Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[PHOTO] Bells! Batman Smells!

GrifterGrifter BermudaModerator mod
edited February 2009 in Artist's Corner
In this thread, we post photos!

All photos are welcome, though most people post with the intention of receiving criticism so that they can become better photographers. Please do not spoiler your photos as that defeats the purpose of the thread.

For photography newbies:
What type of camera should I buy?
This can't be answered the same for every person. There's little difference in the photo quality between most major brands (Canon, Nikon, etc) so it comes down to price and personal preference. Make sure your camera lets you control settings like shutter speed, aperture, and ISO and preferably lets you capture images in RAW format. Other than that, get a bit of hands on time and see how the camera feels to you. Also remember that if you're buying an SLR, camera bodies come and go but lenses usually last while. For this reason it might be worth it to buy a cheaper body and spend a bit extra on some lenses.

Speaking of lenses, which ones should I buy?
Most kit lenses are a good starting place, though you'll begin to find them more limited once you're more comfortable with your camera. A good entry level prime lens for Canon cameras is this little guy. Other than that, you'll probably want to pick up a telezoom lens with a macro feature. This should get you set for a long while.

Any good books/sites I should read?
Lots of people recommend Understanding Exposure or the first Ansel Adams book. Don't bother buying any book that tells you how to use your specific camera model. All of that information can be found in your user's manual.

How do I become awesome at arting?
The best advice I can give is: keep taking pictures. That being said, don't just randomly point your camera at something and hit the shutter button. Stop for a moment to think about why you're taking this picture. What are you trying to show people? Is the current lighting/angle/etc going to help you show that? If so, proceed. If not, adjust your settings or body to capture it another way.

Resources/Tools:
Lightroom - Awesome software for managing your photo collection and editing RAW files.
LR Mogrify - Unfortunately Lightroom doesn't have a border option so use this tool. It also does watermarks and the like.
Canon Firmware Update - Unofficial firmware update that allows more options one some Canon cameras.
Strobist - Fantastic source on getting into off camera lighting. Don't be put off by initial complexities. It'll come.
Flickr - A free photo hosting site. Also has a pro option if you like. There's also a PA flickr group.
Phorumr - If you're using flickr and Firefox, this script auto generates the code you need to paste into the forum.
Photoshop Pyramid - Helps regulate your daily dose of Photoshop.
A DIY plexiglass frame - Nifty.
DIY Bokeh - A neat DIY to getting bokeh shapes.

There's also a great write up from Pope:
Some Photography Stuff

Types of Lenses:

Prime Lens - A lens with no “zoom.” While this might limit composition choices, it also usually means the lens is “faster” (meaning can achieve larger apertures, usually 2.8 and larger (2.0, 1.8, 1.4, 1.0, etc). The wider the aperture, the more light gets in and therefore the faster the shutter can be which is why primes are considered faster.

Zoom Lens - Any lens that can span a range of focal lengths. For example: 18mm-55mm. There are zooms in every category (normal, telephoto, wide, and macro).

Telephoto Lens - A lens that makes objects in the photo appear larger than they were to the naked eye. This is akin to being “zoomed in.” These lenses are comparable to physically moving closer to the subject. Some distortion can occur in the form of “compressing” the distance between objects.

Normal Lens - A lens where objects in the photo appear to be the same size as when seen by the naked eye. This lenses do not change your perceived distance from the subject.

Wide Angle Lens - A lens that shows a wider field of view than the naked eye. This is comparable to being further from the subject. Some distortion can occur (with a fisheye being an extreme example). Foreground objects appear disproportionately larger than background objects.

Macro Lens - A specialty lens that allows focusing on objects MUCH closer than with other lenses. Favored for all closeups (insects, flowers, etc).


Other Terms:

DOF - DOF stands for Depth-of-Field or Depth-of-focus. This describes how much of the shot is in focus (a plain perpendicular to the lens).

Focal Length - The size of a lens. Controls how “zoomed in” or “zoomed out” the picture is. On a 35mm camera a 50mm lens is pretty ‘normal’ and an 85mm lens is a short ‘telephoto’ and a 20mm lens is ‘wide.’ On a lower-end SLR a 50mm is a little bit telephoto.

Crop Factor - The ratio of size of the field of view between various cameras and compared against a 35mm film camera as the baseline. A typical digital SLR has a crop factor of 1.6 (meaning the field of view of the digital chip is smaller than a 35mm film frame). This affects the field of view offered by lenses. For example, a 50mm lens on a typical Digital SLR (DSLR) would be the equivalent of an 80mm lens on a 35mm film camera. A 200mm lens on a typical DSLR would be the same as a 320mm lens on a typical 35mm film camera.

Aperture - The aperture is the size of the opening of the shutter when it fires. It is measured as a fraction (so that 4.0 really means 1/4.0 and 16 means 1/16 and 1.8 means 1/1.8). The smaller the number, the wider the aperture. The wider the aperture, the smaller the DOF and the more light that gets in so the faster the shutter needs to be set.

Shutter Speed - How fast the shutter fires. Conventional wisdom dictates that a camera can be handheld at a shutter speed equal to 1/x where x is the focal length of the lens. For example, if shooting with a 100mm lens, you can handhold the camera up to 1/100 sec. Anything slower (1/50 sec, etc) would need to be balanced on a tripod or monopod or other stabilizer.

ISO - How sensitive the chip is to light. The higher the ISO, the faster the shutter can be set at. ISOs over 200 can start to introduce digital noise (comparable to film grain) with more noise coming from higher ISOs.


Exposure:

There are 3 major factors that affect proper exposure: ISO, Shutter Speed, and Aperture. Adjusting any of these factors affects exposure unless compensated for by either of the other settings.

For example, take the “sunny 16 rule.” The sunny 16 rule is a generalized rule of thumb for achieving proper exposure in sunny conditions. It states that you set the shutter speed to 1/ISO (ie - if using ISO 200 then set the shutter to 1/200 sec), then set the aperture to 1/16 (f-16 or f/16). So a proper exposure would be ISO 200, 1/200 sec, F/16.

Now if you wanted to change the shutter speed because you are using a 300mm lens and don’t have a tripod you could set the shutter to 1/400 sec. This would unbalance the above equation, so you could then compensate by raising the ISO to 400. Now you have ISO 400, 1/400 sec, F/16. Both this setting and the one above give the same exposure.


Depth of Field:

Depth of field is affected by two details: aperture and distance between the camera and the subject. Of these, aperture is the factor that gets manipulated most often when trying to change depth of field. The wider the aperture, the smaller the depth of field. When a lens is “wide open” (using the widest possible aperture, the smallest number) is has the smallest DOF. This is useful for blurring backgrounds and drawing focus where you want it. On the other hand, the smallest possible aperture (anywhere from F/16 on most lenses to F/22 or even F/45 on some lenses) gives the longest DOF. This is most useful in landscape photography where the ideal is to have ALL of the scene in focus.

Distance between camera and subject becomes an issue when shooting Macro photography specifically. When the lens is w/in mere inches from the subject then even a “normal” aperture like F/5.6 can yield a small DOF (a scant couple millimeters). To get all of a macro subject in focus it is usually necessary to shoot a F/8 or F/11 or smaller. This results in slow shutter speeds (see above) unless additional light is brought in (ie - from a flash). Slow shutter speeds increases the chance for motion blur (especially on a breezy day or when the subject is animate, ie a butterfly).

Grifter on
«13456731

Posts

  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Oh man, I love that fresh [Photo] thread smell.


    Happy Holidays, everyone!

    IMG_0288.jpg

    erisian pope on
  • anableanable Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I think I posted this image a few threads back but I had forgotten how much I liked it so here it is again.

    2439630681_6f239efea6.jpg

    I'm off to New Mexico today (sorry again Prosp!). Hopefully I'll have some good stuff when I get back.

    anable on
  • [GHSC]Ryctor[GHSC]Ryctor Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Sweet its a me!

    2vjsak6.jpg

    [GHSC]Ryctor on
    You'd be surprised the amount of damage a hauler can do in the right hands ~ Istvaan Shogaatsu
  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Oh man, I love that. I like low-key and high-key photography a lot, but in this case I love how your picture diverges from the sterile low-key photography you see these days. It's a little gritty, the backdrop has a light on it so I can see the background as gray instead of having the invisible/seamless black, the highlights on the subject clearly give me all the important info. That is one dapper photographer in a film-noir world.

    Badass.

    erisian pope on
  • ProspicienceProspicience The Raven King DenvemoloradoRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Oh man, I love that. I like low-key and high-key photography a lot, but in this case I love how your picture diverges from the sterile low-key photography you see these days. It's a little gritty, the backdrop has a light on it so I can see the background as gray instead of having the invisible/seamless black, the highlights on the subject clearly give me all the important info. That is one dapper photographer in a film-noir world.

    Badass.

    All of this, plus great cropping/comp.

    Prospicience on
  • [GHSC]Ryctor[GHSC]Ryctor Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Oh man, I love that. I like low-key and high-key photography a lot, but in this case I love how your picture diverges from the sterile low-key photography you see these days. It's a little gritty, the backdrop has a light on it so I can see the background as gray instead of having the invisible/seamless black, the highlights on the subject clearly give me all the important info. That is one dapper photographer in a film-noir world.

    Badass.

    Thank you! It was one of the most frustrating self portrait shots I've ever done, but I finally landed one I liked.

    [GHSC]Ryctor on
    You'd be surprised the amount of damage a hauler can do in the right hands ~ Istvaan Shogaatsu
  • anableanable Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Oh man, I love that. I like low-key and high-key photography a lot, but in this case I love how your picture diverges from the sterile low-key photography you see these days. It's a little gritty, the backdrop has a light on it so I can see the background as gray instead of having the invisible/seamless black, the highlights on the subject clearly give me all the important info. That is one dapper photographer in a film-noir world.

    Badass.

    It's like James Bond turned into a photographer.

    Edit: And I just noticed Ryctor is another Oklahoma PAer. We need to make a club or something.

    anable on
  • FlyingmanFlyingman Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Man that is a fantastic self portrait, something I also need to get onto.

    Two new ones from me taken at around 4 this morning.

    docked800.jpg

    hutchinson800.jpg

    Flyingman on
    PAsig-1.gif
  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Such a somber thread!


    Flyingman, I like the both in concept a lot. #2 works for me all the way around, but in #1 the tilted horizon (right side is lower than left) makes me feel a little wonky and that doesn't match the overall mood of the piece.

    erisian pope on
  • FlyingmanFlyingman Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Such a somber thread!


    Flyingman, I like the both in concept a lot. #2 works for me all the way around, but in #1 the tilted horizon (right side is lower than left) makes me feel a little wonky and that doesn't match the overall mood of the piece.

    Cool, so it wasn't just me, I'll straighten the horizon. Me and my partner were staring at it for about 10mins trying to decide whether it looked right or not.

    Flyingman on
    PAsig-1.gif
  • ProspicienceProspicience The Raven King DenvemoloradoRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Freak'n love that crane pic FM.

    3113706119_4eaf1c8297_o.jpg
    Really lost the intensity of the blue sky due to Internets. Straight from my camera though.

    Prospicience on
  • VirumVirum Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    3114577386_74ddab999b.jpg

    OR

    3113978149_22294a45d7.jpg

    Virum on
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Nice stuff, guys.

    needOptic on
  • VeeVee Registered User
    edited December 2008
    This is probably one of my favorite pictures I've ever taken.
    papiivansmvu5.jpg


    My boyfriend. This was for a contest.
    mattwestsacbridgecontesoj6.jpg




    Both are old pictures.

    Vee on
  • VirumVirum Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Such a somber thread!

    3114653696_51e6dfd390.jpg

    :)
    oh look a snapshot!

    Virum on
  • ProjeckProjeck Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    3111342093_8ef8b4557d_o.png

    repostin' dis

    great shots everyone!

    Projeck on
  • VirumVirum Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    projeck, maybe it is just me but it seems blurry/out of focus. Check your shutter speed or your focusing! I think I'd like it a lot better if it were sharper.

    Also if I could see the whole picture on my screen that might help as well, so please post them smaller. Laptop monitor is small :(

    Virum on
  • dagookfatherdagookfather Registered User
    edited December 2008
    This thread is starting off fierce. I've been overly critical at work today, so I'll refrain from saying anything here. Happy Holidays everyone.

    3111320205_56c3205637.jpg

    dagookfather on
  • MustangMustang Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I take offence to the title of this thread!
    I'll have you know that Batman does not smell.
    He has an musky scent of cinnamon and motor oil.

    Yours Sincerely

    Bruce Wayne.

    Mustang on
  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Virum - both coin shots! #1 is clean and awesometastic and #2 is very jumbly and chaotic in a great way! Also, terrific light for a snapshot.

    Prosp - Maybe the blue lost intensity, but it's a very pretty picture.

    Vee - I like them both! I tend to prefer more polished pictures, but those both work really well in my opinion.

    Projek - I like subject (especially his expression), lighting, and comp but the focus really bothers me.

    Dagook - HAHAHAHA! I love it! Did you (or anyone) by any chance see the "I love satan" picture on Flickr Explore recently? It's a little girl who misspelled santa and it's adorable.

    erisian pope on
  • VirumVirum Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Hey Pope, thanks! Actually I was kidding about it being a snapshot because the last few times I've posted somebody told me they were just snapshots. ;)

    Virum on
  • ProjeckProjeck Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    yeah, i dont know what happened with that, it looked a lot sharper last night

    i guess i'm just delusional :S

    Projeck on
  • CecilsanCecilsan Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    n44009892_32949015_9164.jpg


    My first cyanotype!

    Cecilsan on
  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    453300953_22a2b5179c_o.jpg

    CommunistCow on
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Ryctor: absolute awesome photo though I would have cropped just a littttttle bit above the left ear.

    Flyingman: I like the crane picture but I wish there was just a little more brightness so we could see more of the crane on the right.

    Virum: #1 its very minimal and great. The second is too cluttered.

    CommunistCow on
    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited December 2008
    453300953_22a2b5179c_o.jpg

    Dude, you BotP'd yourself!

    I really like this. The gray-tones are terrific and the DOF does a nice job of subject/background separation. Very nice.

    erisian pope on
  • ProspicienceProspicience The Raven King DenvemoloradoRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Hey holmes' my friend wants to give their significant other a lens for christmas. Any Nikon compatible lenses yall would recommend? I was just going to send her a bunch in different price ranges, I'm honestly just looking for a bunch of different types (already going to recommend the Sigma 10-20mm).

    Thanks in advance.

    Prospicience on
  • dagookfatherdagookfather Registered User
    edited December 2008
    I'm guessing cropped sensor?
    Wide end:
    17-55 2.8 - $$$$$
    Sigma 10-20 - Very popular, reduced in price to something amazing like just above $400
    Tokina 11-16 2.8 - extra speed might be useful for some, supposedly superior optics to the Sigma, hard to find...
    14-28 2.8 - FX sensor compatible, Insanely priced, but this is the pro choice, even on crop sensors
    18-55 AF-S ED II (non-VR) - Just over $100 new. Supposedly superior optics to the VR, I own this and it works as a decent walk around

    Mid-Tele's
    50mm 1.8 - of course, need internal focus screw or else manual focus only
    24-70 2.8 - FX compatible, even more $, supposedly best optics of any zoom lens
    28-80 AF-G - Can find these used for like $50. Honestly, mine is almost as sharp as my 50mm in the center. I don't use it much because it is not wide. At all. Screw type focus
    105mm AF-D Macro/Micro (non-VR) - Again, better optics than the VR supposedly. Screw type focus. A tad pricey as well...

    And of course, if the person never plans on doing professional work, just get the 18-200 and be done with it. You don't get the crazy distortion of an UWA is the only thing they'd probably miss...

    dagookfather on
  • ProspicienceProspicience The Raven King DenvemoloradoRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    thanks!

    Ah snap sorry forgot to mention he has a D40x yeah.

    Prospicience on
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited December 2008
    I'm loving the 24mm F/1.4L. All shot handheld. :winky: @ light falloff at 1.4


    IMG_8284web.jpg



    IMG_8289web.jpg



    IMG_8314web.jpg



    IMG_8300web.jpg



    IMG_8304web.jpg



    IMG_8313web.jpg


    IMG_8299web.jpg

    needOptic on
  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited December 2008
    nO - lens looks sharp and handheld in the dark is incredible. Are you shooting on the 5D? The driveway shot has that telltale landscape-photo-exaggerated-foreground look and a cropped sensor with a 24 doesn't seem capable of that. I love the blue-ified swirlies (photo#1). That's really terrific.

    EDIT: Looking a little more critically, I think you captured terrific atmosphere in #s 4,5, and 6. All three have cool detail in the sky that adds to the cool shots of the house. In all three I think they would benefit from a perspective correction in photoshop to straighten the horizon (I know that recommendation is cliche and easy to make, but it's rare that I see a tilted horizon that adds to the mood of a picture, usually it merely reduces the picture's impact and makes it feel more like a snapshot to me). But yeah - all the shots look great, and 3-6 look great and carry great mood.



    It was foggy this morning, and I am a crazy person who endangers everyone on the highway.

    IMG_0362.jpg

    IMG_0363.jpg

    IMG_0386.jpg

    erisian pope on
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited December 2008
    nO - lens looks sharp and handheld in the dark is incredible. Are you shooting on the 5D? The driveway shot has that telltale landscape-photo-exaggerated-foreground look and a cropped sensor with a 24 doesn't seem capable of that. I love the blue-ified swirlies (photo#1). That's really terrific.

    EDIT: Looking a little more critically, I think you captured terrific atmosphere in #s 4,5, and 6. All three have cool detail in the sky that adds to the cool shots of the house. In all three I think they would benefit from a perspective correction in photoshop to straighten the horizon (I know that recommendation is cliche and easy to make, but it's rare that I see a tilted horizon that adds to the mood of a picture, usually it merely reduces the picture's impact and makes it feel more like a snapshot to me). But yeah - all the shots look great, and 3-6 look great and carry great mood.

    Pope - you're absolutely right. It's on the 5d body. Kinda the reason I went from cropped to full frame and got the 24mm. I found that most of my shots from the 17-55mm lens I had on the cropped sensor were at the wide end.

    So now I use my legs for zooming.

    I agree with you about the horizon. I'll fix later today and reupload.


    Edit: Nice tree in the first one. The second would look much better if you used a telephoto and knocked out the background with a shallow DOF, it's a little busy right now.

    needOptic on
  • SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    nO, I'm lovin' that first one.

    This photo thread has started off pretty fantastically.

    Sorry I've been so absent -- I've been super busy, so I haven't been able to catch up on the threads, and I feel shitty about posting photos when I haven't checked out everything I've missed.

    But I'm caught up on this thread, so here's a photo!

    3109489410_73c6891ebc.jpg

    Post-processing by not-me

    And something else

    3085629405_3226a2c99c_o.jpg

    Sheri on
  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Sheri - great to see you again! That second photo could be used in some sort of professional promotional material - top notch! The first one is very cluttered, so it took me a bit to figure out what I was looking at, but after that: neat!

    erisian pope on
  • SheriSheri Resident Fluffer My Living RoomRegistered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Sheri - great to see you again! That second photo could be used in some sort of professional promotional material - top notch! The first one is very cluttered, so it took me a bit to figure out what I was looking at, but after that: neat!

    I definitely like the clutteredness of it

    I should probably point out: post-processing on the first one was not done by me (and I love what the person did with it).

    Sheri on
  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Sheri wrote: »
    Sheri - great to see you again! That second photo could be used in some sort of professional promotional material - top notch! The first one is very cluttered, so it took me a bit to figure out what I was looking at, but after that: neat!

    I definitely like the clutteredness of it

    I should probably point out: post-processing on the first one was not done by me (and I love what the person did with it).

    I do too, actually. The clutteredness is kinda the point of the photo (to me).

    erisian pope on
  • needOpticneedOptic Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Yeah, not feeling the first one. Too saturated and too cluttered for my taste. I love all the textures, but the high contrast behind the bike make it really hard to understand what's going on.

    The second one is very nice.

    needOptic on
  • erisian popeerisian pope Registered User
    edited December 2008
    IMG_0355.jpg

    IMG_0353.jpg

    erisian pope on
  • JivesJives Registered User
    edited December 2008
    3118918478_59d716bb33_b.jpg


    I love your first photo pope

    Jives on
  • projectmayhemprojectmayhem Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Here are some random ones I found while looking through my old photobucket account. All of these are taken with either a Olympus 7070 or this random Panasonic digital I had many moons ago.

    sethgumsmall.jpg

    ThisisJoshBreaking.jpg

    P1020353.jpg

    RacetheSun48.jpg

    P1020065.jpg

    I am debating on picking up an Xti and some lenses and seeing what I can do.

    projectmayhem on
«13456731
This discussion has been closed.