The Photography Thread

[MartyG]

The EV adjustment changes the exposure length, in those situations the camera metering can be fooled, so it's to compensate for that.

And yes, a lower ISO rating means you can have a longer exposure for the same apature size. See here.

[DaiSuki]

Alrighty. Cheers

[MartyG]

Got chance to take a couple of photos today:

A water eylet thing
Swan, yes I know they're done to death.
Ballpoint pen
Ghostly hand

[DaiSuki]

Reassuring to know that ghosts endorse Dell technology. Looks like a nice camera Marty; I find myself hankering after an SLR but I know I wouldn't even understand 90% of what it can do that my existing camera can't so I'm trying to restrain myself.

I was off work today so I headed out onto the Northumberland moors.. was bloody freezing. Results:

Winter
Ice

I get used to deviantart's useful little info box which gives the technical info on the shot (i.e. focal length, shutter speed, aperture, etc etc). Is there a way to make flickr do the same?

[Ginger Tosser]

Nice exposure on the Ice. I have a big problem with this thread, its making me want this!

TBH my current digital is cack, so it needs upgrading.

[MartyG]

On flickr, where it says "taken with", there's a more properties link that lists all the EXIF data held against the photo. http://www.flickr.com/photos/martypg13/93647104/

The ice one is nice, I like the lighting in it - shame the arm of the bench gets in the frame. Do you take more than one photo of the same scene at different angles? Or do you just take one shot and move on?

The "Winter" shot lacks a bit in the framing department, you've got that one thin subject in the middle of the frame, with not much else going on, you're also losing a lot of the background detail on that due to the sun on the left.

When I'm looking at a scene, I'll take lots of photos of the same thing from different angles using different exposures, then I'll often crop to tighten up framing in photoshop (or whatever). This is why film gets so expensive :/.

There's certainly no need to move to DSLRs until you want to use the greater flexibility of them. I'm amazed my compact allows for the amount of adjustment it does, and as has been mentioned a number of times already in this thread: the photographer takes the photo, not the camera.

Film SLRs can be picked up dirt cheap, even stuff like Olypmus OM10s and Nikon FMs will take fantastics shots and cost peanuts. If you just want to muck about with an SLR it's worth picking one up.

I've done a couple of night school classes which were really great for teaching the techniques both in and out of the darkroom - plus I met some characters doing it and it was a lot of fun, I recommend checking them out too.

[DaiSuki]

Cheers for the comments

Aye, I've got a few of the ice but without moving things around (which I didn't want to do, as it seemed quite precariously balanced anyway) I couldn't get no arm of bench + nice lighting. I settled for the arm as the rest of the bench was in the shot anyway.

The winter one; I know what you mean, yeah.. I was attempting to capture deadness of subject with brightness and vibrancy of sun. Juxtapose them, if you will. And I have to confess, I'm a sucker for shots which are drowned in sunlight; I'm sure there's a french name for the stye which escapes me. Le photo drowned by le sun. Or something. Lens flare is the new lens flare, don't you know

[bangaio]

Here's my contribution for the day. Realy feeling b&w at the moment and for that measure feel this could do with some grain, shot at iso 200 if memory serves me. Although people complain about digital noise, i really feel it can work, especially on some cameras that render noise really well. Anyway here ya go.

ps Ginger - you know you want one but that would just be the start, you'd want lenses, lots of them. I really want this puppy.....

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/70-200is.shtml

mmmmmmmmmmmm

[bangaio]

ANd for the sake of example, i also thought about a square crop - in colour. Opinions perlease!

[DaiSuki]

The colour is very delicate and quite attractive... it's a more cold and evocative shot in B&W, but it's very welcoming and homely with the colour. Suppose it depends on the mood you want it to engender.

Myself, I like it in B&W.

[MartyG]

I think I prefer the colour shot in this case, there's not an awful lot of texture or contrast in the B&W version, which is what I personally like in B&W.

I know what you mean about the grain (again I think it's a texture thing). I think portraits with some grain often work very well in B&W.

Nice lens too - how much does that retail at? ?1 or ?2K ? You can go mad on glass, I'm already looking at new lenses as I've lost the wide on my zoom due to the multiplication factor on the DSLR.

[bangaio]

Too much! I have an old Sigma 70-300 APO which was lovely but very slow to focus. Anyway, it doesn't work on my 20d and there is no way for sigma to fix it so I am without long reach which I love. Rumor has it Canon may release an IS version of their 70-200 f4 lense in the next few weeks which would be perfect. Constant aperture, IS and the normal lenses is about ?480 so shouldn't be too much more (yeah right!) It also works out at about 100-320mm in 35mm terms which is great!

Anyway the grain thing is right i think, maybe the b&w needs the crop too? Not sure. I need to work on my conversion techniques from colour to b&w. Here's one with much more grain I took in 2004 ish. Me like and looks great printed and framed. There's also a colour low light pic with grain i took on the way home from work last year. I've always liked this-apologies if i've put either of these up before!

[MartyG]

Have a look to see if your photo-software will do filtered B&W - ie, convert it as if you had a coloured filter across the lens when the photo was taken - this can drastically alter how a B&W shot looks as it emphises certain colours (makes them blacker) and lightens others, I used these type of filters lots on my 35mm SLRs.

Picasa certainly does it (and that's a free download).

[Ginger Tosser]

you know you want one but that would just be the start, you'd want lenses, lots of them.

I've already got the lenses, flash and off shoe mounts (FM was that stuff pricy for a cable!), though that one would be nice. The one i've always wanted is the 35-350mm.

I'll wait to see whats at Focus on Imaging at the NEC, hopefully some retailers will be trying to shift stock. I might try to blag one through the company accounts. I speak with my accountant first!

Oh btw you should try the 1200mm lens (it is actually 1.2metres in length)

[bangaio]

Yeah my other raw converter does - Canon DPP. It doesn't smear the grain like RSP but has inferior work flow. The one for me that I demod is Convert to Black and Whit pro - a ps plug in that works in elements but it costs .....$99!!!! Madness.