A couple of day shots and some more night shots

Discussion in 'Photography' started by kombi45, May 18, 2005.

  1. kombi45

    kombi45 Guest

    On the flag shots, I did some bracketing - mainly overexposing the
    shots slightly. I also used spot metering, cuing in on the flag. I
    was shooting with my back to the sun - I'm still pretty disappointed
    with the results, and part of this may be the Epson Perfection 2580
    scanner. It's weird - My day photos of late seem to come out worse now
    that I'm really looking at the nuts and bolts of photography/lighting
    than they used to when I'd just point and click with no respect for
    conditions!

    Anyway, the night shots I'm pretty happy with, minus a couple. Again,
    comments/critique welcome.

    http://tinyurl.com/979d2

    If this doesn't take you directly to the album, try the following -it's
    the first album:

    http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/kombi45/my_photos

    Thanks,

    Ben
     
    kombi45, May 18, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. kombi45

    Rob Novak Guest

    Flatbed scanners are not optimal for 35mm negatives. Typically, the
    light source is too dim, and the negative holder/transport holds the
    film off the glass platen. The problem with the latter is that the
    scanner array is focused on the glass, and since the film's a bit
    further away, the focus ends up being slightly soft.

    You're going to have to trust me on this one - moving from a flatbed
    to a dedicated 35mm film scanner was the single greatest leap in image
    quality I ever experienced. If budget is a concern, the entry-level
    scanner from Minolta (Scan Dual IV) is affordable, with good specs.
    Right now, the best buy for a 35mm-only unit is the Minolta Scan Elite
    5400 II. It's the best under-$1000 unit available at the moment.
     
    Rob Novak, May 18, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. kombi45

    kombi45 Guest

    This is encouraging news, indeed...perhaps this time it IS the arrow
    and not the Indian. Well, with my most recent roll I am going to have
    prints made, something I haven't done with this scanner yet, and
    compare them to the scans of the negatives. Should yield more data on
    the quality of the scanner's negative scanning ability.
    I hear ya', but until/unless I can actually make some money with
    photography, I'm not quite certain I want to spend that kind of money
    on a scanner. Hopefully that day will come. At this point, I would
    call myself a very eager, aspiring and dedicated amateur - nothing
    more.

    Ben
     
    kombi45, May 18, 2005
    #3
  4. kombi45

    Guest Guest

    I suggest calibrating the scanner and monitor
     
    Guest, May 18, 2005
    #4
  5. kombi45

    kombi45 Guest

    No need to bring a gun into this...

    Ben
     
    kombi45, May 18, 2005
    #5
  6. kombi45

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Been looking at this model, and it seems impressive. A question, though -
    there is an older film format that must have been popular in the 1970s. The
    negative strips are very thin and small, and came in a compact cartridge of
    some sort (I think). Will this scanner or any other take such film? The
    majority of the pictures my mom took when I was a kid used this format, and
    I have the feeling it's going to be hell to digitally preserve. ;)
     
    Mike Kohary, May 19, 2005
    #6
  7. kombi45

    Richard H. Guest

    110 film? Good luck. There's no marketing value in adding 110 support
    to a scanner these days, even if it adds no cost.

    Maybe you could clamp them in the 35mm holder and manually crop /
    separate the scanned images? I've got a ScanDual, and it could probably
    be made to do this.

    Richard
     
    Richard H., May 19, 2005
    #7
  8. kombi45

    Richard H. Guest

    Interesting. They're very grainy. Something's wrong - maybe the color
    depth was set to 8-bit??

    Looking good! Notice the difference your shutter speed makes on the
    water in the fountain shots. Personally, it's a much "warmer" picture
    when a slower shutter speed is used - water doesn't look "normal" frozen
    mid-air (ditto for freezing the rotors on a helicoter in flight).

    Fountain9&4 are great IMHO; Fountain7 not so much (ignoring the blur);
    Fountain is moderate.

    Here's an effect to play with - longer shutter times plus strobe, for
    closer moving subjects (people, cars, cyclists). If you use
    rear-curtain sync on the strobe (see options in the N80 manual), you'll
    get a blur behind the subject as it crosses the viewfinder, followed by
    a fully-lit image just as the shutter closes. (This conjures creative
    ideas with people flash-lit in the foreground of your long-exposure
    traffic or fountain shots.)

    I like the UniversityTraffic shot - the smaller aperature is more
    subtle; rather than a single large blur, it shows several different
    ones, implying more activity.

    For the stained glass shots, it's apparent that uneven lighting will be
    your nemesis (what were they *thinking* when they lit these churches?
    :). You may be better off shooting from inside during the daylight to
    get more even lighting from the sun. That, or rig the interior with
    your own lighting.

    Richard
     
    Richard H., May 19, 2005
    #8
  9. kombi45

    kombi45 Guest

    Richard - you are psychic! First the release cables, and now this -
    this is my project for tomorrow. Thanks for the heads up, as I was
    planning to just take action pics in bulb. My idea is to photograph
    friends playing disc golf - which requires the participant to run up a
    tee and release the disc (frisbee to laypeople) with great force. I
    thought I would start the photo before the run, keep it in bulb for the
    run, and then release it as the disc is released, hopefully creating a
    cool solid/blur/solid effect.

    However, I like the way that sounds. I'll give it a shot.
    Well, sometimes they are unbelievably brilliant at night. That one was
    barely lit, but I know what you are saying. My brother and I are going
    to do some driving around tomorrow night and try some new stuff.

    Thanks for the feedback again!

    Ben
     
    kombi45, May 19, 2005
    #9
  10. kombi45

    Richard H. Guest

    [re-reading...] Ah, yes, this might work. It'll depend on how still you
    can get them to stand at both ends of the shot, and you'll need to
    ensure there's no light behind them or it'll look like they're
    translucent :). Without the flash to give you a burst of light and
    freeze the image, it'll be tough not to end up with a smudged image.
    Ideally, a flash at the shutter open and close would be cool, but not
    likely possible.


    With your Disc Golf (a trademark issue with Frisbee, no doubt), if you
    close the shutter just as they release the disc, and use the flash set
    for rear-curtain sync, it'll fire at the end of the shot and the image
    should show the athelete (??!) and disc at their final position with a
    comet trail behind them.

    The challenge will be in getting both exposures right - the blurred
    subject / background, then the flash for the foreground object. You'll
    likely need a flash with adjustable power in order to fine tune this.
    Or, set the aperature as it'd be needed for the flash, then adjust the
    exposure time to expose the background to the right intensity.

    As a thought, you might be able to get this effect in brighter light by
    throwing on a filter that cuts the light a lot, like a circ polarizer or
    maybe a grey.

    Richard
     
    Richard H., May 19, 2005
    #10
  11. kombi45

    kombi45 Guest

    I will give this a shot - I just read the blurb in the manual, and it
    seems simple enough...on paper.
    I'll be shooting in BW tomorrow, and I have been experimenting with the
    polarizer in BW - see my library photos at http://tinyurl.com/8gd2y .

    Question - How would you recommend I do the following in multiple
    exposure mode:

    My brother and I are going to the local University where he is a
    student, and are going to use one of the empty classrooms to take a few
    pics. Being the warped individual I am, I am going to shoot him
    sitting in several different seats in the classroom, or along the same
    row of seats, whatever, and then have him teaching the class, as well.
    I won't move the camera, will shoot w/ matrix metering, keeping the
    focus continous and the light will be remain at the same level, so what
    are the considerations/techniques for such a shoot? Probably it will
    be in BW AND a color shoot - low speed film.

    Thx,

    Ben
     
    kombi45, May 19, 2005
    #11
  12. kombi45

    Richard H. Guest

    Interesting concept. At best, it'll be difficult in practice.

    First, you need to decide on your exposure subject (the furniture?),
    then divide the exposure by the number of exposures planned. FYI, a
    small aperature (big value) will give you a deeper depth of field so
    he's in focus in all positions.

    However... he will appear to be a ghost in each chair, as he will be
    exposed only once in each position, but the furniture will be exposed
    many times. (You'll see the furniture through him.)

    This is probably an effect better handled through Photoshop
    post-processing. Digital cameras these days have a feature like this
    where you take a picture of your friend in front of the Eiffel Tower,
    then you go stand in the right spot while they snap your picture - the
    camera figures out what's been added and merges the two photos into one,
    so you're standing next to your friend. I've got to think Photoshop has
    a similar merge feature - in which case, you'll need properly exposed,
    distinctly separate shots of your brother in each of the seats (and
    maybe one with all the chairs empty?)

    For exposure, you'd probably be best to pick a setting and lock the same
    exposure in manual mode for all the shots - it's natural for peripheral
    subjects in the image to be less exposed, and may look odd if they're
    all lighted optimally. Just my $.02. Good luck with the creativity!

    Cheers,
    Richard
     
    Richard H., May 19, 2005
    #12
  13. kombi45

    Rob Novak Guest

    Ah - the 110 Pocketcamera cartridges. Absolutely ghastly stuff.
    Small negs, crappy cameras... there's no film scanner I know that
    handles this. The best you can hope for is that you can get a decent
    scan from a flatbed, or try to kludge something together with a 35mm
    filmstrip holder for a film scanner.
     
    Rob Novak, May 19, 2005
    #13
  14. kombi45

    Mike Kohary Guest

    That's about what I thought - thanks!
     
    Mike Kohary, May 19, 2005
    #14
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.