| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/28/2006 04:53:00 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by kudzu:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
I must not be a rational adult either kudzu, I kinda like it :-) |
this was a subject of note recently, was it not? ;)
ahem... well anyway...
this was the, uh... prettier of the two hippos... her mom was all wrinkled and sweaty... took some nostril shots, too, with the hair and all... ick...
|
yeah, ahem ... ;-)
I think I dated her mom one time.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 04:59:22 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by micknewton:
I have a few questions...
1. What does an f-stop smell like?
2. How many focal lengths are in one mile?
3. Can I wash my CF cards to remove stale pixels?
4. Are CF cards diswasher safe?
5. Why doesn't bubblegum remove dust spots from my camera's sensor?
6. What's the best way to remove bubblegum from my camera's sensor? |
1. Poo
2. 1,852,000 mm
3. Yes, as long as the stored photos don't suck.
4. Actually ,yes...washing machine survivors too.
5. It does
6. Duct tape. |
Damn, you're good!
I'm not sure about #5, but I can't confirm it because my shutter is stuck and the LCD just keeps flashing "Game Over" all the time.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 05:08:57 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by micknewton:
I'm not sure about #5, but I can't confirm it because my shutter is stuck and the LCD just keeps flashing "Game Over" all the time. |
FWIW, I'm sure #4 is correct from personal experience.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 06:28:51 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by pearlseyes:
I can't seem to achieve accurate focus when I shoot people. The focus typically is somewhere than the intended place. I have a shot of a red head on my page that the focus seems to be on her shoulder strap yet I thought I locked focus on her eyes. This seems to be the case with most of my shots when people are involved since I bought my DSLR. Maybe I need a lesson on how to achieve proper focus. When I press the shutter button halfway then recompose my shot does it throw off focus if I remove my finger before pressing the shutter button completely? Maybe it has more to do with the aperture I'm selecting and the distance from the subject. I don't know. Any thoughts? I'm still trying to figure all this out. Thank you. |
I know I'm not fotomann, but try this out: Go into custom functions on your camera, and look for the one that switches AF and AE lock - should be CFN 4. Set it to the opposite of the default one, and it'll switch the AF operation to the AE button (the * button on the back, near your thumb). That way, you can get it to focus by pressing that button, and then compose without having to hold down the shutter button. It's easier for me, I have it set on both cameras and am totally used to it now. It makes it really convienent for a bunch of shots with the same focus distance, you can just click away withut worrying about it refocussing or having to switch to MF. In fact, if you set AF Servo mode, you never have to switch AF modes. |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 06:37:21 PM · #30 |
Where did I leave my keys?
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 06:38:28 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by idnic:
Where did I leave my keys? |
They are where you last put them, sweets :-)
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 06:54:46 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by cryingdragon:
Originally posted by Di:
cryingdragon ... pull up one of yoru pictures that we can talk about ... and then try reshooting it with the ideas that Leroy gives you.. |
OK, but just because I wondered why this was only a 4.7 in the challenge.
But I was really just looking for general hints and tips. |
Don't know if this has been mentioned before or not...but (IMO) the 12 for a buck tea candle killed it for me... Remember DPC is about snap and pop...
Here we have an elegant appearing sword luminated by a 10 cent candle. For me the candle really stands out taking away from what should be the subject...the Katana.
Perhaps if the candle was OOF it would lessen the interest and force us back to the sword. Or perhaps a candle that appeared more elegant and re-enforced the Japanese theme.
Just my take, but I first noticed the inexpensive candle before the more expensive sword...
Andy |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:09:04 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by cryingdragon:
But I was really just looking for general hints and tips. |
You've often said, even at least once in your photographer's comments, that you entered a challenge "just to get in", hinting that your entry wasn't the best you could do. That's probably 50% of the reason for your average score. You know you can do better than some of your entries. Maybe you shouldn't enter just to get in, but only when you have a solid idea, and you know your execution is the best you can do.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:14:55 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Since the light illuminating a subject falls off according to the inverse square law, why is it that if the camera moves farther away the exposure for that subject doesn't change? Obviously, the light reflected from the subject into the camera must obey the same physical laws as the light illuminating the subject. |
Bear, kirbic, HELP! |
Here's a little thought experiment for ya:
1> what % of difference exists on a naturally lit scene (sunlight illumination) if you move your camera from 10 feet away to 1000 feet away?
2> what % of difference exists on a candlelit scene if you do the same?
R.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:22:35 PM · #35 |
| Here's a weird one for you... I have a spider that comes and spins a web on my front porch every night. Before daybreak he packs it up and takes it away. I have been on my porch more nights than I can count trying soooo hard to take a picture of him. I'm using a tripod. If I turn any lights on he runs and hides. How do I illuminate him to take his picture and what type of settings should I use? |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:28:50 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by kdsprog:
Here's a weird one for you... I have a spider that comes and spins a web on my front porch every night. Before daybreak he packs it up and takes it away. I have been on my porch more nights than I can count trying soooo hard to take a picture of him. I'm using a tripod. If I turn any lights on he runs and hides. How do I illuminate him to take his picture and what type of settings should I use? |
Put the light out there before he builds the web. As long as he doesn;t think it's daylight and get confused he should get use to the light. I'd probably try to light it from the bottom of the web.
As for settings, if he stays still, use a remote and set the shutter to bulb.
Also, for added effect spray a little mist on the web.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:30:05 PM · #37 |
Thanks fotomann and madman2k. I'll give it a shot this week and see if I improve any.
A |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:36:47 PM · #38 |
I don't want to sound stupid or anything but I have heard the term bokah used many times and I can't find an definition anywhere.
Can someone help a clueless person out?
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:38:02 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Tlemetry:
I don't want to sound stupid or anything but I have heard the term bokah used many times and I can't find an definition anywhere.
Can someone help a clueless person out? |
Bokeh is the out-of-focus portion of a photograph. Here are some examples. |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:39:50 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Tlemetry:
I don't want to sound stupid or anything but I have heard the term bokah used many times and I can't find an definition anywhere.
Can someone help a clueless person out? |
Out of focus specular highlights.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:58:14 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by kdsprog:
Here's a weird one for you... I have a spider that comes and spins a web on my front porch every night. Before daybreak he packs it up and takes it away. I have been on my porch more nights than I can count trying soooo hard to take a picture of him. I'm using a tripod. If I turn any lights on he runs and hides. How do I illuminate him to take his picture and what type of settings should I use? |
Put the light out there before he builds the web. As long as he doesn;t think it's daylight and get confused he should get use to the light. I'd probably try to light it from the bottom of the web.
As for settings, if he stays still, use a remote and set the shutter to bulb.
Also, for added effect spray a little mist on the web. |
OK - more specific questions...
These are the best two attempts so far and you can see how bad they are...
 With this one, my husband came out with a portable spotlight and he (the spider) ran immediately around the porch to the side of the house with me giving chase and snapping away. Obviously, a bad way to go. But I'm really intrigued by the markings on his back.
 On this one, I went with a flashlight that my husband was shining on him from the porch roof overhead (he's construction, so no big deal for him, actually I should have taken a picture of that as it was pretty comical looking). He (the spider again) let me get really close. I set the timer for 10 seconds so I could back away. It seemed that just when I heard the shutter click, he moved.
So, the questions... I can't leave a light on or he won't come. Should I use flash? What shutter speed to prevent motion blur? What aperture?
edit for spelling
Message edited by author 2006-08-28 20:01:36. |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 07:59:31 PM · #42 |
| Anyone....I've got several Senior portraits set up. I did prom shots not to long ago, had a tough time with poses. Does anyone know a site I can visit to get ideas. Will be shooting some outside shots, than some studio shots.......Thanks..(Hey Mick, you've done some senior portraits haven't you)? |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 09:08:02 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by ace flyman:
Anyone....I've got several Senior portraits set up. I did prom shots not to long ago, had a tough time with poses. Does anyone know a site I can visit to get ideas. Will be shooting some outside shots, than some studio shots.......Thanks..(Hey Mick, you've done some senior portraits haven't you)? |
I did some senior photos for Mindy. They were all studio shots. We wanted to do outdoor natural light shots too, but the weather and long travel times didn't work in our favor. There's more of her on my SmugMug site.
A quick google search should find a bunch of photo websites with senior photo samples. There's also been lots of threads on the subject.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 09:21:42 PM · #44 |
| Love the shots with cowboy/girl hat...nice work....Thanks. |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 09:25:41 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by kdsprog:
So, the questions... I can't leave a light on or he won't come. Should I use flash? What shutter speed to prevent motion blur? What aperture? |
I like the look of the second one, minus the motion blur... Get the fastest shutter you can, so lowest aperture number available, turn up the ISO if your camera won't leave too much noise. If you use flash you'll light up the background but you should be able to freeze frame him that way. I like that black background though.
...or get your husband to catch him in a jar and shoot him next morning in better lighting. Don't kill him though, their legs curl up and it makes for a lousy photo...
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 09:30:52 PM · #46 |
[quote]
Don't kill him though, their legs curl up and it makes for a lousy photo... [/quote]
ROFL! My husband can hang from the highest heights, but won't get any where near a spider! |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 09:33:17 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Since the light illuminating a subject falls off according to the inverse square law, why is it that if the camera moves farther away the exposure for that subject doesn't change? Obviously, the light reflected from the subject into the camera must obey the same physical laws as the light illuminating the subject. |
Bear, kirbic, HELP! |
Here's a little thought experiment for ya:
1> what % of difference exists on a naturally lit scene (sunlight illumination) if you move your camera from 10 feet away to 1000 feet away?
2> what % of difference exists on a candlelit scene if you do the same?
R. |
Okay, tell me what you think of this idea:
The reason why we talk about "illumination" of the subject is that the light that is illuminating the subject spreads out as the square of the distance. So the further you move your strobe from the subject, the less light reaches it. (this would not be true if we used lasers for strobes)
The difference here is that from the subject to the camera is a straight line - point to point. The amount of light traveling does not disperse, it stays the same. So you get the same exposure whether you are right up next to the subject, or a thousand feet away.
(well, the light *will* drop off since it is traveling thru air and not a vacuum, but it is minimal over shorter distances)
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 09:46:58 PM · #48 |
Why do so many of my histograms end up bunched up in the middle like this?
|
|
|x
|xx
|xxxx
|xxxxxx
|xxxxxxxxx
|xxxxxxxx
|xxxx
|xx
|x
|
|
Is this considered a good exposure? |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 10:11:23 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Since the light illuminating a subject falls off according to the inverse square law, why is it that if the camera moves farther away the exposure for that subject doesn't change? Obviously, the light reflected from the subject into the camera must obey the same physical laws as the light illuminating the subject. |
Bear, kirbic, HELP! |
Here's a little thought experiment for ya:
1> what % of difference exists on a naturally lit scene (sunlight illumination) if you move your camera from 10 feet away to 1000 feet away?
2> what % of difference exists on a candlelit scene if you do the same?
R. |
Okay, tell me what you think of this idea:
The reason why we talk about "illumination" of the subject is that the light that is illuminating the subject spreads out as the square of the distance. So the further you move your strobe from the subject, the less light reaches it. (this would not be true if we used lasers for strobes)
The difference here is that from the subject to the camera is a straight line - point to point. The amount of light traveling does not disperse, it stays the same. So you get the same exposure whether you are right up next to the subject, or a thousand feet away.
(well, the light *will* drop off since it is traveling thru air and not a vacuum, but it is minimal over shorter distances) |
hmmm, interesting, but flawed. If the light travelling from the subject to the camera did not disperse, you would only be able to see the subject from one point in space. I think you are thinking in the right direction, just not all the way there yet.
Think about it this way, if I have a light, a camera and a subject, I can set the light at some arbitrary distance ,X, from the subject and the camera and some other arbitrary distance, Y, focused on the subject and get some exposure.
If I move the light away from the subject to 1.4*X, I will get one less stop of light and if i move it to 0.7*X, I will get 1 stop more light.
On the other hand, moving the camera closer or further away does nothing to affect the exposure.
There is something else happening to the subject from the camera's point of view when it is moved closer or farther, what is it?
Message edited by author 2006-08-28 22:17:53. |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 10:16:53 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
hmmm, interesting, but flawed.
Think about it this way, if I have a light, a camera and a subject, I can set the light at some arbitrary distance ,X, from the subject and the camera and some other arbitrary distance, Y, focused on the subject and get some exposure.
If I move the light away from the subject to 1.4*X, I will get one less stop of light and if i move it to 0.7*X, I will get 1 stop more light.
On the other hand, moving the camera closer or further away does nothing to affect the exposure.
There is something else happening to the subject from the camera's point of view, what is it? |
Actually he answered this.
You move the light source away, less light is hitting the object due to diffusion. You move it closer, more hits it. As said, this wouldn't be the case if lighting with lasers.
Whatever amount of light hitting the subject, it is a constant value as far as your camera is concerned when viewing it. |
|
