR. When you make the jump (if you so desire), you will notice that your composition is lacking. It takes a good long while before you can really compose your photograph by looking through your viewfinder...I would suggest that if you have a P&S camera, you start, at least every now and then, glancing through the viewfinder, so you get a feel for it. I realize some of them only have another LCD screen in there to look at so that can make it a bit harder, but give it a glance every now and then.
Message edited by author 2005-07-13 21:38:29.
|
|
|
|
07/13/2005 11:20:04 PM · #60 |
 
Following up on our hyperfocal photo. I knew that the original was not as OOF as the entry turned out. Here's the original post and a redo of the original image using the info from the tutorial about getting images ready for submission.
Looking at the meta data, the original image was shot with the 28mm lens, at ISO800, f/19, 1/60sec. The focus distance was about 5 feet. It seems I did get some hyperfocal effect after all. |
|
|
|
07/13/2005 11:58:22 PM · #61 |
Wow...that updated one is a ton sharper...really well-done. You could try experimenting with a selective color layer...bump the magenta, lose a little yellow in the cyan channel, and the sky would turn more blue.
Really looks excellent though!
|
|
|
|
07/14/2005 12:10:53 AM · #62 |
| Thank deapee. I feel that great glow of accomplishment. I'll try your suggestions and post it tomorrow night. |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 01:28:18 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by pidge:
Thanks Olyuzi!
Before we go to composotion, can you give a quick run down of the aperture/shutter aspect? Figure it will help so we don't get a bunch of OOF pictures, but nicely composed :P
Cheers
Kiyoko |
Sure thing, Kiyoko...
Ok, doing this off the top of my head, so if anyone has anything to add, or correct me on, please do. I have a thick skin and won't be offended.
Aperture and shutter speed control the amount of light reaching the sensor (film) of your camera and as such control exposure. Aperture is the size of the hole in your lens that lets light through, and shutter speed is the speed at which it opens and closes. Both can be controled by the photographer in a camera with manual controls, which I believe all of us have. Shutter speed and aperture also control other variables controlable by the photographer, such as depth-of-field and being able to freeze the action, which I'll go into shortly.
When you decrease shutter speed, say going from 1/30th sec to 1/60th of a second, you are halving the amount of light coming into the camera. when you increase shutter speed, say from 1/60th to 1/30th, you are doubling the amount of light reaching the camera's sensor. The lingo used here by photographers is F-stop. When going in either direction, you would be increasing or decreasing the amount of light by a full stop. In digital cameras, you can also increase or decrease F-stops by 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop. For instance, if you decreased your shutter speed from 1/30th sec to 1/40th sec, that would be decreasing by 1/3rd of a stop and from 1/30th to 1/50th would be a decrease of 2/3rds of a stop. Going from 1/30th to 1/125th sec would be a decrease of a full 2 stops, etc. (1/30th to 1/60th is one full stop, and then halving the amount of light again would be 1/125th sec.) Even if you are not trying to stop action, you will get crisper and sharper images when using faster shutter speeds. Usually, 1/125th second is good for getting crisp shots. Also, there is a rule for hand holding the camera during shots that says: in order to handhold the camera, you should set the shutter speed to 1 over the lens focal length (at a minimum). As an example, if your focal length is 300mm, then your shutter speed should be set to at least 1/300 sec, or the closest setting available on your camera (usually 1/320th sec). Any slower than that will require that you use a tripod or stationary object.
Works the same way for aperture...increasing by a full stop (opening up the aperture) lets double the amount of light in from the previous setting, and decreasing by a full stop halves the amount of light coming in from the previous setting. So, as an example, opening up the aperture from F5.6 to F4.0 lets twice as much light in and going from F4.0 to F5.6 halves the amount of light coming in. (Remember, that with aperture, when the F-stops go down in number, you are opening up the hole and letting more light in, and when increasing in value, you are closing down the hole and decreasing the amount of light coming in.) We can also open up, or close down aperture by 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop, just like with shutter speed.
Ok, now that I have you all dizzy...lol, don't worry so much about these numbers, as time and experience will make it more clear. Your viewfinders will give you lots of help with something called exposure compensation...getting to that soon :).
Now, shutter speed, also controls the amount of blur that we see with action/movement subjects. When you increase shutter speed you are able to freeze the action more, so that your moving subject is rendered without any motion blur. If you decrease the shutter speed, you increase the amount of motion blur that will be recorded. This is a creative choice you have. With experience, you will be able to gauge just how fast or slow the shutter speed needs to be in order to get the effect you want with a given subject. Subjects moving faster will require fast shutter speeds in order to freeze them.
Aperture also controls the DOF (department of Fotography...just kidding :) DOF, as you will see it abbreviated stands for depth-of-field. This is the amount of the scene you are photographing that will be rendered in focus from front to back. A larger F-stop (lower numbered and larger opening) will render a more narrow DOF, so that the amount of the scene, front to back that will be in focus will be greatly reduced. You will learn through experience, that digital SLRs, which you all have, are very good at reducing the DOF and this also becomes a creative choice the photographer has. A narror DOF will be used for help in isolating the subject, such as in portraits, so that there is less distraction from the background and the person in the picture gets our full attention. On the other hand, a smaller F-stop (higher number and smaller hole opening) will render a scene with a greater and deeper DOF so that more of the scene is in focus. This will be used by photographers in such instances as landscapes, when we want to show the entire scene in focus.
As an aside, there are other factors that also control DOF, such as distance of lens to subject and focal length of lens. Basically, when we increase lens distance to subject, we will be able to render a greater DOF...a shorter distance from subject to lens will render a more narrow DOF. When lens focal length is short, say 28mm, we will render a deeper DOF, and with longer focal lengths of say greater than 200mm, we will decrease the DOF.
I"m out of breath... (panting like a dog lol)
I need to say one more thing about DOF...
It is also dependent on the size of our camera's sensors. The larger the sensor (included with DSLRs) the easier it is to get a narrow DOF. With smaller sensors (included with prosumer digicams) you get deeper DOFs.
When out in the field, you will be keeping an eye on your exposure compensation meter, which will show you how your current settings of aperture and shutter speed are effecting your exposure. This number will be displayed in stops, such as, 0.0, +0.3, -0.7, etc. A plus sign indicates an overexposure by the amount displayed, and a minus sign in front of the number indicates an underexposure by the amount displayed.
So, for instance, +0.3 is an overexposure of 1/3rd of a stop and -0.7 is an underexposure of 2/3rds of a stop. 0.0 will be a perfect exposure.
We will get into more detail about exposure later. (and, if you have the time and inclination, you may want to read along in the exposure mentoring group).
Yet one more thing needs to be added to this discussion, and that is how ISO effects exposure. ISO is defined as the sensitivity of the sensor to light and has a direct impact on exposure. The photographer is able to set the ISO to greater or lesser sensitivity. Usually, ISO starts at 100 (least sensitive) and doubles as it increases to 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 and 6400 (most senstive). We also use the terminology of "F-stop" with IsO as when we go from ISO 100 to ISO 200 we are increasing sensitivity by one full stop. Going from 100 to 400 would be increasing sensitivity by two full stops and so on. An increase in sensitivity means that less light is required for an accurate exposure, and so we are able to get away with using narrower apertures and faster shutter speeds.
This comes in very handy in low light shooting. Let's saY we take a meter reading off of our subject at dusk and find that in order to get adequate amount of light for an effective exposure, we would have to expose with an F-stop of 2.8, shutter speed of 1/15th second at ISO 100. This shutter speed would be way too slow to handhold the camera and if you did not have your trusty tripod available, then you could up the ISO setting until you got the desired shutter speed so that you could handhold the camera. This may require an ISO of 200, 400, or above.
I need some water! :)
Any questions or comments? Was this explanation helpful? Do you understand it more?
Ok, now that you've gotten a taste (distaste?) for exposure settings, are you ready for composition? You guys and gals are the bosses, so let me know what you want to do...if you want more technical information such as what I just gave you above, I'll be happy to provide more.
We can also do some field work with what you've just learned, if you like. Just let me know. Your wish is my command.
Message edited by author 2005-07-14 01:32:23. |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 04:15:27 AM · #64 |
Testing for sharpness.
One of the things which has been mentioned often in my challenges is lack of sharpness. I think that was previously because I had been not using a tripod. I broke out the tripod this morning, took my 70-200mm and zoomed out to 200. I made sure my exposure was > than 1/200sec
Here is the info for the shot:
1/400s at f/6.3
ISO 200
Focal Length 200mm
I would like to know if this is sharp?
The focus was towards the center of the shot on the branches. I think if I were to have have used f/8 - 10 I could have gotten the whole shot sharp. At the moment it is softer towards the top.
 |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 01:31:17 PM · #65 |
I agree that it looks a bit soft towards the top being that you can't make out the veins in the leaves like you can in the middle and bottom, but this may not be because of too narrow a DOF, but rather other factors, such as the angle of view of those leaves and possiblity of wind on those top leaves. There are better tests to be performed to test focusing. One would be to use an item with graduated markings, such as a ruler, or the side of a brick building. Certainly, a tripod is a must for maximum sharpness, even at high shutter speeds. I just can't seem to hold my camera steady enough, especially in high winds or when holding the camera in portrait orientation.
Originally posted by jseyerle:
Testing for sharpness.
I would like to know if this is sharp?
The focus was towards the center of the shot on the branches. I think if I were to have have used f/8 - 10 I could have gotten the whole shot sharp. At the moment it is softer towards the top.
|
|
|
|
|
07/14/2005 03:51:59 PM · #66 |
Ok.. Not exactly a slide ruler but I think a good sharp pic.
What does our Mentor group think?
--Removed Image--
Message edited by author 2005-07-14 16:07:08. |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 03:53:14 PM · #67 |
This is fabulous! Ok, Olyuzi, now onto composition. No rest for the weary! J/K The primers on everything have been great so far. I'm ready for the next lesson/assignment.
Cheers
Kiyoko |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 06:54:39 PM · #68 |
These are really helpful posts Deapee and Olyuzi. Keep 'em coming!
I want to let you know that I'll be away from my computer for a couple of weeks starting Saturday or Sunday. We're going camping in Norway - can't wait.
Do either of you have some good DOF or other tips for landscapes and bright sun before we leave? |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 07:33:07 PM · #69 |
I have really learned so much this week. I want to thank you guys for all of your help.
P.S. Just to mention I don't have a DSLR.:(
Thanks again,
Roni |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 08:17:46 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by puzzled:
Do either of you have some good DOF or other tips for landscapes and bright sun before we leave? |
Actually, check out the natural light and landscape mentorship threads. There is some good info in there that will probably help you. Have a safe and wonderful trip! |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 10:29:30 PM · #71 |
I have a question about aperature. I've read or heard someplace that lenses or cameras each have a "sweet spot" (aperature) of best focus (for sharpness.) Are you familiar with anything like this?
Also, my 717 aperature will only go to f/8. I find that some distance shots, such as skylines and further away landscapes seem soft at f/8. Is that something that possibly an smaller (size) aperature would help? f/11 or up? Let me know what you think.
|
|
|
|
07/15/2005 04:11:32 AM · #72 |
pidge, thanks for the good wishes. I am soooo excited about this trip! I've lived in Sweden over 8 years and have never visited Norway because every time I have such a long vacation, we go back to the U.S. to visit my family.
jpochard, you've asked all the questions I was trying to ask, but couldn't phrase them as well as you did. Thanks! |
|
|
|
07/15/2005 08:22:01 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by jpochard:
I have a question about aperature. I've read or heard someplace that lenses or cameras each have a "sweet spot" (aperature) of best focus (for sharpness.) Are you familiar with anything like this?
Also, my 717 aperature will only go to f/8. I find that some distance shots, such as skylines and further away landscapes seem soft at f/8. Is that something that possibly an smaller (size) aperature would help? f/11 or up? Let me know what you think. |
Lenses do have a sweet spot -- or an aperture where they are the most sharp. Usually, it's going to be a little bit smaller than the largest aperture -- so if your 717 is f/8, maybe f/10 or 11 would be a tad bit sharper. In all honesty though, it's not something you're going to notice when you resize your 5 MP file down for web view. It may make a difference when viewing on an 8x10 or so, but when resized, any softness is usually created by either user error (camera shake [too long a focal length as opposed to too slow a shutter speed], accidentally focusing on the wrong area -- when you shoot, you want to keep your shutter speed at about 1/Focal Length to avoid camera shake -- some people can go slower, some need faster), or simply resizing without sharpening. Every time you jump down in size, you have to sharpen your file more. It's just the nature of the beast.
|
|
|
|
07/15/2005 11:43:23 AM · #74 |
Hi Judy, yes, I have heard of sweet spots for apertures. In prosumer cameras like mine and yours that only stop down as low as f8 I would say the sweet spot is between 4.0 to 5.6. Experimentation will have guide you.
Possibly one of the reasons for softness with distance shots at f8 is diffraction. I believe this to be that when we stop down to the highest f-stops a greater percentage of the light that is entering the camera is being bent and not focusing where it should be. At either of your aperture extremes (that is stopped all the way down, f8 in your case), or opened up all the way, softness will result. That is why you should try to locate the sweet spot for your camera. DSLR lenses that can stop down to f22 and up can also suffer from diffraction and so I believe they have a sweet spot as well.
Hope this helped.
Originally posted by jpochard:
I have a question about aperature. I've read or heard someplace that lenses or cameras each have a "sweet spot" (aperature) of best focus (for sharpness.) Are you familiar with anything like this?
Also, my 717 aperature will only go to f/8. I find that some distance shots, such as skylines and further away landscapes seem soft at f/8. Is that something that possibly an smaller (size) aperature would help? f/11 or up? Let me know what you think. |
Message edited by author 2005-07-15 11:45:02. |
|
|
|
07/15/2005 11:49:38 AM · #75 |
Puzzled...enjoy your camping trip in Norway! Needless to say I'm envious :). For deep dof for landscape shots use a higher f-stop and a wide angled lens. Also, see Deapee's earlier posts on focusing, DOF and hyperfocal distance, it was very good. Can't wait to see your pics when you get back. Have a safe trip above all else.
Oly
Originally posted by puzzled:
I want to let you know that I'll be away from my computer for a couple of weeks starting Saturday or Sunday. We're going camping in Norway - can't wait.
Do either of you have some good DOF or other tips for landscapes and bright sun before we leave? |
|
|
