Photography Thread

Originally Posted by Mugen910

Like this

Now that I know it CAN be done, would you be so kind as to tell HOW it is done.
Thanks.

Originally Posted by JetJocky51

Now that I know it CAN be done, would you be so kind as to tell HOW it is done.
Thanks.

You have to have the image hosted someplace like photobucket or somesuch.

then you right-click on the image and copy the entire address. Then you add it to your post with {img} {/img} except use the [] instead of {}.

It will look like this.

{img}http://m-mason.smugmug.com/Other/Tonnado-Tech/084a/745851690_3juFW-M.jpg{/img}

There you go.

-Roland.

-Roland.

[Mugen910]

I know it's prob too much to ask but..can you post up the pic info..like F thingy and Iso and such? I'd like to learn please..

sorry jetjocky51...just messing with ya...I figured you would quote me and see how it was done.

[kenstogie]

I forget what programs you can use to extract it, but that data is typically embedded in the image isn't it?

[kgoings]

Originally Posted by Mugen910

I know it's prob too much to ask but..can you post up the pic info..like F thingy and Iso and such? I'd like to learn please..

sorry jetjocky51...just messing with ya...I figured you would quote me and see how it was done.

Here is a thread on the basics, with pics to explain. Its from a photography forum that is mainly Canon, but we allow you Nikon folks to come and learn the error of your ways

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=414088

And here is an exif viewer. EXIF is the info from a picture, what camera took it, what was the focal length, ISO, Speed, and Aperature (the F thingy)

http://regex.info/exif.cgi

[Blueface]

Originally Posted by Mugen910

Like this

To me, that my friend is a photo illustrating one thing and one thing alone.
Answer: 4 very, very lucky guys.

[Noodles]

Originally Posted by Mugen910

I know it's prob too much to ask but..can you post up the pic info..like F thingy and Iso and such? I'd like to learn please..

sorry jetjocky51...just messing with ya...I figured you would quote me and see how it was done.

Originally Posted by kgoings

Here is a thread on the basics, with pics to explain. Its from a photography forum that is mainly Canon, but we allow you Nikon folks to come and learn the error of your ways

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=414088

And here is an exif viewer. EXIF is the info from a picture, what camera took it, what was the focal length, ISO, Speed, and Aperature (the F thingy)

http://regex.info/exif.cgi

F thingy? Is that a Nikon term .

Here's a good tutorial site from Canon, http://web.canon.jp/imaging/enjoydslr/part2/2A.html. I think somebody mentioned AV (Canon) = A (Nikon) and TV (Canon) = S.

[kgoings]

Here Bao, probably not the best example. But I took this at ISO 1000, Shutter 1/400th and Aperature of 1.8. You can see that her feet are somewhat soft or not sharp and if you look close enough you can see that the ends of the bar are also not sharp. This is because of the 1.8 Aperature, you have a very small depth of field where everything will be in focus and sharp. I could have gone faster on the Shutter, as you see there is still motion blur in her hair.

Originally Posted by Roland of Gilead

Camera Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT
Exposure Time 0.0025s (1/400)
Aperture f/4.0
ISO 400
Focal Length 120mm (192mm in 35mm)



Canon EOS-1D Mark II
Exposure Time 0.0003s (1/3000)
Aperture f/4.0
ISO 200
Focal Length 95mm (123.5mm in 35mm)



Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT
Exposure Time 0.002s (1/500)
Aperture f/5.6
ISO 200
Focal Length 40mm (64mm in 35mm)


-Roland.

Updated with Exif data.

-Roland.

[Fishbeadtwo]

cool pics all! how do you get the timing just right to capture the muzzle flash though?

Originally Posted by Fishbeadtwo

cool pics all! how do you get the timing just right to capture the muzzle flash though?

My guess would be that he is taking a burst of frames and then posting the one that caught the image that he wanted.

[Fishbeadtwo]

was thinking along those lines but had to ask.....

Originally Posted by coastietech

My guess would be that he is taking a burst of frames and then posting the one that caught the image that he wanted.

Sometimes that's how I do it, some times if the shooter is shooting with any kind of rhythm, I just try to time a single frame with their shots. Luck has a great deal to do with it.


Camera Canon EOS-1D Mark II
Exposure Time 0.0015s (1/640)
Aperture f/2.8
ISO 200
Focal Length 110mm (143mm in 35mm)


-Roland.

[Mugen910]

Originally Posted by Mugen910

The girl on the far left looks like someone I used to work with....

Originally Posted by kgoings

Here Bao, probably not the best example. But I took this at ISO 1000, Shutter 1/400th and Aperature of 1.8. You can see that her feet are somewhat soft or not sharp and if you look close enough you can see that the ends of the bar are also not sharp. This is because of the 1.8 Aperature, you have a very small depth of field where everything will be in focus and sharp. I could have gone faster on the Shutter, as you see there is still motion blur in her hair.

OK so please anyone correct me.

In regards to this pic [ISO 1000, Shutter 1/400th and Aperature of 1.8. ]..if I did this

ISO 1000....Shutter 1/60...Aperture 1.8 then the pic would have more of a blur effect around the focal point? what would happen to the background?

ISO 400..Shutter 1/400th..Aperture 1.8 then the pic would have be darker?

ISO 1000...Shutter 1/400th..Aperture 4 then the pic would be darker and the background would less blurred.

[kgoings]

Originally Posted by Mugen910

OK so please anyone correct me.

In regards to this pic [ISO 1000, Shutter 1/400th and Aperature of 1.8. ]..if I did this

ISO 1000....Shutter 1/60...Aperture 1.8 then the pic would have more of a blur effect around the focal point? what would happen to the background?

With the shutter sped at 1/60, the picture would be much darker cause it would not have enough light and the movement would be blurred cause the shutter would not be fast enough to stop the action

Now I could have gone with ISO1600 or even 3200 and used a smaller aperature like F4, but then there is the possibility that there would be noise artifacts because of the higher ISO. It is really just a balancing of everything to get the best result.

Originally Posted by Mugen910

ISO 400..Shutter 1/400th..Aperture 1.8 then the pic would have be darker?

Yes the picture would be darker cause ISO400 would not allow enough light, you may be able to fix it with software but it would be underexposed.[quote]

Originally Posted by Mugen910

ISO 1000...Shutter 1/400th..Aperture 4 then the pic would be darker and the background would less blurred.

Yes exactly, and if there were enough light in the gym, the picture would be fine, just more would be in focus like her feet, the bars, blah blah blah. Read that post on that like I posted.

[Mugen910]

Originally Posted by kgoings

With the shutter sped at 1/60, the picture would be much darker cause it would not have enough light and the movement would be blurred cause the shutter would not be fast enough to stop the action

Now I could have gone with ISO1600 or even 3200 and used a smaller aperature like F4, but then there is the possibility that there would be noise artifacts because of the higher ISO. It is really just a balancing of everything to get the best result.



Yes the picture would be darker cause ISO400 would not allow enough light, you may be able to fix it with software but it would be underexposed.



Yes exactly, and if there were enough light in the gym, the picture would be fine, just more would be in focus like her feet, the bars, blah blah blah. Read that post on that like I posted.

Great info..

[Wolfgang]

Originally Posted by kgoings

With an ISO of 1000 I would expect the picture to be much more grainy.

Is there any post production work here?

Was the room/warehouse pretty dim?

Either way kudos.

[kgoings]

Originally Posted by Wolfgang

With an ISO of 1000 I would expect the picture to be much more grainy.

Is there any post production work here?

Was the room/warehouse pretty dim?

Either way kudos.

This was a typical gymnasium, terrible lighting. And in gymnastics no flash is allowed for the safety of the gymnasts.

I am not sure what exactly I did in PP, most likely levels and wb, a very light noise reduction and a small amount of sharpening. But I do that will all pictures for the most part. It isn't until I make a sale that I actually do heavy PP.

Both of my camera's perform very well at ISO 1000 (Canon 40D and 1DMKII) not sure which one I was using here. Noise becomes a big problem when you underexpose, I intentionally overexpose to TRY and avoid that.

[Wolfgang]

Very cool. I will keep that in mind. The flash thing I diddnt think of safety and all.