The Photography Thread

[Boz Mon]

I'll post some stuff here. I went out shooting the other day at a pond near my house, and theres 1 of Chicago. Let me know what you think.

The natureish shots were using the kit lens (18-55) and the pigeons were on my 55-200 VR lens. Hope you guys enjoy

 

[ferrari_chris]

OK, here's an example of a problem I'm having.

Can I expect my pictures to look any good at full resolution?

The picture below was just a quick shot taken by me. Nothing special really.

It looks OK in thumbnail (the image itself, not the composition or anything like that) but when viewed at full resolution, the colours are blothcy, the outlines jaggedy and it just looks like arse.

http://xs125.xs.to/xs125/08126/treepic728.jpg

So is this normal for a digital camera (a point-n-shoot or not), is it my cheap(ish) camera, or can I fiddle some settings?

Feel free to ask any questions, I'll try and answer them the best I can.

Thanks!

 

[skylineGTR_guy]

it shouldnt look that bad, a lot of the test shots on dp review arent like that:
http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/panasonictz1_samples/

In your menu settings is there an option for jpeg detail? if there is try to change the resolution to fine, you will fit less pictures on the card but more detail in your shots.

Was that taken with IS on or off? try both IS mode 1, mode 2, and off and see if it makes a difference.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

I'm mucking about with some photoblog software. I'd welcome opinions from anyone who can be bothered looking. Cheers.

Chris,
I second skylineGTR_guy's post. Also check that the camera ISO is on auto: it's awfully noisy, and it may be that the camera is using a higher ISO than is strictly necessary. It also looks like your lens could do with cleaning.

 

[tait]

It's not bad Giles, but it seems really cluttered. I'd try to go for something a bit simpler. What photoblog program are you using?

 

[ferrari_chris]

it shouldnt look that bad, a lot of the test shots on dp review arent like that:
http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/panasonictz1_samples/

In your menu settings is there an option for jpeg detail? if there is try to change the resolution to fine, you will fit less pictures on the card but more detail in your shots.

Was that taken with IS on or off? try both IS mode 1, mode 2, and off and see if it makes a difference.

...

Chris,
I second skylineGTR_guy's post. Also check that the camera ISO is on auto: it's awfully noisy, and it may be that the camera is using a higher ISO than is strictly necessary. It also looks like your lens could do with cleaning.

Thanks guys. 👍

I'll look into it and get back to you.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Thanks guys. 👍

I'll look into it and get back to you.

As a rule of thumb, try not to center whatever you're taking a picture of in the shot.

 

[ferrari_chris]

As a rule of thumb, try not to center whatever you're taking a picture of in the shot.

Thanks. I'll get into composition when I figure out how to actually use my camera properly.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

It's not bad Giles, but it seems really cluttered. I'd try to go for something a bit simpler. What photoblog program are you using?

It's Pixelpost. With a template by a Canadian dude. I like the look of the template, but it hasn't really taken my modifications well, and the navigation isn't really sufficiently intuitive. I'll keep looking for templates for it, because I like the general operation of the program. I've got a Lightroom mod so I can export direct from Lightroom to the blog, which is pretty cool.

 

[Alex.]

Ok my first shots with my new camera, I didnt really have anywhere to go so please excuse the unawesomeness. I'm still learning about the different modes and settings (if which there seem to be many)

My Dad's car : (Couldnt get any further back behind because of my house wall)




Sunset view from backyard was crap so I decided to go into the fields.

testing macro's capabilities


These were only test shots for me getting used to the camera.
👍

 

[35mm]

Thanks, tait. Love that holga poop.

@Boz Mon: Some nice shots you've got there.

Giles, I agree that it's a bit cluttered and that it's not very intuitive, but in general I got to say it pleased me. 👍

 

[tait]

It's Pixelpost. With a template by a Canadian dude. I like the look of the template, but it hasn't really taken my modifications well, and the navigation isn't really sufficiently intuitive. I'll keep looking for templates for it, because I like the general operation of the program. I've got a Lightroom mod so I can export direct from Lightroom to the blog, which is pretty cool.

Kinda figured it was pixelpost. In my opinion it's the best out there. Weird to hear it's not taking your modifications well; I've always had an easy time editing templates to my own needs. If you need any help or have any questions you can shoot me a pm. You can see mine here;
http://taitk.com/photoblog/

Thanks DM.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Thanks, tait. Love that holga poop.

@Boz Mon: Some nice shots you've got there.

Giles, I agree that it's a bit cluttered and that it's not very intuitive, but in general I got to say it pleased me. 👍

Kinda figured it was pixelpost. In my opinion it's the best out there. Weird to hear it's not taking your modifications well; I've always had an easy time editing templates to my own needs. If you need any help or have any questions you can shoot me a pm. You can see mine here;
http://taitk.com/photoblog/

Thanks DM.

Thanks guys.

I'm going to move the "rate this image" into the "Show me more details" screen. And I'm going to change the result of click on the image to opening that more details screen, then put "previous, browse, next" links under the image.

After that, it's a case of continuing to populate it.

Oh, and tait, do you use the Lightroom plugin? Do you know if posting through Lightroom triggers the ping announce addon?

 

[ferrari_chris]

OK, so I gave my lens a clean (as best I could...) and took some sample pics with different ISO ratings to see which worked best.

I tried at all the available settings for the camera: auto, 80, 100, 200, 400 and 800.

Auto set the ISO at 80. I found the best ISO rating to use was 100. (See the picture below - click for full res.)

​

Here are samples from the other ISO ratings:

80:

100:

200:

400:

800:

Clearly, things get progressively worse the higher the ISO rating.

So, having figured out that ISO100 was the best for this instance, how can I decide in the future what ISO rating to use for my pictures? These images were taken at midday in full sunlight - pretty much the most light I'm ever going to get, right? So what should I do when shooting in a lower, more normal light?

...

In your menu settings is there an option for jpeg detail? if there is try to change the resolution to fine, you will fit less pictures on the card but more detail in your shots.

Was that taken with IS on or off? try both IS mode 1, mode 2, and off and see if it makes a difference.

Previously, the detail was on max., and it was for these pics too. What's IS? I didn't find any setting like that in my menu.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

OK, so I gave my lens a clean (as best I could...) and took some sample pics with different ISO ratings to see which worked best.

I tried at all the available settings for the camera: auto, 80, 100, 200, 400 and 800.

Auto set the ISO at 80. I found the best ISO rating to use was 100. (See the picture below - click for full res.)


Clearly, things get progressively worse the higher the ISO rating.

So, having figured out that ISO100 was the best for this instance, how can I decide in the future what ISO rating to use for my pictures? These images were taken at midday in full sunlight - pretty much the most light I'm ever going to get, right? So what should I do when shooting in a lower, more normal light?

Previously, the detail was on max., and it was for these pics too. What's IS? I didn't find any setting like that in my menu.

ISO affects image quality because it functions like "gain" on an amplifier. Basically, the sensor is made more sensitive by pumping more power through it, but this leads to more 'false positives' across the pixels. We see that as noise in the image.

You should, on a compact camera, leave the ISO on auto, as it usually does quite a good job of holding the ISO as low as possible to give you the best quality images. You can download Noise Ninja for a bit of Photoshop Noise Reduction goodness if you need it.

IS is Image Stabilisation (also called Optical Stabilisation by Sigma and Vibration Reduction by Nikon). Whilst it's normally very helpful, it can sometimes disrupt the image, especially if it's malfunctioning.

It does seem that this set of images are much clearer than the previous set. Are you happier with them?

 

[exigeracer]

You should, on a compact camera, leave the ISO on auto, as it usually does quite a good job of holding the ISO as low as possible to give you the best quality images.

I always found that my camera was too afraid to raise the ISO in auto mode in low-light places. It would always stick it low and just kick up shutter speed, ruining most photos. There should be an ISO "tri-pod auto" mode that keeps it as low as possible and a regular ISO auto mode that isn't as reluctant pushing up the sensitivity.

 

[35mm]

Hey, guys.

Does anyone know of a reputable online US store that will ship internationally?

I want to buy a Compact Flash card and have been looking at some online US stores and the prices are unbelievable.
Like this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820208339

I wouldn't even have to worry about customs with this kind of price. The problem is that I can't find anything with international shipping...

Any thoughts?

 

[CDailey]

Have you checked www.bhphotovideo.com ?

 

[ferrari_chris]

ISO affects image quality because it functions like "gain" on an amplifier. Basically, the sensor is made more sensitive by pumping more power through it, but this leads to more 'false positives' across the pixels. We see that as noise in the image.

You should, on a compact camera, leave the ISO on auto, as it usually does quite a good job of holding the ISO as low as possible to give you the best quality images. You can download Noise Ninja for a bit of Photoshop Noise Reduction goodness if you need it.

IS is Image Stabilisation (also called Optical Stabilisation by Sigma and Vibration Reduction by Nikon). Whilst it's normally very helpful, it can sometimes disrupt the image, especially if it's malfunctioning.

It does seem that this set of images are much clearer than the previous set. Are you happier with them?

I always found that my camera was too afraid to raise the ISO in auto mode in low-light places. It would always stick it low and just kick up shutter speed, ruining most photos. There should be an ISO "tri-pod auto" mode that keeps it as low as possible and a regular ISO auto mode that isn't as reluctant pushing up the sensitivity.

Thanks.

I was talking to a friend with a more professional camera than me, a Canon 400D, and he said he tends to keep his ISO set at 400, then move it up or down depending on light conditions. I agree with exigeracer's comments as I've found the camera is always very keen to give me a very low shutter speed, which would indicate it's not too keen on cranking up the ISO in auto mode.

Now that I know what IS is, I'll take some shots in all three settings and see what the results are. I've always had it on the most aggressive setting (2) as I might as well have Parkinson's on a bad day...

I also just bought a tripod, so now a longer exposure time shouldn't be so bad for static shots.

I am happier with these shots, yes. Although, like I stated, these were taken in what I think are 'perfect' conditions - midday, in brilliant summer sunlight. Ordinarily, I won't have this much light to play with. Should I just play around with the ISO rating to get a feel for it so I can better judge which setting to use? The worst thing is taking pictures and not knowing how crap they are (at this stage, pictures are judged on a level of crapness rather than quality) until I hook the camera up to the PC and pull them off.

My (Canon weilding) mate also told me that a larger MP image might not be as good quality, but it'll look better when resized down. I think I/we touched on this earlier and I'm not sure if he's 100% accurate here? Doesn't seem right to pay extra for a higher MP camera, just so you images can look poor in full res., but look better when resized.

 

[FWA2500]

one of my favorite photos so far:

Minolta X-700
Kodak T-Max 100 (developed by me)
f5.6
shutter 500
lens: Vivitar auto wide-angle + 2.5x tele-converter
negatives scanned with a Nikon Super Coolscan 5000ED


ISO is the film speed which refers to how quickly it responds to light. lower ISO= smaller and more light sensitive halide crystals in the film's emulsion which is why the quality of the image is better. in digital, the sensor basically imitates the way film works.

 

[tait]

Thanks.

I was talking to a friend with a more professional camera than me, a Canon 400D, and he said he tends to keep his ISO set at 400, then move it up or down depending on light conditions. I agree with exigeracer's comments as I've found the camera is always very keen to give me a very low shutter speed, which would indicate it's not too keen on cranking up the ISO in auto mode.

Now that I know what IS is, I'll take some shots in all three settings and see what the results are. I've always had it on the most aggressive setting (2) as I might as well have Parkinson's on a bad day...

I also just bought a tripod, so now a longer exposure time shouldn't be so bad for static shots.

My (Canon weilding) mate also told me that a larger MP image might not be as good quality, but it'll look better when resized down. I think I/we touched on this earlier and I'm not sure if he's 100% accurate here? Doesn't seem right to pay extra for a higher MP camera, just so you images can look poor in full res., but look better when resized.

I wouldn't go past a 400 iso unless I'm either shooting film, or shooting a picture that I don't really care about as a photograph. Also, remember that 1/30th is the absolutely slowest speed you should shoot at, and 1/50th is when you should start taking caution to being as still as possible.

An image from a larger megapixeled sensor (assuming both sensors are roughly the same physical size) will produce a better quality picture than the latter, whether it be full resolution or scaled down.

Scanned in a polaroid;

I'll post some oldies since it's been awhile that I posted anything.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

I wouldn't go past a 400 iso unless I'm either shooting film, or shooting a picture that I don't really care about as a photograph. Also, remember that 1/30th is the absolutely slowest speed you should shoot at, and 1/50th is when you should start taking caution to being as still as possible.

An image from a larger megapixeled sensor (assuming both sensors are roughly the same physical size) will produce a better quality picture than the latter, whether it be full resolution or scaled down.

Ah well, you Nikon users would say that ( ). In practice, the more you spend on your camera, the better it is at coping with sensor noise. Noise is dependent upon three factors: the size of the sensor, the size of each pixel on the sensor, and the ISO setting. Larger sensors are better, larger pixels are better, and lower ISOs are better. The ISO400 rule is a good one for compacts. Entry level SLRs can usually work with 800, and (semi-)pro SLRs can usually creep toward 1600. This image was taken on a Canon 5d at ISO 640 and had no noise reduction applied.

I use Noise Ninja as a Photoshop plugin. It works very well, but does soften the image a little, so needs some sharpening after. The thing I like about it is that you can download "templates" for cameras, and it automatically applies the correct template based on the EXIF data.

 

[CDailey]

Lmao, Giles. That picture cracks me up.

Also tait, your poop is nice. Also polaroid and old stuffs.

DM = good shots too. I especially love the shot of the stairs.

 

[tait]

Oh, and tait, do you use the Lightroom plugin? Do you know if posting through Lightroom triggers the ping announce addon?

Whoops, missed this one. Haven't say I have used the Lightroom plugin, but I would imagine it still triggers the ping announce addon.

Thanks CD. I guess my poop is kinda nice isn't it?

 

[skylineGTR_guy]

I've found that with shutter speed I can go lower than 30 without an issue, I generally go by the rule of thumb that my shutter speed should always be at or faster than whatever level I'm zoomed in at and I get pretty crisp shots. so 1/50 at 50mm 1/200 at 200mm etc.

and my 40D works pretty decent at high iso, ive used a few nikons and wasn't all too thrilled with the noise levels D300 wasn't all that great, haven't tried the D3 yet.

 

[Venari]

I love this photo...

The last GT5 n00b to ask Famine how to turn the background music off.​

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

finally got round to developing and printing pictures from knockhill a few weeks back.

 

[exigeracer]

Okay so I went in to the shop today to take a second look at the Sigma 10-20 UW I want. My last time of taking shots, I noticed (and posted) I was getting pretty soft images. I'm a good 10,000 frames into my body, so I didn't want to be dropping 550$ on a new lens if the body is going kaput anyways.

I have no idea why I didn't think of taking back-to-back shots with my stock lens (Tamron 18-70) and the Sigma to compare when I got home, but here are the photos.

Sigma ultrawide:

100%:

Stocker:

100%:

I've got an onboard sharpness adjustment, which was at 0 for both of the above. The stock lens doesn't seen that bad in this selection, so maybe the shots that were soft weren't focused properly? Maybe I'm not watching how low shutter speed is going?

Any general commentary on the above? Charles, I remember you saying that the shots looked soft.

 

[Bram Turismo]

Been a long time since I've shot something, got around to pick out my favourits from my trip to Belgium though 👍

​

Anyone up for a wide-angle cappucino?

​

 

[SaNTi iTNaS]

Just saw this thread today... Heres some of my Photography. comments and critiques always welcome.

Check out my Flickr account to see the rest if you want.