| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/02/2002 08:31:27 AM · #1 |
While I'm expecting lots of blurry pictures this week, I'm sure this challenge could throw up some nice entries.
I had been wondering about the validity of stopped motion picctures for this week. I know that there has already been a stopped motion challenge in the past, but would that sort of thing qualify for this challenge?
A stopped motion pic still conveys the feeling of motion, even in it's frozen state. I wonder if pictures would be marked poorly for taking such an approach?
What do others think?
|
|
|
|
12/02/2002 08:36:32 AM · #2 |
I think this week that your picture should depict motion. How you
select to do that is completely open, so if you can take a stopped
motion picture, that still shows motion, then more power to you.
One of the problems a lot of people faced in the stopped motion challenge
was that the subjects looked actually stopped, rather than captured well in motion.
I expect motion blur and panning to be the big success stories next week,
but who knows.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2002 10:04:30 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
I expect motion blur and panning to be the big success stories next week,
but who knows.
Could certainly be nice. I can't wait to see the entries. |
|
|
|
12/02/2002 08:24:18 PM · #4 |
|
|
|
12/06/2002 01:14:00 PM · #5 |
I think that stopped motion can convey motion in a strong way. Like maybe a Balloon about to hit a stack of needles or A pedestrian about to be splashed by a passing auto.
This motion Challenge has had me up pretty late the last few nights. I am new to DPC and am very impressed with all the good photographers here. I have been trying many variations of time lapse with night shots but as of yey have made any great success. I may chicken out on this one ,but did submit in the open. Part of my frustration is due the difficulty in focusing with digital in low light or NO light .Any one have a similar problem? |
|
|
|
12/06/2002 01:16:24 PM · #6 |
i think lots of stopped motion photos do a great job of conveying a feeling of motion... I have seen lots of sports photos where this is quite effective...
|
|
|
|
12/06/2002 01:21:08 PM · #7 |
| A lot of digi cameras can have problems focusing in low light. It can be worked around to an extent depending on the camera and the subject. |
|
|
|
12/06/2002 01:33:00 PM · #8 |
i can too.
Originally posted by Arachnophilia:
i can.
*shudders* |
|
|
|
|
12/06/2002 01:41:57 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by BadPigg:
Part of my frustration is due the difficulty in focusing with digital in low light or NO light .Any one have a similar problem? |
That's because the 602 does not have an AF-assist lamp. It is a great camera, but it has some difficulties focussing in lowlight.
The F707/F717 is a great low light camera. It has a kind of infrared night mode you find on videocamera's (green picture). You can use it to see in the dark and focus yourself, you can take that kind of pictures, but they don't look pretty. It also has a Laser AF assistant. It uses a laser grid to determine focus. That thing can focus and to some point meter in total darkness.
You can try some other things with the 602. When it gives a low light AF warning, it is supposed to set the Autofocus to two meters. So you can capture anything at 2m distance, or more depending on the selected aperture. I suggest trying F8 to F11 to get as much in focus as possible (depth of field) based on a 2m distance. But the shutter is limited in programmed exposure modes (Programs, Auto, Programmed Auto, Aperture/Shutter Priority). Therefore you either need to switch to a high ISO (not recommended, when possible always use the "slowest" ISO available, ISO160), wich means that you need less shutter open time. You can switch to Manual, and select higher shutter open times like 5 to 15 seconds or do both when 15s is not enough. It might take some practice to find out what's best.
When 2 metres is enough, you can always select F2.8 for a small depth of field which gives you plenty of room with the 3s shutter in aperture priority.
Another thing is to first measure the exposure, use the exposure lock (AE-Lock), let someone light the subject for the Autofocus. Take the light away and make the picture. How to use exposurelock is described in your manual.
When you have control over the light (switch on/off or illumination by a strong lamp -yes, it is similar to exposure lock-) switch to Manual Focus. With the lights on, do a one-time AF (the button inside the AF/MF switch). The camera is now focussed on your subject and it will stay that way, because we are in manual focus. Lights off. Press the shutterbutton halfway to let the camera make an Exposure decision (set the aperture and shutter based on the AE-program you are running) and push the shutter.
To avoid camerashake I suggest that you use the 2s selftimer button (Shift+AE-L check the manual if this isn't the right combination) and a tripod.
The third method can also be done in Manual, but you need to guess the aperture and shutter yourself. When it is very dark I think that you need the 15s shutter anyway.
I hope that this was useful. Don't be offended when it goes into basic photo technology too (use a tripod, try this aperture or shutter etc), because I hope that less experienced 602 users read this also. Especially the third option has been very useful for me.
Message edited by author 2002-12-06 13:43:17.
|
|
|
|
12/06/2002 01:54:18 PM · #10 |
Az, I have a 602 also and I want to thank you for the low light tips! Now I may be able to do something worthwhile in the dark :-)
|
|
|
|
12/06/2002 02:04:39 PM · #11 |
Thanks Azrifel , or may I say Az? That which you mentioned is helpful and I am aware of the functions of this Fuji. I should ve been more specific though . I am talking about FINE focus, That little elusive cuss that you cant see through the EVF. Even with the zoom focus helper. It makes me think that a Through the lens viewfinder would be the only way to go. Or , am I dealing with the lack of pixels? 3.1 isnt much in the current 5-6 or 11-14 megapixel world. This is a new camera for me ,that is, digital. Unfortunately I really cant get away with buying the pro digital SLR's. I resort to taking multiple-x shots till I finally get the detail I'm looking for. But it is far more work than using an SLR. Thanks
Yes I am using a tripod slow shutter ,varied DOF and trying to shoot(photo) my daughter in less than 1 watt light. And I almost always use manual.
Message edited by author 2002-12-06 14:11:59. |
|
|
|
12/06/2002 02:44:28 PM · #12 |
BadPigg- I know what you mean. I have the same problem. I take shots that I focus so carefully, and they look great in the viewfinder, only to find a photo with soft focus. My minolta does great sometimes, but definately does not like low light situations! I take 100's of picts to get one that i really like!
|
|
|
|
12/06/2002 03:53:24 PM · #13 |
| BadPigg is right you need a "through the lens" viewfinder |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 03:36:45 PM EDT.
