| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/03/2013 08:54:49 PM · #1 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Is it too late to point out that this special rule eliminates from participation a possibly large portion of the pool — basically anyone without a dSLR camera? Point&Shoot or "in-between" cameras like mine can't take 30-second exposures. |
You should check out CHDK. I used it back when I had my S5, and it added some cool features.
Specific to this challenge, it allows you to extend your shutter speed to 64 seconds.
//chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 08:41:55 PM · #2 |
| Is it too late to point out that this special rule eliminates from participation a possibly large portion of the pool — basically anyone without a dSLR camera? Point&Shoot or "in-between" cameras like mine can't take 30-second exposures. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 05:26:39 PM · #3 |
Thera are other way to take photo with long exposures, but now i can't tell you 'cause i've entered the challenge... :-)
|
|
|
|
01/03/2013 03:59:11 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by giantmike:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by giantmike:
Originally posted by mike_311:
that's the problem, no polarizer, no ND filters. maybe i'll just hold a piece of black card board over the lens to increase the time if i need to :P |
Perfectly within the rules, and I actually would like to see some of those to mess with people's minds :) |
It may be "within the rule" as written, but it's sure as hell against the spirit of the challenge, and I got to admit I'm a little taken aback that you seem to think it's a fun idea for a bunch of people to go to work and "mess with" the voters' minds.
Come ON, man, we got enough problems already without you fomenting insurrection against a very specific (and interesting) little extra rule in a particular challenge :-) |
I guess that didn't come across as intended. What I meant to say was that I would like to see these types of shots to break down pre-conceived notions. Like using a long exposure in a completely dark room, but multiple flashes to create interesting effects in one frame. I don't find that at all against the spirit of the challenge.
That is exactly why I shot my last minimal entry using the 1:1 ratio switch on my camera. By the time I woke up the first morning of voting, my shot was already requested for validation. It was validated by the SC a few days later.
 |
Hehe... I used the 1:1 as well and got a verification... then the SC didn't validate until less than 12 hours to go in voting. I think it was hurt (a little) by this. but I wanted to push the perception and use the 1:1 to "show off" that it could be done without PP cropping...
As for long exposure tricks...
   
These were all long (sub-30, but still 15-25 seconds) in a dark room with shutter open and the flashes being fired manually. The last one required a camera flip on the tripod and blocking of where to stand to not overlap.
These would and should be valid... but like the 1:1 shots, the voters who don't see blur and movement will assume it wasn't a long shot or that it violates the spirit of the challenge.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2013 03:52:25 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by giantmike:
Originally posted by mike_311:
that's the problem, no polarizer, no ND filters. maybe i'll just hold a piece of black card board over the lens to increase the time if i need to :P |
Perfectly within the rules, and I actually would like to see some of those to mess with people's minds :) |
It may be "within the rule" as written, but it's sure as hell against the spirit of the challenge, and I got to admit I'm a little taken aback that you seem to think it's a fun idea for a bunch of people to go to work and "mess with" the voters' minds.
Come ON, man, we got enough problems already without you fomenting insurrection against a very specific (and interesting) little extra rule in a particular challenge :-) |
I've entered several shots in other challenge where the exposure was 25-30 seconds, but the actual "lights on" time was very little. It is completely valid and allows you to create some in-camera combinations that could not ordinarily be achieved. Without the extended exposure, you'd have to PP those effects. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 02:42:05 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I do understand that these techniques are "legal" within the challenge: if EXIF shows 30+ seconds, there ya go. But WHY? Why bother? These are like, technique-driven challenges, to get us focusing on certain aspects of the craft we might not often work with, and putting the energy into finding a way AROUND the "limitation" seems quixotic to me. |
I understand where you're coming from. Last time I was in NYC I picked up a 3, 6, and 10 stop ND filter to do just this. It's just after seeing the winning entry for the 1-second entry I had to do something similar (not the composition, but the idea).
Due to the holidays I can't get to the location I would have liked for this challenge to use my new filters.
Message edited by author 2013-01-03 14:44:12. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 02:36:00 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by giantmike:
That is exactly why I shot my last minimal entry using the 1:1 ratio switch on my camera. By the time I woke up the first morning of voting, my shot was already requested for validation. It was validated by the SC a few days later.
|
Jejeje. I did that too, had an entry ready to go from the Lumix in square format, but in he end I liked the picture I entered better so the square one didn't make the cut. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 02:34:45 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Venser:
I'll pull my entry then. It was a 30 second capture with a rear sync flash.
How's it against the spirit of the challenge? The challenge specifically says 30 or more seconds, which is easily verified through EXIF data. I would argue going against the spirit of the challenge are the people who took more than 47 steps, something completely taken on faith. |
I got no problem with rear-curtain flash if it pulls BG detail with it. If what you're talking about is shooting in a completely dark room with a 30-second exposure so you get, in effect, 1/4000 of a second or something, well I think that's sort of lame personally.
I do understand that these techniques are "legal" within the challenge: if EXIF shows 30+ seconds, there ya go. But WHY? Why bother? These are like, technique-driven challenges, to get us focusing on certain aspects of the craft we might not often work with, and putting the energy into finding a way AROUND the "limitation" seems quixotic to me.
Still, seriously, both you guys, go ahead and knock yourselves out :-) I did put a smiley on my first comment, 'cuz I'd be a fine one to seriously expostulate against that sorta stuff when I've done plenty of obscure fiddling in my day... |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 01:39:09 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by giantmike:
Originally posted by mike_311:
that's the problem, no polarizer, no ND filters. maybe i'll just hold a piece of black card board over the lens to increase the time if i need to :P |
Perfectly within the rules, and I actually would like to see some of those to mess with people's minds :) |
It may be "within the rule" as written, but it's sure as hell against the spirit of the challenge, and I got to admit I'm a little taken aback that you seem to think it's a fun idea for a bunch of people to go to work and "mess with" the voters' minds.
Come ON, man, we got enough problems already without you fomenting insurrection against a very specific (and interesting) little extra rule in a particular challenge :-) |
I guess that didn't come across as intended. What I meant to say was that I would like to see these types of shots to break down pre-conceived notions. Like using a long exposure in a completely dark room, but multiple flashes to create interesting effects in one frame. I don't find that at all against the spirit of the challenge.
That is exactly why I shot my last minimal entry using the 1:1 ratio switch on my camera. By the time I woke up the first morning of voting, my shot was already requested for validation. It was validated by the SC a few days later.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2013 01:35:44 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
It may be "within the rule" as written, but it's sure as hell against the spirit of the challenge, and I got to admit I'm a little taken aback that you seem to think it's a fun idea for a bunch of people to go to work and "mess with" the voters' minds.
Come ON, man, we got enough problems already without you fomenting insurrection against a very specific (and interesting) little extra rule in a particular challenge :-) |
I'll pull my entry then. It was a 30 second capture with a rear sync flash.
How's it against the spirit of the challenge? The challenge specifically says 30 or more seconds, which is easily verified through EXIF data. I would argue going against the spirit of the challenge are the people who took more than 47 steps, something completely taken on faith.
Message edited by author 2013-01-03 13:51:01. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 01:34:58 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by giantmike:
As for the f stop question, with the DPC image size of 800px max, you don't have to worry too much. I shot some images at 15mm with f/22 and at 24mm with f/29. While it's true that full sized they lose sharpness, when sized down to 800px, it wasn't visible. |
+1
Unless you're doing some crazy macro at f/40 or something, at 800px this effect will be imperceivable.
Message edited by author 2013-01-03 13:37:16. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 01:32:59 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by giantmike:
Originally posted by mike_311:
that's the problem, no polarizer, no ND filters. maybe i'll just hold a piece of black card board over the lens to increase the time if i need to :P |
Perfectly within the rules, and I actually would like to see some of those to mess with people's minds :) |
It may be "within the rule" as written, but it's sure as hell against the spirit of the challenge, and I got to admit I'm a little taken aback that you seem to think it's a fun idea for a bunch of people to go to work and "mess with" the voters' minds.
Come ON, man, we got enough problems already without you fomenting insurrection against a very specific (and interesting) little extra rule in a particular challenge :-) |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 01:29:32 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by giantmike:
As for the f stop question, with the DPC image size of 800px max, you don't have to worry too much. I shot some images at 15mm with f/22 and at 24mm with f/29. While it's true that full sized they lose sharpness, when sized down to 800px, it wasn't visible. |
That's true enough; they're usable at small size, but the fine-detail resolution at any normal size suffers. At 800 pixels we can't capture the full detail our ultrawides render anyway... |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 01:27:04 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
that's the problem, no polarizer, no ND filters. maybe i'll just hold a piece of black card board over the lens to increase the time if i need to :P |
Perfectly within the rules, and I actually would like to see some of those to mess with people's minds :)
As for the f stop question, with the DPC image size of 800px max, you don't have to worry too much. I shot some images at 15mm with f/22 and at 24mm with f/29. While it's true that full sized they lose sharpness, when sized down to 800px, it wasn't visible. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 01:15:50 PM · #15 |
| that's the problem, no polarizer, no ND filters. maybe i'll just hold a piece of black card board over the lens to increase the time if i need to :P |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 12:54:57 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
ok i'll be using a 17-40mm, i should try to stay above what fstop |
At 17mm, I try to shoot at f/8 or f/11 with that lens. I'd be willing to go f/16 in a pinch at 40mm... You can use your polarizer, if you have one, to get a stop or two darker.
Message edited by author 2013-01-03 12:56:11. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 12:52:09 PM · #17 |
| ok i'll be using a 17-40mm, i should try to stay above what fstop |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 12:51:42 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by mefnj:
i am assuming the extra rule means the EXIF in the ORIGINAL, if requested, must indicate 30s exposure.
i ask b/c i convert my raw image to a TIFF to do some adjustments using Nik software, and this seems to strip out most of the EXIF data that would be recorded with the final JPEG for DPC submission.
any confirmation of this?
-m |
That's correct. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 12:50:25 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
just preparing here, i m worried that 30s may be too long to get a proper exposure where i plan to, i have heard that if i close down my lens too much i am degrading the sharpness, at what point does it occur? i know how my lenses behave on the other end but i rarly shoot so closed down. |
Depends on how long the lens is. A 200mm lens can easily be shot at f/22 with essentially no adverse effects. At 17mm, f/22 would be problematic. F/stop is the ratio of aperture diameter to focal length, so f/20 on a 200mm lens would be a 10mm aperture, whilst on a 17mm lens it would be .85mm, very tiny.... |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 12:48:25 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
just preparing here, i m worried that 30s may be too long to get a proper exposure where i plan to, i have heard that if i close down my lens too much i am degrading the sharpness, at what point does it occur? i know how my lenses behave on the other end but i rarly shoot so closed down. |
It depends on the lens and the sensor. In general, f/20, f/22 or tinier aperture will cause light rays to diffract. You'll lose some image sharpness in the details. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 12:44:30 PM · #21 |
| just preparing here, i m worried that 30s may be too long to get a proper exposure where i plan to, i have heard that if i close down my lens too much i am degrading the sharpness, at what point does it occur? i know how my lenses behave on the other end but i rarly shoot so closed down. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 11:33:08 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
I was outside for about 2 hours overnight. The temperature was +2 degrees F. (-17 degrees C.) No wind, which helped a lot. The camera, lens and tripod worked great, although I'll admit I was on manual focus and manual settings, but I have every reason to believe the metering and AF would have functioned well, had I needed them. My only regret.... limited to 800 pixels on the longest dimension. Very much a disadvantage for me. |
I've shot in single digits plenty of times with my camera, and the worst I've ever experienced was that the LCD gets slow.
The shots I took for this shot  were not only in mostly single digit temps but heavy blowing snow, and there was zero problems other than a bit of snow encrusted on the camera and a slow lcd display. Our cameras are more resilient than most think. The batteries do tend to be a bit troublesome, but swapping one in and out of one's coat does the trick generally. |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 11:26:59 AM · #23 |
| brought my gear to work and staying til sundown, will be shooting tonight! |
|
|
|
01/03/2013 11:05:25 AM · #24 |
| I was outside for about 2 hours overnight. The temperature was +2 degrees F. (-17 degrees C.) No wind, which helped a lot. The camera, lens and tripod worked great, although I'll admit I was on manual focus and manual settings, but I have every reason to believe the metering and AF would have functioned well, had I needed them. My only regret.... limited to 800 pixels on the longest dimension. Very much a disadvantage for me. |
|
|
|
01/02/2013 10:28:27 PM · #25 |
| ok, whether permitting i'm going out tomorrow night. |
|
