Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Photo of the Day (January 2008)

Maldini said:
I received my new D80 yesterday and i was practicing with a teddy bear after my little sis got bored..anyway today a friend of mine came by with his Falcon:eek: and i was shocked when i saw that thing..now here is the shot...its not perfect ,i'm still a beginner :D

2170447372_9f1d0401fc.jpg


I know this is seriously underexposed and this happens with many of my pictures, did anyone had a similar experience with a D80? should i change the ev to - 0.3 or -0.7 to fix this problem?
Click to expand...

At the risk of telling you what you already know, it's a low-key pic: ie a fairly dark subject against a black background. Even the cleverest of camera metering systems will try to 'average out' the information in your composition. The camera would also be 'fooled' by a very light background. In these conditions, I'd switch to 'manual' and make some small adjustments... based on a quick review of the pix while shooting.

When I used film cameras, I'd regularly under-expose by, say half a stop, to get the effect I wanted... not what the camera 'wanted'. This disparity was consistent, at least, so I never felt it to be a problem. If you feel your camera gives you a consistent level of under- or over-exposure, then you could adjust the exposure compensation.
 
"Tiki T"

While out inspecting tree blowdown damage from a recent storm here on the Oregon coast, one of my adopted Baja dogs, Tequila, struck this pose. She's a sweetheart, so I thought I'd share her picture.

DSC_5782.JPG


Model: NIKON D50
ISO: 1600
Exposure: 1/250 sec
Aperture: f/5.3
Focal Length: 46mm w/18-55 kit lens
 
Kirkland church in the North Pennines. I've seen some strange lighting conditions in this area. Don't really know why.

This combination of stormy sky and shaft of sunlight only lasted about half a minute... before the clouds 'closed up' again.

It's fun when the usual rules are reversed, and the land is brighter than the sky... but this was extreme.

kirklandstormxj4.jpg
 
freebooter said:
Well, IR focuses differently than visible light, so one has to compensate, especially if you use larger apertures or longer focal lengths because the depth of field is smaller. (Jessica, I would guess you may be using wider lenses and smaller apertures) Many lenses, especially fixed focal length ones, have a red dot on the (usually) left side of the focus distance indicator. What I do is focus with filter off, note the distance indicated, then put that distance on the red dot. It's a bit more complicated if I try to maximize the DOF, but that's the general idea. With the 28mm lens I used I had a lot of latitude so I could just guess-timate most of the time. But, I when I occasionally used the 105mm I had to be much more careful. Modern zoom lenses usually don't have the IR mark, so some experimentation is needed. Focus closer than you would normally. Also, some lenses render a hotspot when used for IR, my new 50mm 1.4, for example. There is lots of info on all this on the web, and for Nikon owners contemplating a new/used lens for IR I'd suggest checking http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html
Click to expand...
Thanks Freebooter and Jessica for the tips, i'll see how it goes and post results :D
 
dsc0015mx6.jpg

Caryatis - Tomb of Kekrops (1st king and founder of Athens)
Beside the Parthenon on the Acropolis.
 
xcalibre said:
dsc0015mx6.jpg

Caryatis - Tomb of Kekrops (1st king and founder of Athens)
Beside the Parthenon on the Acropolis.
Click to expand...

Good, well-lit shot of a much photographed landmark. I like the streaks in the sky, which don't detract from the statues. And I love the way the women have one kneee bent, as though they have no idea of the weight they're supporting (but I guess the respect is due to the artist rather than the photographer. :))
 
Doylem said:
Good, well-lit shot of a much photographed landmark. I like the streaks in the sky, which don't detract from the statues. And I love the way the women have one kneee bent, as though they have no idea of the weight they're supporting (but I guess the respect is due to the artist rather than the photographer. :))
Click to expand...
thanks mate, i agree :D
 
wow

Hey that is a GREAT photo Crawn! What type of camera and format do you shoot in to do something like that? (I'm assuming that you didn't stitch it together?)

...Forgive my ignorance, I just love panoramics and I'm trying to learn the best way to shoot them...thanks!



Crawn2003 said:
Pano I did while on a job in Chicago back in October.

2167866980_3784d78468_b.jpg
Click to expand...
 
San Francisco 4/2007
A: f/11
S: 1/60
F: 18mm
 

Attachments

  • DSC_9536_web.jpg
    DSC_9536_web.jpg
    283.1 KB · Views: 101
Took this in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic in 2006.. I looked at the image in my Aperture library today :)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1166.jpg
    IMG_1166.jpg
    601.2 KB · Views: 86
Maldini said:
I received my new D80 yesterday and i was practicing with a teddy bear after my little sis got bored..anyway today a friend of mine came by with his Falcon:eek: and i was shocked when i saw that thing..now here is the shot...its not perfect ,i'm still a beginner :D

2170447372_9f1d0401fc.jpg


I know this is seriously underexposed and this happens with many of my pictures, did anyone had a similar experience with a D80? should i change the ev to - 0.3 or -0.7 to fix this problem?
Click to expand...

I actually like this photo
 
SolracSelbor said:
I actually like this photo
Click to expand...

As do I. I think its a good composition, and I like the subject against the black background. But as others have said, it is very slightly underexposed.

Whats on its face? Its like a shell, is that to make it so the falcon doesnt get spooked or try to fly away?
Also, to obtain that black background, did you put the bird infront of a black background, or did you do it in Photoshop?
 
Underexposure FYI: It is often best to underexpose than to overexpose. Once you blow the highlights by overexposing, you can not recover them. One stop underexposure is right where I like my images from the camera to be.

I normally would not take the liberty of editing someone's photo but, as an example of what I mean, here is your image, adjusted however. All that was done is, import to Aperture, increase exposure, export back out, upload to here.. Nice photo by the way!!
 

Attachments

  • 2170447372_9f1d0401fc (1).jpg
    2170447372_9f1d0401fc (1).jpg
    41.9 KB · Views: 117
dprensner said:
Hey that is a GREAT photo Crawn! What type of camera and format do you shoot in to do something like that? (I'm assuming that you didn't stitch it together?)

...Forgive my ignorance, I just love panoramics and I'm trying to learn the best way to shoot them...thanks!
Click to expand...

Thank you. Usually no one here comments on any of my photos. They usually get buried and forgotten about. Nice to know someone appreciates the work!

I actually use different formats and it all depends on what I'm doing. Sometimes I take a pano with a Sinar 4x5 with a Leaf Digital Back but that's like 40lbs of equipment I have to drag out to the middle of no where. Most of the time I just use either Fuji S5 Pro or a Nikon D70s.

That photo was done with a Fuji S5 Pro. What I did was turn the camera in the vertical position. I then go from left to right and fire off the shots. So in this one, I used building as points of reference for each frame. Set the camera to Manual and get a reading for the exposure. I usually shoot around F/11 to F/16 so these were around 20sec. each. Also set your lens to manual, not auto focus, and set it for infinity. Each photo you take HAS to overlap the other for Photoshop to stitch them together.

I think this one, I did 7 different shots and stitched them together. The hardest part was getting each frame to be consistent which took Curves on each frame before flattening the image. I think, overall, that it was about 4 hours work because I had to go back and paint some of the grass green and remove the yellow tint from the left side of the pano.

I'm going to post another pano shortly that I took a while back in 2006.

~Crawn
 
Cali Pano WITH TIMG!

Cali Pano from 2006 when I had to go on location for a shoot in San Francisco.

Shot near Bodega, CA. with a Nikon D70s in July 2006.

Warning too, it's over a 500k file when you click on it! :eek:

~Crawn
 

Attachments

  • 9. Cali Pano.jpg
    9. Cali Pano.jpg
    452.4 KB · Views: 1,162
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back