MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Yeah wot Graham said about creepy trees. That's it!
Earlier, you dismissed the selective use of Depth of Field. Which is a photographic feature that is manipulated to aid in the creation of an image the photographer wants to produce.
this is a particular coincidence where an artifact of optics simulates visual attention, but it's such old hat that it would be shocking to try to pass it off as creativity when it conforms so solidly to convention. Yes, it's an available tool, nothing more, and risks crowbarring the viewer's attention.
how are your photoshop skills progressing SB?
Yes, it's an available tool, nothing more, and risks crowbarring the viewer's attention.
But that's the whole point, not a risk!
If you are merely trying to make a record of what you see to look at later then your point stands.
If you are trying to go beyond that into the realms of art or creativity in any way, then it doesn't.
how are your photoshop skills progressing SB?
mixed review. I've got used to the tedious multiple confirmations and I love the spot heal tool for removing blemishes, but for instance, going back to Paintshop Pro it's such a relief to be able to right click to select the source for the clone tool instead of having to locate the ALT key. Photoshop insists on using far more RAM that the limit I've set it, even when there are no files loaded (like 3.5GB!) and every now and then it just stops working with the cursor stuck on some tool or other but not doing anything useful, or it'll complain about being about to overwrite a file that does not exist, and if it loses mouse focus, the first time you click back onto it, nothing happens, it just selects the window, and you have to click again to do whatever it was you wanted. A great program limited by a crappy interface and careless implementation.
But that's the whole point, not a risk!
what I mean is, if the subject is sufficiently compelling people won't look at the background anyway, and forcing it out of focus is a photographic conceit. It was creative 150 years ago, now it's just same old same old.
Also consider these two images by a [url= http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/profile/simonfbarnes ]well-known amateur photographer[/url] that depict the same composition with two different exposure settings:
[url= http://www.bogtrotters.org/rides/2010/2oct/thumb/DSC_0889.jp g" target="_blank">http://www.bogtrotters.org/rides/2010/2oct/thumb/DSC_0889.jp g"/> [/img]
1/200s, f/7.1, ISO400[/url]
[url= http://www.bogtrotters.org/rides/2010/2oct/thumb/DSC_0886.jp g" target="_blank">http://www.bogtrotters.org/rides/2010/2oct/thumb/DSC_0886.jp g"/> [/img]
1/6s, f/20, ISO100[/url]
In the first he has frozen the action to capture the detail of the individual water droplets, whereas in the second he allows the water to blur to convey the continuous motion of the rapids.
So the two images manage to convey different things, neither simply reflects what the scene actually looked like, and the difference is purely down to altering the camera controls 😀
maybe complain to adobe they do listen to customers.
it's such a relief to be able to right click to select the source for the clone tool instead of having to locate the ALT key.
you can assign any key to a shortcut/modifier key, i set up my wacom pen so add point/delete point are on the rocker switch. no need to touch alt/ctrl.
photoshop will use all available ram because it's faster than a scratch disk.
try turning openGL off, reducing the history states and cache this will help speed things up (i'm on mac dunno if this is the same for pc)
but it's such old hat that it would be shocking to try to pass it off as creativity when it conforms so solidly to convention
You might as well say 'paint is just a convention' when talking about art. Yes, it's traditional, but it's what you DO with it that counts.
Likewise DOF and all the other effects you can deploy. It's not the effect itself that you're presenting to the viewer - it's your USE of that effect to convey a thought.
You are showing that you REALLY don't understand the concept of art. I don't either, but at least I know that and try to learn 🙂
this is a particular coincidence where an artifact of optics simulates visual attention, but it's such old hat that it would be shocking to try to pass it off as creativity when it conforms so solidly to convention. Yes, it's an available tool, nothing more, and risks crowbarring the viewer's attention.
As I said before when you create a photograph you throw away huge dimensions of information, including depth.
You rob your viewer of the ability to refocus on different parts of the image and the ability to judge depth by binocular vision.
Therefore it is your responsibility to select a suitable focus for them and ensure that you provide other depth cues if you require them for your composition.
Alternatively.... get yourself the [url= http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/23/adobe-shows-off-plenoptic-lenses-that-let-you-refocus-an-image-a/ ]new Adobe Plenoptic Lens that lets you select focus after you take the picture[/url], then rig up a video display which tracks your eye movements and automatically re-focuses the image on the bit you are looking at. Might cost a bit though 😀
You are showing that you REALLY don't understand the concept of art.
you are showing you have no idea what I think is all 🙂 This is normal.
you can assign any key to a shortcut/modifier key, i set up my wacom pen so add point/delete point are on the rocker switch. no need to touch alt/ctrl.
ooh, thanks, I'll try that!
photoshop will use all available ram because it's faster than a scratch disk.
except it has a setting to tell it the maximum amount of RAM to use, which it ignores, and 3.5GB to hold zero files is excessive, particularly when I spend less than 1% of my postprocessing time loading images and I'd like that RAM for other stuff I'm doing 🙁
Molgrips, yep, agreed.
You rob your viewer of the ability to refocus on different parts of the image and the ability to judge depth by binocular vision.
good point! I'd been thinking about that but forgotten 🙂
Personally I only use manual because I can decide on the image I want to take and take it, and secondly once I decide on a particular setting, usually sutter speed, I then only have to worry about one control, making life a lot easier. I don't think there is anything wrong with using fully auto as a viewer of the photo I niether know or want to know how it was taken, as a photographer I am often interested though.
I don't particularly like photos that have had too much PS editing and make them look unrealistic, creativity from the camera is another thing.
From the two pictures from Elfin, the TT picture has too much movement for my tastes, I'd like to see at least a small area being clearly defined, the eyes or face for example.
The track photo is quite beautiful, not just as an image, but also it is a quite difficult image to take from a technical point of view. How many pictures were rejected from that shoot????
My two-penneth.
you are showing you have no idea what I think is all This is normal.
I'm really trying hard to figure it out mate. You are doing a terrible job getting your point across, since none of seem to be able to work it out.
and secondly once I decide on a particular setting, usually sutter speed, I then only have to worry about one control
Is that not priority mode?
In the first he has frozen the action to capture the detail of the individual water droplets, whereas in the second he allows the water to blur to convey the continuous motion of the rapids.
but the eye can do either too - you can choose to track the water movement and see the droplets or widen your attention to see the bulk flow 🙂
And I didn't mean that settings were irrelevant, only that they don't need to be elevated to some hallowed, faux creative status
You are doing a terrible job getting your point across, since none of seem to be able to work it out.
my working hypothesis is that they're speed reading or fondling themselves...
my working hypothesis is that they're speed reading or fondling themselves...
Mine is that you can't communicate and are unable to read our reactions and react appropriately!
Is that not priority mode?
I assume the "M" signifies manual, I might be wrong though, but when I take a series of photos I don't want to be pi55ing around with two buttons for every shot. Slow shutter speed, lots of blur and the apeture I want, then the sun disappears behind a cloud, what do I do? Change everything or just one setting?
Two buttons?
S means shutter priority meaning that you think 'right I want to take this at 1/800s' so you set that, and the camera keeps that shutter speed and adjusts everything else to get the exposure ok, thereby compensating for the sun going in etc.
Two buttons?
Buttons, dials whatever you want, one for shutter speed and the second for aperture, two!
My camera doesn't have "S". But what does the "M" mean then?
And I didn't mean that settings were irrelevant, only that they don't need to be elevated to some hallowed, faux creative status
And I think that they are as integral part of the creative process as composition is.
If you compose well but get the exposure all wrong then the image simply will not convey what you want it to. If you compose terribly with perfect exposure then you'll have a technically competent but uninteresting picture.
Both composition and exposure involve creative decisions that alter your final image, as I've just shown you with your very own photos!
Right.. if you use M you need to adjust twice - aperture and shutter. If you use one of the priority modes then you only need one adjustment...
What camera is it? P, S, A and M are pretty much a convention I think.
My camera doesn't have "S". But what does the "M" mean then?
[img] 
[/img]
P = Program
A = Aperture priority (you set aperture size, camera selects shutter speed)
S = Shutter priority (you set shutter speed, camera selects aperture)
M = Manual (you set shutter speed and aperture)
(Canon use "Av" for aperture and "Tv" for shutter "Time")
[img] 
[/img]
Then, in addition, the running man thing is sport setting, which favours high speed shutter but isn't as rigid as S mode.. and so on. the woman in the hat I am guessing is portrait - presumably favouring narrow DOF?
EOS10d and EOS20d. But by using a priority mode you're restricting my creativity. The sun is just one parameter, maybe from the above scenario I decide the pictures have too much blur and I want a faster shutter speed, I only need one control. There are times when multiple cahnges are needed, not a problem. Manual is, for me, much simpler and much easier to control the camera. Next purchase, hopefully will be an EOS5d MkII with non of this auto rubbish.
Then, in addition, the running man thing is sport setting, which favours high speed shutter but isn't as rigid as S mode.. and so on. the woman in the hat I am guessing is portrait - presumably favouring narrow DOF?
Yep, "scene modes". Basically like the "green square auto" but you give the camera a bit of a hint about the kind of picture you are trying to take.
But by using a priority mode you're restricting my creativity.
Not really - the same thing can be achieved unless you are going for a really wild exposure.
Both composition and exposure involve creative decisions
I'm disputing the adjective "creative" for exposure as I think it's just a technical detail to choose the compromise which captures the detail you want, in the same way you might select a particular paintbrush. Composition [b]can[/b] be creative.
as I've just shown you with your very own photos!
but I was just snapping, not being creative.
The track photo is quite beautiful, not just as an image, but also it is a quite difficult image to take from a technical point of view. How many pictures were rejected from that shoot????
He's on film, so I doubt it was many, if any at all.....
From the two pictures from Elfin, the TT picture has too much movement for my tastes, I'd like to see at least a small area being clearly defined, the eyes or face for example.
Ahh. You might like this, then? 🙂
[url= http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2690/4319913898_dedfd47443_b.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_atkin/4319913898/ ]103[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/peter_atkin/ ]PeterPoddy[/url], on Flickr
I'm disputing the adjective "creative" for exposure as I think it's just a technical detail to choose the compromise which captures the detail you want, in the same way you might select a particular paintbrush. Composition can be creative.
Yes but [u]choosing[/u] [i]"the compromise which captures the detail you want"[/i] [u]is[/u] a creative decision!! You creatively decide what details go in your creation and what details are irrelevant and distract from it.
I was just snapping, not being creative
No comment 😈
Composition is Art, Photography is science.
Use cameras as you want to, they are just a means to an end.
GrahamS - MemberBut by using a priority mode you're restricting my creativity.
Not really - the same thing can be achieved unless you are going for a really wild exposure.
Of course it's restricting, you're only allowing me to move on one axis. Fix SSpeed and I can only play with aperture, fix aperture and I can only play with SSpeed. Fully manual and I can do what I want, when I want.
I hate those mode dials as they always manage to turn accidentally 🙁
Now I have:
[img] 
[/img]
where you have to hold down the mode button and spin the wheel, which is far less prone to nudging 🙂
The track photo is quite beautiful,
there's something awry there either in exposure developing or printing.
it looks muddy so maybe under exposed and there is an area of overexposure running along the top of the frame so either lack of agitation when in the tank or a reflection off the baseboard mask when printing. it certainly doesn't look like everything was 100% spot on in the process from exposure to print.
Ahh. You might like this, then?
sorry, rider too ugly 🙁
Yes but choosing "the compromise which captures the detail you want" is a creative decision!!
at the same level as choosing the contrast on your TV allows you to join hands with the director...
or if you like, set the camera on "bracket" and select the best rendering later...
Nice, but I prefer this, though, PP. 😉
[img] 
[/img]
Of course it's restricting, you're only allowing me to move on one axis. Fix SSpeed and I can only play with aperture, fix aperture and I can only play with SSpeed.
But you just said you "don't want to be pi55ing around with two buttons for every shot" - which means you have to fix one?
Anyway it's not true. I shoot Aperture priority most of the time.
I choose the overall exposure I want using the exposure compensation (e.g. I want this to be dark so I'll dial down two stops (-2EV) from the normal exposure)
Then I am free to change the aperture as I like and the camera will balance the shutter speed to ensure I get the same overall exposure.
copyright thief 🙁
But you just said you "don't want to be pi55ing around with two buttons for every shot" - which means you have to fix one?
Exactly, but I have the choice about which way I want to move, depending on exteranl factors like the light levels, or internal factors like my whims, and I get to choose which one I fix.
at the same level as choosing the contrast on your TV allows you to join hands with the director...
**** me you really just don't get it do you simon? 😆
The contrast on my TV doesn't alter the depth of field. It doesn't introduce motion blur or freeze the action. It doesn't make the scene lighter or darker. It doesn't introduce noise.
That's the directors job!
Exactly, but I have the choice about which way I want to move, depending on exteranl factors like the light levels, or internal factors like my whims, and I get to choose which one I fix.
So do I. I can switch it to shutter priority if I want. 😀
Personally I just can't be arsed doing the mental maths to work out exposures.
Presumably you have to go [i]"Right I'm at f/11 for 1/30s. That exposure is spot on, but I want a shallower depth of field. So stop down the aperture to f/4, that's three stops, so then I need to decrease the shutter speed to... 30 x 2 x 2 x 2... rounded.. 1/250s"[/i]
Whereas in Aperture priority I would just stop down the aperture and the camera does the maths to give me the 1/250s shutter for the same exposure. That feels simpler to me.
maybe from the above scenario I decide the pictures have too much blur and I want a faster shutter speed, I only need one control.
Yes but in that situation your picture will get darker if you only operate one control, so you'd need to operate two to keep the same exposure. In S mode you'd only have to operate one.
Next purchase, hopefully will be an EOS5d MkII with non of this auto rubbish.
Not quite sure I follow what you are talking about. Your current camera and that one have full auto, full manual and all points in between. You are free to choose which one you want.
I am suggesting that in the scenario described, S mode would be a simpler option since you could adjust the shutter speed as you wish without having to adjust the aperture as well to maintain exposure.
More a case of "f/11 for 1/30sec is spot on....
... and now the suns gone in, let's go f/8 or,
... this guys coming slower, let's go 1/50sec, or,
... this guys wearing a really light shirt, let's go f/13, or,
...?
With the photography I do, I'm unlikely to get a perfect exposure. I'm looking for something else. Why are you trying to convice me that the way I find comfortale is somehow not good?
simonfbarnes - Membercopyright thief
Who?
Set the aperture you want, quick butchers at the RGB histogram, get the furthest peak on the right nearly clipping by adjusting the shutter speed and hey presto spot on exposure
Why are you trying to convice me that the way I find comfortale is somehow not good?
More to the point, why do you THINK I'm trying to convince you of anything?!
If you're an experienced camera user, then fine. You sounded somewhat unsure of things however, so I was trying to illustrate what S and A modes could do for you if you weren't aware, which you may have found useful.
Bloody internet... everyone thinks everyone else is trying to force them to do something or other 🙂
More to the point, why do you THINK I'm trying to convince you of anything?!
Not necessarily you, and I was playing earlier. 😉
Why do people have to take thinks so personally on the internet. 🙄 oh yes, and... 😉
get the furthest peak on the right nearly clipping by adjusting the shutter speed and hey presto spot on exposure
I thought the idea was to get most of it in the middle?
With the photography I do, I'm unlikely to get a perfect exposure. I'm looking for something else. Why are you trying to convice me that the way I find comfortale is somehow not good?
I'm not I'm just countering your argument that using a priority mode would restrict creativity. Its just a different way of controlling the same thing.
Set the aperture you want, quick butchers at the RGB histogram, get the furthest peak on the right nearly clipping by adjusting the shutter speed and hey presto spot on exposure
Unless, y'know, you don't just want an exposure that fills the histogram. Maybe you want to clips some highlights or drop some blacks.
Yeah but he said that clipping the right most peak meant 'spot on' exposure.. I'm still not understanding the implications of historgrams very well.
My reaction is that there are too many variables, both internal and external, and that fixing one point [i]must[/i] restrict movement and creativity, or they wouldn't put so many options on the camera in the first place. All IMHO.
Yes.. you only select the option to fix that if that's what you want. After all, you want a photo that is exposed enough to see. So that's a constraint right there.
It's just a convenience that's all. So if the sun comes out and you decide you want to do a high speed shot of a fast rider with bits of gravel flying up in the air, you can just whack the exposure from 1/30 to 1/800 and snap - the camera will make sure the pic is still visible.
Just saying that S mode can be useful that's all.
Personally I just can't be arsed doing the mental maths to work out exposures.
Me neither. But handily, on the screen it tells me if I'm over or under exposing and I can adjust until the exposure is how I like it, or select Tv or Av modes, then tell it to over or under expose by a certain amount leaving me free to concentrate on shutter speed or DoF as I choose.
I know very little about the technical side of photography, but I know what I like and I like learning how to achieve it 🙂
Yeah but he said that clipping the right most peak meant 'spot on' exposure.. I'm still not understanding the implications of historgrams very well.
[img] 
[/img]
Left is dark/black, right is bright/white (or vice versa on some systems)
The height is the amount of the image which is that brightness.
The dark and bright are absolute limits.
A big peak squashed up against the dark edge means lots of your image is completely black with no detail in it.
A big peak squashed up against the bright edge means lots of your image is completely white, "blown highlights" with no detail in it.
Tijuana Taxi's approach means your exposure is as bright as it can be without any (significant) blown highlights.
Read: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml
..or select Tv or Av modes, then tell it to over or under expose by a certain amount leaving me free to concentrate on shutter speed or DoF as I choose.
Which is exactly what I was proposing. 🙂
Tijuana Taxi's approach means your exposure is as bright as it can be without any (significant) blown highlights.
That's what I thought.. but that's going to lead to bright pictures. Which you may not want! Getting most of it in the middle means a neutral exposure doesn't it?
It's just a convenience that's all. So if the sun comes out and you decide you want to do a high speed shot of a fast rider with bits of gravel flying up in the air, you can just whack the exposure from 1/30 to 1/800 and snap - the camera will make sure the pic is still visible.
So you make that change from rider 1 to rider 2, rider 2 is wearing a white shirt, rider 3 comes along wearing a black shirt or the sun disappears again. You still want 1/800sec, what do you do? I'm more concerned about the rider than the background. For me I find it a lot simpler to use manual 100% for action shots and auto for the podiums because I can't be ar5ed... 😆
Are you trying to say that one mode is [b]better[/b] than another?
You still want 1/800sec, what do you do?
If you are in S mode, you don't have to do anything. The camera will still expose correctly.
I'm more concerned about the rider than the background
That's what spot metering is for.
So you make that change from rider 1 to rider 2, rider 2 is wearing a white shirt, rider 3 comes along wearing a black shirt or the sun disappears again. You still want 1/800sec, what do you do?
Carry on at f5.6, & 1/125 becasue I'm using a remote strobe, actually.....
8)
(Or if I do need a bit more exposure, I'll knock it back to 1/100th maybe)
Getting most of it in the middle means a neutral exposure doesn't it?
Or conversely it means most of your image is average grey and uninteresting 😀
Basically there is no ultimately "correct exposure" there is only the exposure that matches what you want.
So you make that change from rider 1 to rider 2, rider 2 is wearing a white shirt, rider 3 comes along wearing a black shirt or the sun disappears again. You still want 1/800sec, what do you do?
I wouldn't do anything for the sun disappearing, because presumably I am in S mode so the camera will open up the aperture itself to compensate (and some can even be set to increase the ISO if you don't have enough aperture available).
For the black shirt, well if I wanted him to be brighter than the last guy then I'd just add a stop to the exposure compensation.
The contrast on my TV doesn't alter the depth of field. It doesn't introduce motion blur or freeze the action. It doesn't make the scene lighter or darker. It doesn't introduce noise.That's the directors job!
no it isn't. it's the job of the DOP to do this and whoever does the grading in post production.
I use the RGB histogram which I find far better for accurate exposure than the light/dark one.
Just get the one of the three peaks that is closest to the right nearly touching seems to work for me
Also a good idea to set the shutter speeds in smaller increments than whole stops for finer adjustment
Bearing in mind most of my shots are landscapes hence setting the aperture to one of my choice
I think we may be homing in on a harmonious conclusion as I realise a lot of the argument is over teminology. I don't think of the camera controls as creative but functional - the creativity (if any) is in the mind of the snapper as they decide the framing, focus and areas of interest.
Of course I'm always fritzing with the ASA and relative EV to get the best compromise between subject movement, rendering quality, camera shake, backlighting, shadow detail etc etc, but as I do it I'm not thinking "Oooh, look at me being [b]creative[/b]!", but "Grrrr! Now the stupid camera needs me to do this :(".
It so happens the Program mode seems to make a reasonable job of the kind of shutter and aperture compromises I like, biased towards overall sharpness, so I'm happy to leave it in that, but there's one other vital factor left out of the mix, which is my inability to remember what I've set, so I end up shooting landscapes at 1000 ASA after action, or action at 200 ASA, or getting lots of overexposed shots after I wind up the EV for riders against the sky. It doesn't matter that it's all displayed round the edge of the viewfinder, as I've never consciously seen any of that stuff while shooting, as my concentration is on the subject out there in the world - perhaps due to using SLRs for 25 years before there was any of that clutter.
And that's why I want a real viewfinder that lets me feel like I'm looking directly at the subject, not a little screen in my hand!
no it isn't. it's the job of the DOP to do this and whoever does the grading in post production.
😆 yeah okay, but it is part of the creative process and the overall creative direction and "look" of the programme, no? (don't encourage sfb ffs!)
I'm more concerned about the rider than the backgroundThat's what spot metering is for.
Nahh, that's what a remote stobe is for. 😉 Expose for the background, then use just enough extra light, placed exacly where you need it, to light the rider up and freeze (most but not all of, in my case) the action
I've got one more addition to make to my kit before I'm happy with shots like this:
[url= http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4770092865_1ddb084f7d_b.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_atkin/4770092865/ ]IMG_8520[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/peter_atkin/ ]PeterPoddy[/url], on Flickr
Have a guess what it is... 🙂
(Oddly, my local photography shop doesn't stock them either!)
I think Elfin will guess, becasue he thinks like I do.....
For the black shirt, well if I wanted him to be brighter than the last guy then I'd just add a stop to the exposure compensation.
So you do actually agree that priority setting are restricting and for full creativity you need to step outside an automatic setting. 😉
If you can use manual on the fly then do so, you'll have greater control over the image rather than relying on the camera to figure it out for you,
If you can't (or don't want to) use manual, then use aperture or shutter priority, there's no shame in it, and you'll be doing what many pros do.
If you're interested in taking photography seriously avoid using the auto settings...start off with the aperture and shutter settings, and then play around with manual when you're comfortable.
Have a guess what it is..
Better looking subjects?
A right fork leg?
Have a guess what it is...
Women? Naked women? Women with their norks out? Is it women????
They sound like SFB answers! 😉
So you do actually agree that priority setting are restricting and for full creativity you need to step outside an automatic setting.
Nope, I just use priority + exposure compensation, where you use aperture + speed.
I don't think by using the compensation I am stepping "outside the automatic setting". I'm just using the controls available. (and I don't really consider priority modes to be automatic either.)
Remember though, I am a rank amateur. I don't do nearly enough photography to be able to guesstimate exposures on the fly in the way you describe. I simply don't have that experience. So I let the camera handle that part whilst I still maintain the control I need over the exposure.
Tell you what, some of that set are better then I remember. It's nice to look back at them again...
[url= http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4762038954_7d60e5d088_b.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_atkin/4762038954/ ]IMG_8412[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/peter_atkin/ ]PeterPoddy[/url], on Flickr
They sound like SFB answers!
FYI I am not the only man to appreciate totty 🙂
I don't do nearly enough photography to be able to guesstimate exposures on the fly in the way you describe
I'm not sure why one would want to unless frequently operating under heavily controlled lighting conditions, particularly when sophisticated light metering is on hand 🙂
From the two pictures from Elfin, the TT picture has too much movement for my tastes, I'd like to see at least a small area being clearly defined, the eyes or face for example.
It's interesting, reading different people's opinions about that pic. I was going for a pretty abstract sort of feel, evocative of the blur of movement as a rider speeds past. Not really trying to include any significant detail, but just enough to show what's actually happening. Like I said, I'm not particularly satisfied with it. Happy that someone likes it though.
The track photo is quite beautiful, not just as an image, but also it is a quite difficult image to take from a technical point of view. How many pictures were rejected from that shoot????
Why, thank you! 🙂 I was pleased with it. Was fairly difficult, as the riders were doing 30mph+; and the 24mm exaggerates perspective. The riders were going past me in a split second, so only had a tiny window of opportunity to get the right shot. Only took about half a dozen shots from that angle; most came out ok but that was the best.
there's something awry there either in exposure developing or printing.
it looks muddy so maybe under exposed and there is an area of overexposure running along the top of the frame so either lack of agitation when in the tank or a reflection off the baseboard mask when printing. it certainly doesn't look like everything was 100% spot on in the process from exposure to print.
Ooh, picky! 😉
it's an outdoor track, so the lighting isn't the same as indoor ones. I think the exposure's bang on for the rider, tbh. So, I'd disagree with you on that one. Processing is fine too. The scan is just how it was off the film, so maybe a little tweaking in Photoshop with Curves, but I'm happy with how it is.
It's meant to serve as an illustration of how to capture fast action with fully manual control and no motordrive. I think it does that job quite well.
You're more than welcome to print me a 'perfect' copy, though. 🙂
I think it's stupid to argue that manual is more or less creative. Quite a lot of pictures, they'd be impossible or hard to create using full auto. But also, there are tons of pictures out there that rely on quick picture taking, no thinking about settings, and just pressing the button at the right moment. In the past I bet people taking those pictures just set some rough settings and crossed their fingers that any problems could be fixed in the darkroom, whereas nowadays the camera at least adjusts for conditions.
When it comes down to it auto modes are just another useful tool for getting pictures, no reason not to use them for ninety percent of pictures (where you're not doing special effects with blurring or depth of field, or shooting fast action in poor light). It doesn't make you less creative if you get a picture using them.
Sure, but relying on auto alone is bit limiting.
I dunno. I learned using manual-only cams, and never had a problem with only using manual, even in tricky conditions.
In fact what I'd really love, is a digital FM2. Full frame 35mm sensor, proper tough-as-bastards metal body, no fripperies such as built-in flash, 'sports' and 'portrait' modes etc, silly built-in shitty digital effects and all that bollocks.
And not costing £1700....
no fripperies such as built-in flash, 'sports' and 'portrait' modes etc, silly built-in shitty digital effects
I never use the scene modes myself but they do mean I can hand the camera to someone else to get a picture of me without needing to give them a 20 minute lesson.
They are not hard to ignore though, so I'm not sure what the benefit would be in mssing them out?