| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/11/2005 12:56:10 AM · #26 |
Deapee, take the How the Camera Works topic and I'll take the other, basic workflow.
See you all tomorrow, as it's time for sleep...zzzzz :)
Originally posted by deapee:
I'll take how a digital camera works for $100 please. Actually, I'll handle that one if you want the other...lemme know. Do you get the PM's I send you oly? |
|
|
|
|
07/11/2005 03:00:30 AM · #27 |
"Just curious why the settings on this shot:
f/19, ISO 800 at a shutter speed of 1/60 sec.
Just curious, I'm not picking in the least bit. Just gaining general knowledge here."
I knew this shot would show up... Ugg, ugg, smirk, smirk , embarassment changing my face color to red.
I had taken my camera with on a walk at dusk. The ISO was chosen in order to be able to get shutter speeds slow enough to hand hold (the tripod was at home.) I wanted DOF, but even the f/19 was pushing it with a shutter speed of 1/60. I can be pretty steady when I need to be and the original came out pretty clear. I've learned since then that pretty clear is not sharp enough here, however.
Then came the post processing and getting it ready for the web. I'm sure I did everything wrong I could when it came to keeping the image sharp. The tutorials have since come in handy.
Goodnight for now. I'll check in tomorrow.
 |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 03:07:01 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by rjkstesch:
"Just curious why the settings on this shot:
f/19, ISO 800 at a shutter speed of 1/60 sec.
Just curious, I'm not picking in the least bit. Just gaining general knowledge here."
I knew this shot would show up... Ugg, ugg, smirk, smirk , embarassment changing my face color to red.
I had taken my camera with on a walk at dusk. The ISO was chosen in order to be able to get shutter speeds slow enough to hand hold (the tripod was at home.) I wanted DOF, but even the f/19 was pushing it with a shutter speed of 1/60. I can be pretty steady when I need to be and the original came out pretty clear. I've learned since then that pretty clear is not sharp enough here, however.
Then came the post processing and getting it ready for the web. I'm sure I did everything wrong I could when it came to keeping the image sharp. The tutorials have since come in handy.
Goodnight for now. I'll check in tomorrow.
|
What lense did you use for this shot?
Ive had issues before where I chose the wrong lense for the situation. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 03:13:20 AM · #29 |
I was using my the Nikkor AF 28-70mm 3.5-4.6, most likely at the 70mm end. I would have been better off using my 50mm 1.8 lens and getting the faster speed, but alas, it was home.
(I carry my camera with me always, but only one lens. Even that makes my purse a heavy weapon to use against muggers.)
edited for clarity and spelling
Message edited by author 2005-07-11 03:16:09. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 03:17:10 AM · #30 |
Hello everyone, I am looking forward to learning a lot from this group. I have a point and shoot camera, but I manage to take ok shots even though I don't know what I am doing! Workflow is a great place to start because I am having a hard time learning photoshop. I use Elements 3, and find it to be very confusing and not at all user friendly like most software.
I will get caught up in all the prior posts tomorrow. Thanks to all of you for creating such a supportive learning enviroment!
Catherine |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 04:52:12 AM · #31 |
Whew, that lesson on hyperfocal distance was scary, but I'm so glad you wrote it. I certainly don't understand your whole article yet, though! :-)
The link helped me understand your article MUCH better - it helped to go back an forth from your examples to the article.
Could you post some pictures that would describe hyperfocal distance in real life? (Maybe some of your street photography shots, but the same shot at different settings...).
To my classmates: The link above shows just about all digital cameras, including point and shoot digicams. It's interesting, even if you're like me and don't understand it all. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 04:54:15 AM · #32 |
Double post, sorry.
Editied to say that I'd like to see a combination of easy stuff mixed with a few difficult and challenging topics. Even if I don't understand the difficult topics, they'll probably remain somewhere in the back of my head for easier learning in the future.
This is really fun - and I have to say thanks once again to Oly and Deapee!
Message edited by author 2005-07-11 04:59:59. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 06:34:17 AM · #33 |
Digital photography Workflow
WORKFLOW – The steps taken in the production of an image that proceeds from a personal vision to capturing an image in the camera, then editing and processing the image in the computer in editing software such as Photoshop, and on to the final stage as an output to be shared. There is no one workflow that is the final ultimate and best one that should be used by all photographers. Each person develops their own for what works for them, their subjects and situations and equipment. Below is a general guideline and example for what constitutes a workflow, but by no means is complete or set in stone. They are constantly evolving and changing.
Before the photographer picks up the camera he/she can start off with a vision of an image. This vision can either be supplied to him from an outside source, such a client who is contracting to have product photographs produced for a catalog, or it can be a personal vision for artistic expression. A photographer may have a more concrete idea of what kind of vision is to be produced when working in the studio than when out on location. In studio work, the photographer is responsible for all aspects of the image, such as lighting, props, models, poses, backgrounds, etc and his/her task is to choreograph these different elements into a cohesive vision. There will be a lot more pre-shoot planning and the photographer will know ahead of hand what they want to accomplish.
Though a photographer may know in advance the kind of vision they want to capture when on-location, there is more of the element of spontaneity and working with the available elements, instead of supplying the elements, as is done in studio work. In doing landscape work, for instance, the photographer will have to use/manipulate the available light, deal with weather/climate and discover a scene that he/she wants to photograph.
I̢۪m predominantly a landscape/seascape photographer and when I go into the field I keep a list with me to help organize my thoughts about the scene I have chosen and what I want to say or bring out to the viewers attention. I assess the scene and ask:
-What are the pictorial elements in the scene? A house? Mountain and lake?
-Is there a story I want to tell?
-What compositional elements exist in the scene that I want to emphasize in my photograph? These would be things such as line, point, form, shape, color, tone, texture, pattern, etc. (We will get into more of this when we tackle composition.)
-What is the mood, atmosphere, emotion of the scene? Dark and broody, or light and happy, for example?
-Quality and quantity of light and shadow is in the scene and how do I want to use the light to express my vision.
These questions help me to form my vision so that I know what I want to express and start to think how to best accomplish that. The second step in a workflow is getting your vision, best you can into your camera using compositional techniques. At this point I may start framing the scene in my mind, or with the help of tools, in order to help me decide what compositional and pictorial elements I want to include in the image. I start thinking in terms of defining the subject, foreground and background and start to arrange them by using point-of-view, cropping, alignment, etc. It may be helpful to look through the viewfinder or a homemade cropping/framing tool to help you accomplish this. I may also want to decide on whether or not I want the image to convey a literal or expressive representation. I now begin to make decisions regarding exposure settings and metering, lens choices and focal length, depth-of-field, white balance, ISO, contrast and saturation settings, focus, use of flash, filters, file type and other creative decisions that will help to create and define your vision. In action shots, I may decide as to whether to pan the subject or maintain a locked position? Do I want a narrow or deep depth-of-field? This second step in the workflow requires more technical decision making.
While the previous steps are all part of workflow, when photographers talk of workflow, they mostly mean to define the steps involved in post-processing their images on the computer. Once the photograph is captured in the camera, it is transferred and uploaded to the computer for editing/developing and enhancing in photo editing software. While Photoshop is the gold standard to measure all such programs, there are many others for general and specific use, such as Paintshop Pro, The GIMP, Neat Image for noise reduction, Ifranview for organizing, etc. Here, decisions regarding output of the image have to start to be taken into account because at this point editing of the image involves additional cropping, upsampling or downsampling to certain size requirements of the output. It is also in this step that we enhance the image to our vision, to optimize contrast and exposure, tone and color correction, sharpness, noise reduction, etc by using tools such as levels/curves, contrast/brightness, hue/saturation, unsharpmask, layers and many others. Or we may apply special software filters to obtain special effects such as motion blur. A big part of the editing workflow is in organizing and file naming to help in archiving and retrieval of photographs. When you deal with hundreds or thousands of images that need post-processing it is important to be organized and efficient.
Output of the image is the final step in a workflow and can be in print form, for use on the internet, on CD/DVD, etc. Here, it is important to understand the different file types used in digital photography because they will have a bearing on the quality of the image we are producing. While there are many file types, we mostly use either TIFF, jpeg, RAW, or psd files. For printing, we can use TIFF files, or jpeg files, but TIFF is preferred as jpeg degrades the image quality by compressing it. However, if we want to post a picture on the internet, jpeg is the preferred file type because by compressing it, we are reducing the file size to a manageable level so that it uploads to the net, or downloads to someone̢۪s computer much faster than a much larger TIFF file. RAW files are proprietary for each camera manufacturer and are produced in the camera during capture in a non-processed way. This kind of file gives us the greatest flexibility in post-processing our images but is not an output type file. It also requires a steep learning curve in learning how to edit these files. TIFF files are the largest file types and have the camera settings and parameters applied to them while RAW files do not. PSD files are files specifically for use in Photoshop and would need to be converted to another file type for output purposes.
Was this write up helpful to all? Was it too simple? Long? Do you have any questions or things you would like to add? Deapee, please add to it as you see fit.
|
|
|
|
07/11/2005 06:41:31 AM · #34 |
While getting the faster speed using a 1.8 f-stop, it would have also reduced your DOF to very narrow, rendering the top of thetower out of focus. I think it may have been better to use a 28mm or 35mm focal length lens to get a deeper DOF. Also, to handhold in low light conditions, you could have upped the ISO. Any additional noise this would have produced you could have reduced in noise reduction software during the post processing.
Originally posted by rjkstesch:
I was using my the Nikkor AF 28-70mm 3.5-4.6, most likely at the 70mm end. I would have been better off using my 50mm 1.8 lens and getting the faster speed, but alas, it was home.
(I carry my camera with me always, but only one lens. Even that makes my purse a heavy weapon to use against muggers.)
edited for clarity and spelling |
|
|
|
|
07/11/2005 06:47:25 AM · #35 |
Workflow:
It was good Olyuzi. I cements what I have read in books and also what I have begun to do recently which is try and come up with a couple visions and then search them out or create them. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 08:23:18 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by rjkstesch:
I was using my the Nikkor AF 28-70mm 3.5-4.6, most likely at the 70mm end. I would have been better off using my 50mm 1.8 lens and getting the faster speed, but alas, it was home.
(I carry my camera with me always, but only one lens. Even that makes my purse a heavy weapon to use against muggers.)
edited for clarity and spelling |
Cool, no need to be embarrased heh...I was just curious. Normally, when bumping ISO, it's to get more shutter speed, and when closing the aperture (bigger number), it's to get a slower one or more DOF -- in this case, being that you had to shoot at 70mm, you probably did the right thing.
If you could have gotten closer, say around 20mm, you can see how that hyperfocal distance would come into play though. Could have shot around f/4 and gotten a decent DOF -- sometimes things are just too far away though and you have to use a longer setting which can complicate things.
|
|
|
|
07/11/2005 10:09:54 AM · #37 |
| Actually, I was right under that 9 foot fence. I can see where bumping up the ISO to 1600 (the next highest & Max on my camera), using the 28mm setting and using hyperfocal would have really helped. Since I still have access to this spot, I'll try it again this week with these settings and let you see the results. It's nice to be able to try again. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 10:17:23 AM · #38 |
| Good write-up Olyuzi. Not too hot, nor cold. My challenge is putting it all together. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 01:31:10 PM · #39 |
Just want to inform everyone that I will be away this evening at work, and it may extend to the morning hours if I'm mandated to do overtime, which is likely. Deapee should be posting how a digital camera works tonight. I'm getting the impression that maybe we are being too basic for most of you and would like some feedback as to more of the direction you would like us to take. I want to be helpful and not post stuff that you already know. So please come up with some specific topics or questions that you would like us to address.
See you later, and stay cool! It's sweltering hot and humid here in the NYC region. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 03:23:55 PM · #40 |
Question: How come I somtimes get comments that the picture is OOF?
On a 20d I have 9 autofocus point. I recently submitted a challenge where I was positive I had at least 4 AFPs lit up when I took the shot but someone commented the photo appeared OOF. I took a look and I cannot see where the entire photo is OOF. I will send it to the group privately if you want to see it. Maybe Im blind but a recent eye examine put me at nearly 20/20 :)
So, I have to ask myself, maybe this person sees things OOF or maybe they expect to have the entire shot crystal clear in focus.
I would love to see if you guys think it is OOF. If so I probably need some help in focusing subject.
Im not complaining about the comment just trying to understand it. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 06:02:54 PM · #41 |
jseyerle I would like to have a look at the photo. I am not very good but I can usualy tell if something is out of focus.
Thanks Roni |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 06:08:41 PM · #42 |
ok guys, just checking in. I'm super busy right now, but should be around later. Post your photo that you're talking about jseyerle and we'll have a look at it.
Anyone in the group can post what you think, and I'll give it a look later as well. It's great learning from teaching, so that could be a fun little exercise. Make a critique on it...to give us a view on how you guys look at photos.
I'd say post your critique here, then post it in the image as well, that way it gets credited as having put in a comment, and if found helpful, can bump your count as well -- afterall, you are making a comment, you deserve the credit.
Do jseyerle's, also, take a look at this one...and go in detail, here's another to look at if you have the time.
Be back later. I'm going to go take my d70 apart so I can see how it is that a digital camera works ;)
|
|
|
|
07/11/2005 06:22:36 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by deapee:
ok guys, just checking in. I'm super busy right now, but should be around later. Post your photo that you're talking about jseyerle and we'll have a look at it.
Anyone in the group can post what you think, and I'll give it a look later as well. It's great learning from teaching, so that could be a fun little exercise. Make a critique on it...to give us a view on how you guys look at photos.
I'd say post your critique here, then post it in the image as well, that way it gets credited as having put in a comment, and if found helpful, can bump your count as well -- afterall, you are making a comment, you deserve the credit.
Do jseyerle's, also, take a look at this one...and go in detail, here's another to look at if you have the time.
Be back later. I'm going to go take my d70 apart so I can see how it is that a digital camera works ;) |
Ok I probably should wait until the challenge is over shouldnt i?
I will look at this image and post a critique. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 06:28:39 PM · #44 |
I have never critiqued a photo before but I feel that this photo is great. However I see some things that I think are wrong (from what I have learned so far on DPC. The first thing I notice is that the photo is divided right in half, horizontally and vertically. ( NO rule of thirds). The other thing that I think would have been better is the tip of the boat on the right hand side should have been cropped out. Maybe a tighter crop off of the sky. Like I said I have never done this before, but this is what I see when I look at this photo.
Roni
edit:Yes you should wait til the challenge is over I am sorry I didn't realize it was in a challenge right now
Message edited by author 2005-07-11 18:32:06. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 06:45:26 PM · #45 |
1) Seems very busy. Is this a skyline shot, or a boating shot. I would have used less water in the foreground and closed in on the boats just until the skyline began to fill the upper portion. So basically cut out some water and sky.
This would have also gotten rid of the rogue boat on the right and the extra bit of land. Hopefully would have helped adhre to Rule of Thirds.
2) On my LCD monitor it appears to be underexposed.
3) Nothing is really sharp in the image.
Thats all I can really see. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 10:20:35 PM · #46 |
| Technically, it does look dark on my monitor as well. It also does not appear to be very clear. By that I mean that at this size it looks passable, but looks like it doesn't have the detail needed for a larger size...hope that makes sense. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 10:52:47 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by deapee:
|
Hmmm, Ok, here's my go at it. I like the photo. I find a few post processing things can be done with it. I think some curves/levels and color tweaking will help make the colors more vivid, especially the sky. I think a little burning on the clouds to make them stand out just a touch will also help. I would crop the bow of the boat on the right. I agree that the people in front seem to lack detail, and I don't know if that's from focus things or compression or something like that. I like the bridge, but it's at just enough of an angle to make me think for a moment the picture is crooked, and then realize it's not. I have no idea though, if that's just me and my eyes making that happen or if it's an intentional illusion.
So, those are my comments on it. Cheers |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 10:59:03 PM · #48 |
| Olyuzi, great information. A question to you and deapee. 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? |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 11:01:32 PM · #49 |
deapee, I like the information on the hyperfocal distance. It never occured to me to take that into consideration, and is a great asset for using objects from the foreground to the background.
Everybody: this is GREAT! Already learned SO much! Thank you!
Edit: oh yes, and though some of us may know 'the basics' (Not saying I'm one of them) such as how digital cameras capture pictures, and what aperture is, I think starting with that would be great. Gives us building blocks for the future :)
Message edited by author 2005-07-11 23:06:59. |
|
|
|
07/11/2005 11:02:57 PM · #50 |
woops - wrong thread - sorry ;-)
Message edited by author 2005-07-11 23:04:22.
|
|
