View Full Version : hai fotofags
MST3Kakalina
05-10-2009, 05:20 AM
an issue i'm having with my photography skillz (or lack thereof) is trying to get colors balanced so they come out looking sharp and vibrant. a lot of my photos look rather washed-out and i end up tweaking them in the GIMP (mostly oversaturating some of them by a bit). i want to take photos that <i>don't</i> need that kind of help. how can i address this?
exemplary citizen
05-10-2009, 11:15 AM
can you manually adjust your white balance and exposure on your camera?
MST3Kakalina
05-11-2009, 07:06 AM
can you manually adjust your white balance and exposure on your camera?
yes, i can, it's a kodak easyshare z740. i also have it on on manual settings because the automatic settings look like even <i>more</i> ass than what i come up with.
other things i can adjust include:
exposure metering
focus zone
AF control
color mode
sharpness
ISO
f-stops
i leave for indonesia on friday and i want my pictures to be fucking epic.
exemplary citizen
05-13-2009, 10:55 PM
there's pretty much only three things on that list you need to be concerned with:
most important is making sure your white balance is set. there's probably a bunch of different presets on yours, like one for "sunny" and "indoor" or it might even be "flourescent" and "tungsten". just play with them and see what works best; it's pretty easy to get assy shots even using the "correct" white balance setting.
ISO is the same as your film speed - it's the sensitivity of your CCD. 400 and up is good for outdoors stuff, but you want to keep it as low as possible to avoid crunchy grain (read: ugly, ugly jpg noise)
f-stops are... kind of tricky. if your camera has a light meter built into the viewfinder, adjust it until the arrow lines up with the center point (or close to it, sometimes I like to underexpose stuff). BUT there's also another factor to consider - shutter speed. your shutter speed is going to influence your aperture (f-stop) setting - the faster the shutter moves, the less motion blur you get. conversely, a fast shutter means less light makes it through to the image plane, so you have to open your aperture (which is done, crazily enough, by <i>reducing</i> your f-stop number). here's an example:
lets say you're trying to photograph a city street - you want the cars to be blurred a little to give a sense of motion, so you'll need a slower shutter speed (slow shutter = fast moving things look streaky). it's kind of overcast daylight, so let's say (because i'm too lazy to look up reference numbers) you decide on 1/60 (or "120", same difference, just put a "1/" in front of it), and after looking at your light meter you decide to set your aperture at (what the hey) f11.
now you're at the zoo and you want to get a shot of a pretty critter (lets say it's an ocelot, why the fuck not), and it's moving around a lot, so you'll want a faster shutter speed - let's call it 1/500. so now you'll get a shot of it without blurriness - BUT WAIT!! if we leave the f-stop at f6, we'll see bupkis. so we have to increase the size of the aperture, by moving to a smaller f-stop. kind of helps to think about both the shutter speed and the aperture as fractions - f6 is 1/6 the size of the fully open aperture, so f2 (1/2) will let more light in because it's a bigger fraction of the size. totally counterintuitive, I know. but compared to the above street example, your ocelot shot is going to need something more like f4 or f2.8
so yeah. that's pretty much the crash course in non-suck photos, as far as I understand it. I am not a photographer, I only play one on tv, please consult your manual. also, <a href=http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Photography-Book-Scott-Kelby/dp/032147404X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242280584&sr=8-1>this book</a> is also concise and really helpful
exemplary citizen
05-13-2009, 11:07 PM
multiple exposures
lolol look ma, hdr
<img src=http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2417/2176897085_946b7b66b8.jpg>
god, I fucking hate the way those tonemapped photos look. very few people can do it tastefully.
all digital photos need post-processing of some sort for levels (which ensures you have a true white/black and decent colors) and sharpening, at least. often curves too, which lightens/darkens the whole affair based on a given starting tone. it's not impossible that you'll take the perfect photo technically, but it's very rare--and i'll say 100% likely for publishable photographs--that the photograph that comes from the camera will need to be edited before it becomes a final product. not to jazz it up, but to overcome the inherent lossy nature of digital photography.
so if you have a point and shoot, just make sure you're holding it nice and steady, the sun is behind you, and you never use on-camera flash.
if your real issue is colors, it's probably a function of your camera's optics and circuitry, though, so it's not really anything you can do about it.
exemplary citizen
05-13-2009, 11:14 PM
tom, we should have a spirited film vs. digital debate.
i don't know, i'm not sure if there's a real debate.
instead let's find photos on deviantart and deem whether they are "art."
exemplary citizen
05-13-2009, 11:24 PM
I approve of this plan
http://i41.tinypic.com/18dbio.jpg
i'll take "not art" for 500, alex
MST3Kakalina
05-14-2009, 05:30 AM
there's pretty much only three things on that list you need to be concerned with:
most important is making sure your white balance is set. there's probably a bunch of different presets on yours, like one for "sunny" and "indoor" or it might even be "flourescent" and "tungsten". just play with them and see what works best; it's pretty easy to get assy shots even using the "correct" white balance setting.
ISO is the same as your film speed - it's the sensitivity of your CCD. 400 and up is good for outdoors stuff, but you want to keep it as low as possible to avoid crunchy grain (read: ugly, ugly jpg noise)
f-stops are... kind of tricky. if your camera has a light meter built into the viewfinder, adjust it until the arrow lines up with the center point (or close to it, sometimes I like to underexpose stuff). BUT there's also another factor to consider - shutter speed. your shutter speed is going to influence your aperture (f-stop) setting - the faster the shutter moves, the less motion blur you get. conversely, a fast shutter means less light makes it through to the image plane, so you have to open your aperture (which is done, crazily enough, by <i>reducing</i> your f-stop number). here's an example:
lets say you're trying to photograph a city street - you want the cars to be blurred a little to give a sense of motion, so you'll need a slower shutter speed (slow shutter = fast moving things look streaky). it's kind of overcast daylight, so let's say (because i'm too lazy to look up reference numbers) you decide on 1/60 (or "120", same difference, just put a "1/" in front of it), and after looking at your light meter you decide to set your aperture at (what the hey) f11.
now you're at the zoo and you want to get a shot of a pretty critter (lets say it's an ocelot, why the fuck not), and it's moving around a lot, so you'll want a faster shutter speed - let's call it 1/500. so now you'll get a shot of it without blurriness - BUT WAIT!! if we leave the f-stop at f6, we'll see bupkis. so we have to increase the size of the aperture, by moving to a smaller f-stop. kind of helps to think about both the shutter speed and the aperture as fractions - f6 is 1/6 the size of the fully open aperture, so f2 (1/2) will let more light in because it's a bigger fraction of the size. totally counterintuitive, I know. but compared to the above street example, your ocelot shot is going to need something more like f4 or f2.8
so yeah. that's pretty much the crash course in non-suck photos, as far as I understand it. I am not a photographer, I only play one on tv, please consult your manual. also, <a href=http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Photography-Book-Scott-Kelby/dp/032147404X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242280584&sr=8-1>this book</a> is also concise and really helpful
lol yeah i took half of a photo course in college (my minolta, while well-loved and well-tended, had a tendency to chew up film which made doing projects rather impossible) so i'm all set on shutter speed and aperture settings etc. i just didn't know if there was some special photo trick about thinking digitally about color that i missed out on. after i posted this i googled a while and found <a href="http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm">this</a> site, which looks to be quite useful.
my kodak isn't quite as sexy as that (canon?) dSLR you had at 'con, but it offers a bit more control than your standard point-and-shoot.
exemplary citizen
05-14-2009, 08:10 AM
yeah, there's no special trick, except the knowledge that digital color always, always sucks and needs some kind of adjustment.
sexy canon needs to go in for repairs. lens mount suddenly has a gap in it D:
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.