Jump to content

About This Club

This is about sharing information about taking better pictures, film or digital, and post processing of photographs (taken with a camera)

  1. What's new in this club
  2. ICE is a very useful and adaptable tool for photographers. If you avoid the "auto detect" option, you can then choose the projection that works best for your image. Some really interesting effects can result
  3. Hi, I was browsing YouTube, and ran into a video about how some extraordinary images are created. The video is called "10 Reasons You Shouldn't Trust Photos On Social Media" if you would like to see it. If you do watch it, feel free to comment here about what you saw, and if you might try some variation of them. I will think about doing the same perhaps. If I do try something, I will show the result here, it it comes out at all decent. Also, if you have or invent some tricks of your own, consider telling us about them here, and showing your results.
  4. Of course, you mat use long lenses and zooms to enlage what you see. However, you can also use them to totally change what you see, and get an entirely different effect. It is easier to show the to explain. Take the photo below: Now, it is pleasant enough. Clearly, it is a bush, some tiny purple flowers on the ground, a mostly blue sky, and some snow capped mountains in the distance. This picture was taken about four feet away from the bush. If I would have chosen to back up about 50 feet, then the bush would be more than 12 times farther away. What do you suppose would happen? You probably guessed, that the bush would occupy a smaller portion of the picture, it would be smaller. On the other hand the mountains (Mount San Antonio) is 26 miles away. Walking back 50 feet, is not making the mountain much smaller in the picture. That means that as I move back, the mountains and the bush, are changing proportions in the photograph, the bush getting smaller than the mountains will, in term of the space taken up in the image. Now, from this new perspective, I can zoom in (more telephoto) and restore the bush to be again, a larger part of the image. When I do this, the mountains will also be brought closer. You can see the result, and just for yourself, if the resulting photo was worth walking 50 feet away to get:
  5. I guess this is still astro-photography but no telescope involved, just the camera's built in zoom lens zoomed out, and zoomed in and cropped.
  6. Here is another example employing ICE free software, this of the desert, mountains and clouds, as I walk home from the grocery store: That is 10 separate images, stitched together, around a 360 degree view. My home is dead ahead, under the sun, just left of the large tree.
  7. Just another example, of doing a panorama inage, with the free program: ICE First, the separate images taken: Then, the images stitched and cropped, Using ICE, literally took just a few minutes:
  8. Thanks, that looks interesting, I'll look it over when I get some time!
  9. This is something I want to get into this spring/summer/fall as the weather permits. I have a several telephotos with my Canon DSLR and a Celestial telescope I haven't used much. I stumbled upon this website which may encourage others to follow suite. Source: Catching the Light
  10. Some museums do not allow you to use a flash. But by changing the ISO setting from 100 (daylight) to 400 (indoor available light), you can get some nice shots without violating any museum rules. With film photography, I'd then balance the ISO 400 film with an 80A/80B for tungsten lighting, or FLD for fluorescent lighting. I haven't learned yet whether or not I have to do this with digital photography. You can do a lot with software enhancement of RAW images afterward. So when I was shooting film at the Huntington Library/Botanical Gardens/Museum in Huntington Beach California, I had my ISO 400 film pushed to 800. I got great pictures inside of Gainsborough's Blue Boy and others inside, and good pictures outside except where the sky was concerned. I took a picture of a bird on a tall cactus and the cactus and bird turned out fine, but the sky was washed out. I don't remember if I was using a polarizer or not, and I definitely wasn't using a neutral density filter. It would probably corrected the sky color. I was using a Minolta SRT 102 at the time with manual settings for aperture and shutter control. I had about 1 year of experience shooting 35mm at the time. Experience is the best teacher sometimes.
  11. example of changing the ISO and doing a 15 second exposure I was getting a picture of the coals burning and the fire decided to have one of those spits during the exposure. Sometimes pictures are a bit of luck.
  12. Well, I'm going to answer my own question but first a little background. ISO stands for International Standards Organization and it refers to the industry norm for sensitivity of emulsion based film, with 100 ISO being not so sensitive (and the standard ISO used by most people) to 1600 ISO which is extremely sensitive to light. Based on my own practical experience shooting film, I used an ISO film setting of 100 (typically daylight) and an ISO setting of 400 for indoors where light is not as bright. You can compensate if you have the "wrong" film rating in your SLR by using ND (neutral density) filters to adjust your available light to your film. You can also "push" film to a higher ISO setting with special processing. I had to do this a few times pushing ISO 400 film to 800 and beyond and obtained excellent results. If you have two camera bodies with two different films, that's another way to compensate. A third way is via a bounce flash. I always bounced my flash to eliminate redeye on portraits. There are other ways to eliminate redeye, but this is what I did for the 20+ years of shooting film. For those really adventurous there is always IR film. I haven't shot a lot of B&W film but I believe in will allow the film to be "pushed" beyond color film. Pushing film can cause increasing graininess especially when pushed beyond 2x. Anybody seeing anything wrong please correct me. Also, feel free to ask questions anytime which I will answer to the best of my ability, as an amateur photographer. So we arrive at ISO settings on DSLR cameras. The beauty of digital photography, and is the ability to change your ISO setting for each shot. In film photography, you set the ISO setting for your whole roll of film and cannot change it or push individual shots. What this means is, should you come across a situation where you are in low light and cannot use flash, you can just up the ISO settings to 800, 1600 or even 3200 making the sensor a lot more sensitive to light, and fire away knowing the images will come out OK. There's no way to do this on film photography, the whole roll is at the same ISO, pushed or not. I'll leave it there for now. Just remember, the higher ISO number, the more sensitive it is to light. With all this in mind, I wonder the usefulness of ND filters for digital cameras. I'll have to read up on that.
  13. I do not, but and f1.2 @ 25mm, sounds like a great one to have, and Olympus is generally known for good optics.You would probably be better advised to ask such questions at a dedicated photograpy forum, that from the handful of people we have here, but, welcome to the club!
  14. Anybody here has experience with the Olympus M.Zuiko ED 25mm f1.2 PRO ? I'm thinking about buying this lens.
  15. On the other end of the speed settings. This is a 30 second or so exposure playing around with a new camera. I was trying to get a picture of the coals in a fireplace in a cabin we were renting at Beavers Bend State Park in Southeast Oklahoma. During the exposure it did one of those spit things that fires do now and then and the results were pretty cool. One of those blind luck things that you couldn't do again if you tried for years.
  16. Carry mine in the car most of the time unless it's really cold or hot. Here's one I had to stop and take on the way to work one morning.... Several people stopped to see what I was doing including a Highway Patrol. After a few minutes the HP touched me on the shoulder and said, "Get off my highway." We decided to go on down the road, but for about ten minutes we all saw raw nature in all it's glory.
  17. Fantastic shot. I have photo envy. I missed my opportunity when I was living in Glendale, CA. I was driving up the Pacific Coast Highway towards San Francisco. Somewhere along the coast past Santa Barbara, I stopped to stretch my legs and left my camera in my Z. I walked to the edge of a cliff and heard and saw a whale blow out water and then saw its enormous tail come up out of the water. He did that twice while I was cursing myself for leaving my camera in my car. When he stopped, I ran back to my car and got my camera in case he returned, but he never did. I learned a valuable but painful lesson, never be without a camera.
  18. It helps when you are stopped but many of my best pictures are snapped with me not even looking in the viewfinder and moving at sometimes highway speeds. Here is a d example of practising in point and shoot. Standing in the rain with a 15mph wind and a boat moving around. Its taken me tens of thousands of practice snaps to do that. When we start on vacation I practice off and on for several days to calibrate my hands to my eyes. Camera was about belt level. No time to look in the viewfinder.
  19. When I was shooting film in California, I bought a special panorama head for my tripod. The pivot point was right where the film image would be produced by my SLR. I didn't stich the pictures together then. But years later I found a shareware program that allowed me to stich the three pictures I scanned into my computer together. It looked great, but I've only used it that one time. I have Photoshop so I should do another panorama sometime. It should be easier with a digital camera. Outstanding work Omegaman and really well illustrated. This would make an excellent how-to.
  20. So it's pretty much like film then. When I was single and living in California, I did a lot of landscapes. When I married, I started shooting more indoors using filters to balance the light from fluorescent and tungsten. Indoors and for sports, I was always conscious of the camera speed trying to keep it as high as possible and never below 1/60th of a second. With modern stabilization in digital cameras, I guess that's not so important now.
  21. Depends on the lighting and what you are shooting. Aperture changes your depth of focus somewhat. When driving I set the speed as high as possible and let the camera adjust the aperture. Need the high speed to compensate car movement.
  22. I do not have any real experience yet, to offer any expertise, I just put it on full auto for that picture, and let it figure it out, of course I could also bracket the exposures, or post-process them.
  23. Back in the film days we used to keep a uv haze filter on our cameras. Many people use them for protection for their camera lenses. Some film was rather sensitive to uv light, but digital camera's really aren't and those filters can cause flair, especially at night with brighter lights. It's ruined many moon pictures until I figured out what was causing them. Scratched it one night and the flares pretty much went away. Still use a clear protection filter when not taking night shots.

  • Create New...