Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 19, 2025, 04:33:31 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Topic: Digital Camera & Photoshop tips 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 25 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Digital Camera & Photoshop tips  (Read 336378 times)
NiX
Wiki Admin
Posts: 7770

Locomotive Pandamonium


Reply #175 on: February 18, 2009, 07:10:05 AM

What is it lacking?
Boobs.

Seriously, what Righ said and the pose, which you already pointed out. Otherwise, it's fine.

On another note, I need advice for long distance shooting with a point and shoot digital camera. I'm heading out to Alberta in a week, so I'll be visiting the mountain region, need to know the best way to capture these shots without them looking like I just stopped, took a picture and kept walking.
JWIV
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2392


Reply #176 on: February 18, 2009, 07:35:01 AM

The usual answer is a haze filter and/or ND gradient to help with sky/ground exposure, neither of which is any use to you.  Maybe exposure bracket and then do some exposure blending.  Other than that, pray for good conditions and composition will probably reign supreme.

Ookii
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 2676

is actually Trippy


WWW
Reply #177 on: February 18, 2009, 08:23:32 AM

What's the model and brand of your point and shoot?

Stewie
Terracotta Army
Posts: 439


Reply #178 on: February 18, 2009, 08:37:45 AM

Quote
On another note, I need advice for long distance shooting with a point and shoot digital camera. I'm heading out to Alberta in a week, so I'll be visiting the mountain region, need to know the best way to capture these shots without them looking like I just stopped, took a picture and kept walking.

Doesnt matter what kind of camera you are using. The most important thing when taking landscapes is a good tripod. I cannot stress this enough.
Also instead of a uv filter you want a polarizer to get those rich colours and remove any unnecessary glare. As far as the "long Distance" shooting you mentioned,  unless you are shooting wildlife just shoot wider and you should be ok. (if you are shooting wildlife, get as clos as possible without getting eaten why so serious?)
Alway keep in mind good composition. IE: rule of thirds, good leading lines, foreground interest and good contrasting subjects. Of course these rules are more guidelines but if you stay close to them you will generally be ok.

Professional Forum Lurker.
Ookii
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 2676

is actually Trippy


WWW
Reply #179 on: February 18, 2009, 09:09:23 AM

Except if his camera can do some manual stuff.  Or has preprogrammed modes that do manual stuff for you.

Stewie
Terracotta Army
Posts: 439


Reply #180 on: February 18, 2009, 09:11:48 AM

Of course you are correct, but I am assuming that most all point and shoots nowadays have some manual functions and the ability to set your own aperture and shutter speed at the very least :)

Professional Forum Lurker.
NiX
Wiki Admin
Posts: 7770

Locomotive Pandamonium


Reply #181 on: February 18, 2009, 09:15:46 AM

What's the model and brand of your point and shoot?
Don't remember the exact model number. It's the Canon SD750 I think. Unfortunately it doesn't have IS.
Stewie
Terracotta Army
Posts: 439


Reply #182 on: February 18, 2009, 09:33:33 AM

If you are doing landscape photography you do not need IS, just a good tripod.

Professional Forum Lurker.
JWIV
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2392


Reply #183 on: February 18, 2009, 09:34:39 AM

Just because my uncle swears by his (mostly because it's stupid convenient), a good monopod is also an alternative if you don't want to lug about a tripod.
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 23657


Reply #184 on: February 18, 2009, 10:23:37 AM

Of course you are correct, but I am assuming that most all point and shoots nowadays have some manual functions and the ability to set your own aperture and shutter speed at the very least :)
That would be incorrect awesome, for real

E.g. the Canon SD1100IS I got for my mom for Christmas has no manual controls over stutter speed or the aperature and that's true for almost all of Canon's newer P&S cameras.

Stewie
Terracotta Army
Posts: 439


Reply #185 on: February 18, 2009, 10:35:16 AM

huh, I was not aware of that. That's kinda silly but I guess they are trying to dumb things down as much as possible.

I guess the old adage of what happens when you assume applies to me :)

Professional Forum Lurker.
Bunk
Contributor
Posts: 5828

Operating Thetan One


Reply #186 on: February 18, 2009, 10:52:32 AM

Nix - I'll agree with Stewie on paying attention to composition basics. For example - if shooting a landscape - don't stick the horizon dead center of the frame. If you are shooting something in the distance like a mountain, consider having something also in the foreground. Puting a tree in the edge of the image, that sort of thing.


Ooki - move his head down a little in the frame - right now the focus of the picture is on his chin, it should be on his eyes. Also, most of time portraits look better with the subject at a bit more of an angle. You want shadows across the face like you have, but having him turn a bit would remove the blackeye look.

If you find the light/shadows to be too much of a contrast, stick a big white reflector opposite the light, to difuse the shadows.

"Welcome to the internet, pussy." - VDL
"I have retard strength." - Schild
Ookii
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 2676

is actually Trippy


WWW
Reply #187 on: February 18, 2009, 12:28:54 PM

If you find the light/shadows to be too much of a contrast, stick a big white reflector opposite the light, to difuse the shadows.

I HAVE ONE AND I STILL COULDN'T GET RID OF THE BLACK EYE THING.

I spent like an hour on that yesterday, my reflector is a white foam board on a pvc stand.  I was having no luck, I could illuminate the whole side of the face but not that stupid quarter size area to the size of the nose and below the brow.

I eventually just started taking pictures without facing the camera directly, instead I pointed the head more towards the light source.  That did the trick, I'll have to keep playing to get the direct on thing working.

Bunk
Contributor
Posts: 5828

Operating Thetan One


Reply #188 on: February 18, 2009, 01:19:09 PM

Lol.

As you said, turn his head. When shooting a subject straight on, you might see the photographer use two light sources, say straight out either side.
For one light, you might have also simply moved the light more to the front, instead of turning him.

Get HAMMER FRENZY to come over a point a flashlight directly at Jacob's left eye - that'll do it!

"Welcome to the internet, pussy." - VDL
"I have retard strength." - Schild
apocrypha
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6711

Planes? Shit, I'm terrified to get in my car now!


Reply #189 on: February 19, 2009, 12:22:07 AM

Righ: the 70-200 VR is fucking gorgeous, and a beaut to use. I'm doing physiotherapy like a mofo so I can get out there and use the damn thing more  awesome, for real

Nix: most important thing for good landscape pictures is patience. Waiting until you find the right picture (this is an active process... *looking* for it) and the right light. If you find a spot that looks really, really good, would it look better if the light was different? Ansel Adams would go to the same spot every single day, over and over and over again for *years* until he got the shots that have been on people's walls for decades ever since.

Ookii: To get rid of the dark eye bring the light more towards the camera. Start at 45 degrees, move it around, left/right/up/down, until it looks better. Get the subject to point their face in exactly the right direction for the light - hold you finger up and tell them to point their nose at your finger while keeping their eyes locked on the camera. That makes most people concentrate and they lose their "camera face" often too :p  Also, try bringing your light and reflector closer. Just out of frame. Adjust the ratio of light:dark by changing those distances - light further away + reflector closer = less contrast between the two sides and vice versa.

You also have very little contrast separation between subject & background. Move subject further away from background to make it darker or put more light on it to make it lighter. Or put a tungsten light on the background and a flash light (or daylight from a window, diffused through a sheet) on the subject and set the camera white balance to daylight - gives you a colour separation, or reverse that, daylight on the background, tungsten on the subject and set white balance to tungsten, gives a nice blue tinge to the background. Two lights is nice, gives you more control, but you can do a huge amount with one light and some experimentation!

"Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to socialism or regression into barbarism" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1915.
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 32117

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


Reply #190 on: February 19, 2009, 07:49:03 AM

Get HAMMER FRENZY to come over a point a flashlight directly at Jacob's left eye - that'll do it!
Have HAMMER pose him  why so serious?
Ookii
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 2676

is actually Trippy


WWW
Reply #191 on: February 19, 2009, 08:17:04 PM

OMFG i Heartbreak lightroom.

I didn't even know this shit existed before I watched Zack Arias's OneLight DVD thingie, which is AWESOME btw.  I know you guys talked about it on the last page, I just had no clue what it did.

I barely have to use Photoshop now!

stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #192 on: February 19, 2009, 10:54:50 PM

I've still never used it (granted, I'm just noob at this stuff, but I have used Aperture a bit). I like the idea of quick launching editors, and keeping organization separately.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60350


WWW
Reply #193 on: February 19, 2009, 11:58:26 PM

OMFG i Heartbreak lightroom.

I didn't even know this shit existed before I watched Zack Arias's OneLight DVD thingie, which is AWESOME btw.  I know you guys talked about it on the last page, I just had no clue what it did.

I barely have to use Photoshop now!

I find it impossible that you'd never used or knew of Lightroom before a dvd.

Seriously. Insane.
Ookii
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 2676

is actually Trippy


WWW
Reply #194 on: February 20, 2009, 07:08:55 AM

So I changed my photo in Lightroom and then did a little more editing in Photoshop with it.  After I looked at the picture in ACDsee and it didn't look the same.  I figured it was the ICC Color Profile so once I turned on "Use profiles if they are embedded in the image" it started looking correct.  The only problem is I don't know what the pictures would look like on someone else s stuff, anyone have any idea?

apocrypha
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6711

Planes? Shit, I'm terrified to get in my car now!


Reply #195 on: February 24, 2009, 12:02:39 AM

Welcome to the wonderful world of colour management. There are 100s of books written just about this. Cambridge in Colour is probably the best online set of guides to it.
 
It's a nightmare. You're pretty much never certain how your stuff will look on other people's systems unless they've got calibrated monitors and a correct colour workflow. All you can do is work to best practices yourself - get a hardware monitor calibration device and use it regularly.

Working for print is a lot easier once you calibrate, working for digital display sucks. This is why the Flickr "most interesting" photos are often very over-saturated and strong in primary colours, because subtle shades and colours are lost on most people's monitors.

"Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to socialism or regression into barbarism" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1915.
Ookii
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 2676

is actually Trippy


WWW
Reply #196 on: March 06, 2009, 08:46:06 PM

Schmap decided to use my SF Japanese Tea Garden Photo for their San Francisco guide or something.  It's just a small photo but it's still kind of cool, there was a whole submission process and stuff.

http://www.schmap.com/sanfrancisco/sights_goldengatepark/#p=20654&i=20654_30.jpg

JWIV
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2392


Reply #197 on: March 07, 2009, 08:10:23 AM

Schmap decided to use my SF Japanese Tea Garden Photo for their San Francisco guide or something.  It's just a small photo but it's still kind of cool, there was a whole submission process and stuff.

http://www.schmap.com/sanfrancisco/sights_goldengatepark/#p=20654&i=20654_30.jpg

Dude, it's awesome.  Congratulations!
Ookii
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 2676

is actually Trippy


WWW
Reply #198 on: March 10, 2009, 12:44:08 PM

I highly recommend checking out Zack Arias's new critique video, it's pretty awesome.

http://www.zarias.com/?p=303

Righ
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6542

Teaching the world Google-fu one broken dream at a time.


Reply #199 on: March 12, 2009, 09:19:44 PM

Drool. New "cheap" Nikon street lens for compact sensor bodies:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09020901nikon35mm1p8.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/nikon_35_1p8_preview/

Added to the long list of lenses I want. Being at the lower cost end of the list, I can see myself getting one fairly soon. A long time before I get my 70-200 2.8 VR. Sniff.

Available early next week from Amazon who closed their pre-order page weeks ago and shipped those pre-orders today. Adorama got ~500 and pre-orders took care of all of them - they'll have more later this month. B&H sold all theirs on day one and are awaiting resupply.

While you ponder that, Best Buy has the Nikon D200 body for $600. I wouldn't normally suggest an older D-SLR since the rate of camera improvement is dramatic (the D300 knocks it into a cocked hat), and more modern lower-end models may outperform them making even cheap older high-end cameras of questionable value. But the D200 has a few "pro" features not on lower-end cameras that people might really like at this price point, most notably the ability to meter using old manual focus Nikon AIS lenses and supporting higher frame rate using a battery grip. Which is great for using relatively inexpensive fast primes and shooting action. However, it has a CCD rather than CMOS sensor, so its noisier in low light than the D90 and likely whatever replaces the D40 at the bottom end (probably mid-late this year). But a good price from a presumably reliable reseller if you want to shoot AIS glass or fast action on the cheap.

The D40 was discontinued and no new SLR was announced by Nikon at PMA, making the D60 the low-end model for now. I can't see that situation lasting out the year. The D60 is too pricey compared to the newer higher-end cameras in Nikon's range - they should bring out a low-end model with the D300/D90 sensor at some point.

The camera adds a thousand barrels. - Steven Colbert
apocrypha
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6711

Planes? Shit, I'm terrified to get in my car now!


Reply #200 on: March 13, 2009, 06:31:23 AM

Schmap decided to use my SF Japanese Tea Garden Photo for their San Francisco guide or something.  It's just a small photo but it's still kind of cool, there was a whole submission process and stuff.

http://www.schmap.com/sanfrancisco/sights_goldengatepark/#p=20654&i=20654_30.jpg

Ookii that's awesome, grats :)


Anyone interested in off-camera lighting might wanna have a look at a new flash that's just been released, the LumoPro LP120.

It's been custom designed for manual, off-camera work with an eye to very low cost. It has no auto flash or TTL or any of that stuff, just manual power settings down to 1/32 (GN80) but it has four way sync - hot shoe, external PC jack, 1/8" jack and built-in optical slave, which is just the most awesome collection of sync options ever :)  Plus cos it hasn't got all that TTL crap it's only $130. I'd rather have 3 of them than 1 SB-900 any day  awesome, for real

"Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to socialism or regression into barbarism" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1915.
Mosesandstick
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2476


Reply #201 on: March 13, 2009, 02:05:41 PM

Damn, that lens has to be one of the few things in my life I've bought as soon as it's come out.

As soon as I get the lens I'll probably try to take some indoors shots of my martial arts peeps. Will tell you how it works out  Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?.
Mosesandstick
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2476


Reply #202 on: March 20, 2009, 01:53:57 PM

People, I need tips.

I want to go hiking (I live in the UK) and take some nice scenic shots. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I am thinking I need a tripod. My main issues are how on Earth I'm going to carry my stuff. Carrying hiking crap I can deal with (though I haven't really done any serious hiking, I've got the huge bag and everything), and carrying photography stuff I can handle. Both at the same time? Not so easy. The lenses I have are:

18-55
55-200 VR
35 prime

Which should be good to handle anything I can think of, though any recommendations for lenses will be appreciated. Also would love recommendations for locations to visit in the UK. Thanks in advance.
Righ
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6542

Teaching the world Google-fu one broken dream at a time.


Reply #203 on: March 22, 2009, 10:19:34 AM

What I'd take is a single body, a tripod and a suitably wide lens for the scenery shots. Your most useful lens will be the 18-55mm - at the widest, it is currently the equivalent of 27mm on a 35mm frame. You'll find yourself bang up against that a lot of the time and sometimes wanting more. The good news is that you don't need speed for landscapes, especially with a tripod, so that lens will serve you well. Depending on how much you want to spend there are several ways you can go.

Tripod - if you don't have one, this is most likely where you want to spend money first. It needs to be solid enough to hold your camera and lens safely, it needs to be well built enough to be easy to adjust and less likely to wear out as a result of heavy use. If you're hiking, you almost certainly want carbon-fiber legs to reduce weight. Legs with three sections are more stable than those with four, but those with four will fit on smaller packs. You don't have to buy stuff as expensive as Gitzo & Really Right Stuff, but it may pay you back in the long run if you can. The Manfrotto stuff is a good price for acceptable gear.

Superzoom - the 18-200mm VR doesn't go any wider than you have but it is a great hiking lens since it covers anything you might happen upon to shoot without carrying other lenses.

Go wide - Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S DX. Equivalent to 18-36mm in 35mm terms. It's THE landscape lens for Nikon DX sensors. It'll cost the best part of a grand though.

The camera adds a thousand barrels. - Steven Colbert
Stewie
Terracotta Army
Posts: 439


Reply #204 on: March 23, 2009, 09:34:56 AM

One thing I would recommend with your tripod is that you get a pan head with a level on it. This will help if you wants to take a few panoramic shots.

Personally I have a ball head which is nice as it doesn't have the handles and stuff hanging off of it and it is super easy to adjust (one lever) but there have been many times I would have liked to have the ability to keep my camera level and just swivel it slightly.

The other thing is that you might not want to shoot at 18mm as most lenses aren't at their best at the extreme ends. You will usually have a sweet spot but generally speaking most decent lenses produce better results when not at their limits.

Oh and definately get the carbon fiber if you can afford it. My tripod is a manfrotto and is hella heavy. Although on the plus side if I run into any bears I have a weapon to defend myself with.
 

Professional Forum Lurker.
Mosesandstick
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2476


Reply #205 on: March 23, 2009, 11:32:50 AM

Sweet advice guys, thanks a lot.

Unfortunately those lenses are out of my price range (I'll stop being a student eventually...)

I think I will try and get one of those serious wide angle lens next, maybe I'll sell a kidney. I tried taking shots in Prague during sunrise (without a tripod  awesome, for real) at 18mm on my 18-55 and the results weren't exactly as I expected. Serious, serious, vignetting and god knows what else.

I'll take a look at the carbon fibre tripods. I don't need to worry about bears cos I can just use my martial arts skills.
Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27449

Badge Whore


Reply #206 on: March 24, 2009, 09:25:10 AM

While you ponder that, Best Buy has the Nikon D200 body for $600. I wouldn't normally suggest an older D-SLR since the rate of camera improvement is dramatic (the D300 knocks it into a cocked hat), and more modern lower-end models may outperform them making even cheap older high-end cameras of questionable value. But the D200 has a few "pro" features not on lower-end cameras that people might really like at this price point, most notably the ability to meter using old manual focus Nikon AIS lenses and supporting higher frame rate using a battery grip. Which is great for using relatively inexpensive fast primes and shooting action. However, it has a CCD rather than CMOS sensor, so its noisier in low light than the D90 and likely whatever replaces the D40 at the bottom end (probably mid-late this year). But a good price from a presumably reliable reseller if you want to shoot AIS glass or fast action on the cheap.

The D40 was discontinued and no new SLR was announced by Nikon at PMA, making the D60 the low-end model for now. I can't see that situation lasting out the year. The D60 is too pricey compared to the newer higher-end cameras in Nikon's range - they should bring out a low-end model with the D300/D90 sensor at some point.

So this seems to be the thread to ask in, and I'll quote Righ since he was the last one talking about it:

The wife and I got a grand from Mom to buy something "from Dad" since his passing.  We're budgeting about ~500 to buy a new digital camera, and I'd like to get an SLR-type instead of just a point and shoot POS.  Neither of us has experience with such a camera, but my sister is a photography major and can assist in learning how to fiddle with all the settings. I'll be getting her input on a camera, too, but I like opinions from a wide variety of sources.

We'd primarily be using it for photos on vacations, around the house, birthdays, etc but I'd want to use it in the field at times, too, for shots on-site or of my companty's/ competetor's product.  Thus, my desire for more of an SLR than a point and shoot, since the lens-swapping would help me on Architecture shots while we could have a more standard 30mm for 'everyday' type shots.

Or hey, maybe just one of the advanced point and shoots like the Sony Cybershot would serve us better.  I'll be honest, I'm not entirely certain.

 Reccommendations?

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
Righ
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6542

Teaching the world Google-fu one broken dream at a time.


Reply #207 on: March 24, 2009, 10:51:19 AM

You're going to be severely limited in your choice of D-SLRs at the $500 price point, particularly since you will need at least a basic kit lens as well as the body. There are actually few if any current D-SLR cameras including lenses retailing at this price point now that Nikon have discontinued the D40 (though there are a handful that regularly discount under $500). However, where the older models are sill available new they still have the full warranties, so unless you need the latest features they're still good candidates.

The Nikon D40 is still the bargain D-SLR, costing less than the cheapest of the Canon Rebels. But the older Rebels are still in the shops and represent pretty good value too. Between them, Nikon and Canon have owned the SLR world for a while, and they have the most lenses available for them, both in their own ranges and from third parties. So if you envisage yourself spending many thousands of dollars on lenses in the future, it might be better to stick to one of these two manufacturers simply because you'll have the greatest chance of finding the lenses you need and using those lenses on future cameras.

Sony's cameras and lenses have come a long way in a short time, and they represent pretty good value - you can get a Sony A200 and lens for $499 pretty easily. At least one of the Olympus and Pentax models should be selling under $500 in most places too. One other option, somewhat above your price point (around $800) is the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1, which is not an SLR, but probably fits your requirements. Its the first shutterless digicam with removable lenses. So it has some of the properties of an SLR without being anywhere near as large. With an adapter you can even use all the lenses made for Olympus SLRs.

If you want something compact with a fixed lens, nothing beats the Canon PowerShot G10 at the moment. Its the king of the pocket digicams.

The camera adds a thousand barrels. - Steven Colbert
apocrypha
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6711

Planes? Shit, I'm terrified to get in my car now!


Reply #208 on: March 24, 2009, 12:30:36 PM

Agreeing with Righ here, $500 is right at the low end for a DSLR.

In my view the advantage of an SLR is that you buy good lenses that you then continue to use forever, replacing the body as technology leaves it behind. Unfortunately to get the best out of this approach means buying good lenses, which really aren't cheap. However, if you spend $1000+ on a good Nikon or Canon lens then you'll probably still be using it in 20 years time, unlike the DSLR body you buy now for 3x that price.

I'd vote going for a good bridging camera at that price point - something larger and with a better lens than a standard compact but not as comlex or bulky or expensive as a full DSLR. Something like a Canon G10 maybe? The DMC-G1 is a very interesting camera but I have a bit of a Betamax feeling about the Four-thirds system. It *might* be an awesome system that survives and leads the way for mirrorless cameras in the future..... or it might fail horribly and disappear into obscurity. I'm hoping it survives but I'm a terrible judge of such things :P

"Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to socialism or regression into barbarism" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1915.
Ookii
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 2676

is actually Trippy


WWW
Reply #209 on: March 24, 2009, 12:39:27 PM

You can get a new d40 for a little less than 500 and a refurb one for 375!  They're both kits so you get the basic 18-55 3.5, and if you get the refurb you could buy something else.  DRILLING AND MANLINESS

http://www.adorama.com/INKD40KR.html?searchinfo=d40

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 25 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Topic: Digital Camera & Photoshop tips  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC