The Photography Thread

[MartyG]

When I say soft I'm talking about the sharpness of the photos. They're all a little off focus making them soft, some more so than others. This is actually fine for some of the time, particularly when it comes to portraits, but it's off putting here.

Composition is very subjective, but there are rules that can guide you. Look up "Rule of thirds", that should give you some pointers.

There are loads of settings on the D200, from exposure ( amount of light ) to focus areas ( where the camera is going to set its sharp focus ). Any and all of these are going to change things in some respect - read the manual and look up the terms.

Depth of field is the amount of photo which is in sharp focus - this is both in front and behind of the sharp focal point and is determined by a number of factors; apature, lens length, point of focus - google it, you'll find loads of info.

Some useful sites that'll give you technical and none technical pointers

http://www.kenrockwell.com/ - some of his stuff is well worth reading, other bits you should take with a pinch of salt, but it's a good resource.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/ - lots of useful tips there and on the forums and they're generally a friendly bunch. A number of us here post there and enter pics in the monthly comps.

[funkydan]

Thanks Marty, I'll look into all that - have now also signed with flickr and willtry to use it in future

[MartyG]

Make sure to join our NTSC-uk group then

http://www.flickr.com/groups/ntsc-uk/

And we'll add you to our contacts.

[funkydan]

join requested!!

[Richard.John]

Some nice pics in the last couple of days. Congrats on the D200, funkydan! That's a camera that many would love to have hanging around their neck.

I like the way you have tried to explore DOF/bokeh as that was the first thing that I did when I got my DSLR. It's true, I am a Bokeh whore.

[funkydan]

Some nice pics in the last couple of days. Congrats on the D200, funkydan! That's a camera that many would love to have hanging around their neck.

I like the way you have tried to explore DOF/bokeh as that was the first thing that I did when I got my DSLR. It's true, I am a Bokeh whore.

Thanks Richard, I know the DOF term but erm....what's the 'bokeh' acronym stand for (presuming of course that it is an acronym, and not just some crazy new word that all the kids are using )?

As for my focusing issues, I think I need to adjust the aperture. My boss was just explaining about that to me and I think I understand it now

Will shoot some more soon and we'll see if I can get the pics a little sharper. Will also try to RTFM this weekend!

Cheers for the comments guys

Dan

[Gareth C]

Bokeh is based on a japanese word Boke (blur) which refers to the out of focus areas of a photo.

It's talked about a lot in photography in terms of the quality of bokeh that a lens can produce. Good lens bokeh is often considered to render out of focus areas softly (creamy as many people refer to it). Some lenses are considered to produce bad bokeh. This is because the out of focus areas are rendered too sharply and have a "donut" effect of object having defined edges. Bad bokeh is often seen as distracting from teh main focus of the image...Bokeh though comes down to personal taste.

Depth of Field is controlled by the aperture of a lens. A low number (f2) for instance is considered a 'fast' aperture, also refered to as the lens being 'wide open'. When that is the case the lens has a short depth of field (i.e. only a small amount of the image is in focus). f11 and higher on the other hand will produce an image that has almost everything in focus.

The thing is that an aperture of say f2 will let twice as much light in as f4, meaning that with f2 the shutter speed can be twice as quick as if using f4, so less chance of camera shake.

ISO is also related to these two...higher ISO means more light sensitivity. So, either the aperture needs to be less wide open at the same shutter speed. Alternatively the aperture could be left the same but the shutter speed halved (ie twice as fast).

Different people use different set-ups but I tend to shoot in aperture priority mode. This means that I set the aperture I want to use (based on the depth of field I want) and the camera works out the shutter speed needed. You have to be careful with this though as shutter speeds aren't limitless. My camera has a fastest shutter speed of 1/4000th of a second. On a bright day using f2 that shutter speed is too slow, too much light comes in to the camera and you get an over exposed image. This means for instance that the sky can appear as just white, with no detail.

Over exposure is bad beacuse the detail (eg clouds) are not in the image and can never be go back. Under exposure means the image is too dark but with software you can deal with this and get large black areas to lighten and show what detail was there in real life.

The lens size is also a consideration. A 'wide' lens such as a 21mm or below will generally have a wide deptth of field (and also often don't have 'wide' f stops such as f2). A 90mm lens on the other hand can create very limited depth of field even at wider apertures. These lenses are often used for portraits etc as they can soften the subject a little and also flatten them. If you try and shoot a portait of someone with a wide angle lens (the 21mm and below) the chances are that the image won't be very falttering (the nose will appear to protrude more etc).

Hope that helps a bit.

[funkydan]

Yes, it does, thanks Gareth (although no photo attached by the way)

[Gareth C]

Oops...here is one. The black image is from Ken Rockwell and illustrates the type of bad bokeh he describes as donut or halo.

Bad bokeh though is subjective, just take a look around flickr (with bokeh search) and you will see some images with very prominent bokeh that still adds atmposhere to the picture.

[Ginger Tosser]

Nice pics over the last day or so.

Ish, love the lampost!
Alastair, Nice editiorial shots
Dan, well done with the camera! Was the competition for trade people?

Anyway, some people shots with a bit of Bokeh.







Weather was a bit variable, but quite bright.

O.k. the first one has the bokeh

[funkydan]

Dan, well done with the camera! Was the competition for trade people?

I think so as I was emailed about it at work, although I guess anyone could have looked at their site, seen the comp and entered.

Nice Bokeh on the 1st shot!

And the guy in the second shot - what a lot of 'flair' he has! He could teach Jennifer Aniston a thing or two (about flair, not in a 'beast with 2 backs' kinda way - eww, barf out, gag me with a spoon )

Dan

[Gareth C]

here's a great example of how bokeh varies with lens and how much it effects the look of a picture.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/bok...arison.htm#105

[Spagoli]

Dont suppose anyone heard a prgramme about a photography exhibition on Radio 4 a year or so ago, I know its bit of a long shot. It was about an exhibition of photographers who took staged pictures but they staged them to capture ultra realistic pictures. One was a person walking surrounded by swirling leaves, apparently each leaf was suspended by string and placed precisely. Another used the down draft from a helicopter to create a gale. I seem to remeber another one had taken over a year to capture for the perfect lighting. Sadly I didnt get the name of the expo. Only just thought about it again

[funkydan]

Dont suppose anyone heard a prgramme about a photography exhibition on Radio 4 a year or so ago...

Ah yes, photography on the radio, it's awesome

[Spagoli]

Ah yes, photography on the radio, it's awesome

Get back to reading about DOF lol, although that said i did take this pic because of doing just that

http://www.flickr.com/photos/91308681@N00/334200611/

anyway I'll take it you didn't hear the programme must have been good though because it made such an impact its taken a year to remember it, maybe you're right about photography on the radio, what next football on teletext