Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 169

Thread: Photo Assignment: Weekend 01/05/08

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    SNC1923
    Guest

    Photo Assignment: Weekend 01/05/08

    It's a new year and interest in our photo assignments shows no sign of abating; however, knowing the road to hell is paved with good intentions, let's bear in mind these simple rules:

    • Photos must be shot this weekend: Fri, Sat, or Sun.
    • You must provide the EXIF information if asked. If you need help, we can show you how to find it or even link it to your photo.
    • No photoshop alteration (we're looking to improve your skills with your camera, not software).
    • Your photograph must adhere to the theme, which will be described below.
    • Post only one photo per post, so that commentary can be easily provided for that photo. You may post more than one photo, but try to keep it to a handful.
    • Title your photo so it can be referred to later.
    • Post your photos in this thread only. Do not start a thread in reply to this assignment. Please post your photos no later than next Wednesday.
    • And, the most important rule: have fun! We're looking to spread the joy that many of us derive from taking pictures, particularly ones that tell a story of some kind.


    This week's theme: "Close Up"

    In keeping with requests for learning techniques, this week, please take a photo utilizing a close focusing distance, sometimes referred to as "macro." Most P&S cameras have a built-in macro setting, often the minimum focusing distance with the lens at wide-angle. DSLR cameras with zoom lenses often have this same arrangement. For DSLR cameras, you can buy close-up filters fairly inexpensively. Some of us even have macro lenses capable of focusing closely enough to reproduce a subject at life-size.

    Very simply put, just focus as closely, or nearly as closely, as you can--no purchase necessary.

    There are several factors you should bear in mind:

    1. In many circumstances you will need plenty of light. Shoot outdoors or use a supplementary light source or reflector, white cardboard, for example. If you use a desk lamp, don't forget to switch your white balance to that light source.
    2. Depth-of-field will be a factor, so shoot at a smaller aperture if you are able.
    3. A smaller aperture will result in a slower shutter speed, so. . . .
    4. you may need to use some form of support, i.e. your braced arms or a tripod. A small bean bag or similar item makes an excellent support.


    By no means is it necessary that your photo be microscopic. Just get in close and shoot a detail of something. Bonus points for anything motorcycle related or any subject that is not immediately identifiable.

    Now get out there and get close.

  2. #2
    R12ST bricciphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Littlestown, Penna.
    Posts
    277
    Tom--great instructions on shooting up close. Don't forget DSLR users might want to experiment with extension tubes if they have them. I'll also add that exposure issues related to small apertures can be offset somewhat by trying to keep the subject parallel to the film/sensor plane, i.e. any tilt of the lens (or camera) relative to the subject is going to minimize DoF at most aperture settings. Keep your lens parallel and you might be able to pick up a stop or two--a spirit level in the hot shoe will help keep things in sharp focus (if desired).

    If you're shooting outdoors, up close wind (any wind) will be a factor!

    Happy shooting all!
    Ben Ricci

    Rides & Drives: '07 BMW F800ST Low, '07 Porsche Cayman, '06 VW Jetta TDI & '05 BMW R1200ST

  3. #3
    *censored*
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Sonoma, CA
    Posts
    398
    I've got a bit of spare time today, so I've already jumped in with both feet.

    Pics uploading now.

  4. #4
    *censored*
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Sonoma, CA
    Posts
    398
    Rivets:



    Exif:
    Make Canon
    Model Canon PowerShot A710 IS
    Aperture Value f/2.8
    Color Space sRGB
    Exposure Bias Value 0 EV
    Flash No Flash
    Focal Length 5.8 mm
    ISO Unknown
    Metering Mode Center Weighted Average
    Shutter Speed Value 1/30 sec
    Date/Time Fri 04 Jan 2008 10:19:41 AM EST

  5. #5
    *censored*
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Sonoma, CA
    Posts
    398
    H1



    (underexposed)

    Make Canon
    Model Canon PowerShot A710 IS
    Aperture Value f/2.8
    Color Space sRGB
    Exposure Bias Value 0 EV
    Flash No Flash
    Focal Length 5.8 mm
    ISO Unknown
    Metering Mode Center Weighted Average
    Shutter Speed Value 1/200 sec
    Date/Time Fri 04 Jan 2008 10:22:40 AM EST

  6. #6
    *censored*
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Sonoma, CA
    Posts
    398
    Swingline



    Exif:
    Make Canon
    Model Canon PowerShot A710 IS
    Aperture Value f/2.8
    Color Space sRGB
    Exposure Bias Value 0 EV
    Flash No Flash
    Focal Length 5.8 mm
    ISO Unknown
    Metering Mode Center Weighted Average
    Shutter Speed Value 1/100 sec
    Date/Time Fri 04 Jan 2008 10:30:22 AM EST



    By far the best image I took today. You can find the rest, if you're interested, here.

  7. #7
    rocketman
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by BONEY View Post
    H1



    (underexposed)
    you should have just pluged it in, no problem with under exposure then!

    I like the stapler, in the next one, very stark and it imediately grabs your attention! No question what the subject is there! good DoF for most of it as well.

    Nice!

    RM

  8. #8
    rocketman
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by bricciphoto View Post
    Tom--great instructions on shooting up close. Don't forget DSLR users might want to experiment with extension tubes if they have them. I'll also add that exposure issues related to small apertures can be offset somewhat by trying to keep the subject parallel to the film/sensor plane, i.e. any tilt of the lens (or camera) relative to the subject is going to minimize DoF at most aperture settings. Keep your lens parallel and you might be able to pick up a stop or two--a spirit level in the hot shoe will help keep things in sharp focus (if desired).

    If you're shooting outdoors, up close wind (any wind) will be a factor!

    Happy shooting all!
    Hmmm, I understand what you are saying here but I think that saying it will "minimize" the DoF might be confusing to some, the fact that the subject is angled, in and of itself can’t effect the actual DOF, (as that is a function of the camera lens, aperture and light) rather it would probably make more sense to say that any tilt will make the shallowness more apparent as it will make it harder to get the entire subject in focus when working the shallow depth of field of close up photography. By having it parallel as much as possible you can get a greater amount of the subject within the field of focus and therefore have a overall sharper image. Or as we learned from an earlier challenge, you can use the shallowness to your advantage by having only that which you want the viewer to focus on, in focus (sorry for the pun ) while taking that which you don’t want to be part of the main subject matter out of focus, though often with close up photography that effect is harder to achieve without it appearing that you simply miss-focused. there would need to be a very strong element that was the main subject, such as perhaps the eye of a bug, while the head and body was softened so that the viewer was drawn immediately to the main focal point of the image.

    RM

  9. #9
    R12ST bricciphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Littlestown, Penna.
    Posts
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by rocketman View Post
    Hmmm, I understand what you are saying here but I think that saying it will "minimize" the DoF might be confusing to some, the fact that the subject is angled, in and of itself can’t effect the actual DOF, (as that is a function of the camera lens, aperture and light) rather it would probably make more sense to say that any tilt will make the shallowness more apparent as it will make it harder to get the entire subject in focus when working the shallow depth of field of close up photography. By having it parallel as much as possible you can get a greater amount of the subject within the field of focus and therefore have a overall sharper image. Or as we learned from an earlier challenge, you can use the shallowness to your advantage by having only that which you want the viewer to focus on, in focus (sorry for the pun ) while taking that which you don’t want to be part of the main subject matter out of focus, though often with close up photography that effect is harder to achieve without it appearing that you simply miss-focused. there would need to be a very strong element that was the main subject, such as perhaps the eye of a bug, while the head and body was softened so that the viewer was drawn immediately to the main focal point of the image.

    RM
    I think I understand what you're saying.

    Actually, all I am implying is there is a common belief that at small apertures (f/22, f/16, etc.--that Tom referenced) maximum focus will be acheived. This is true when the subject and sensor/film plane are parallel. It is not true if there is a shift in the two planes, particularly if the subject is curved, rounded, staggered, etc. So one could shoot an object at f/16 and depending on the angle of the lens/camera it could appear as though it was shot at f/5.6* or lower. Shooting close-ups with blur is a no brainer, just about any camera or person will do this with ease. Shooting close up with sharp focus and maximum depth of field is a lot harder to acheive without a bellows or a tilting lens, when the sensor/film plane is not parallel to the subject.

    *In this example the photographer "wasted" several stops by shooting at f/16, which almost by definition will require a lower shuttle speed to acheive the same exposure at a given ISO. This would introduce the potential for motion blur, etc.

    And thinking about this for a nanosecond longer, the converse of what I said is also true: if the sensor/film plane and subject are parallel, why shoot at f/16 when the same focus could be achieved at f/4 thereby providing a lot more latitude in exposure?
    Ben Ricci

    Rides & Drives: '07 BMW F800ST Low, '07 Porsche Cayman, '06 VW Jetta TDI & '05 BMW R1200ST

  10. #10
    rocketman
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by bricciphoto View Post
    I think I understand what you're saying.

    Actually, all I am implying is there is a common belief that at small apertures (f/22, f/16, etc.--that Tom referenced) maximum focus will be acheived. This is true when the subject and sensor/film plane are parallel. It is not true if there is a shift in the two planes, particularly if the subject is curved, rounded, staggered, etc. So one could shoot an object at f/16 and depending on the angle of the lens/camera it could appear as though it was shot at f/5.6* or lower. Shooting close-ups with blur is a no brainer, just about any camera or person will do this with ease. Shooting close up with sharp focus and maximum depth of field is a lot harder to acheive without a bellows or a tilting lens, when the sensor/film plane is not parallel to the subject.

    *In this example the photographer "wasted" several stops by shooting at f/16, which almost by definition will require a lower shuttle speed to acheive the same exposure at a given ISO. This would introduce the potential for motion blur, etc.

    And thinking about this for a nanosecond longer, the converse of what I said is also true: if the sensor/film plane and subject are parallel, why shoot at f/16 when the same focus could be achieved at f/4 thereby providing a lot more latitude in exposure?
    Ah, Ok I see what you're saying I guess I may have read it differently, and that said hopefully it may help clarify it for others (or maybe I'm the only one? )

    thanks

    RM

  11. #11
    Still Wondering mika's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Fly Over Land
    Posts
    10,554
    Pass the mustard and UP THE REVOLUTION!

    St. Paul Pioneer Press , Minneapolis Star Tribune

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Livonia, MI
    Posts
    30

    Nice shot!

    That is some good pic's how about this IMG_0103

  13. #13
    SNC1923
    Guest
    John--thank you so much for putting together that index. That's really great, man.

    Twintoaster, let's see that shot again. If you need any assistance in linking a photo, search for a thread on how to do that or PM me; I'd be happy to help.

    Nice photos everyone.

    Franze, you got some 'splainin' to do.

  14. #14
    franze
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by SNC1923 View Post
    John--thank you so much for putting together that index. That's really great, man.

    Twintoaster, let's see that shot again. If you need any assistance in linking a photo, search for a thread on how to do that or PM me; I'd be happy to help.

    Nice photos everyone.

    Franze, you got some 'splainin' to do.

    The more I looked at the Van Halen shot, the more it looks like it's been messed with. Kinda looks like one of those half-tone postives I made on Litho film back in the days of yore when I took a photo manipulation class at SJSU , but, it isn't. It hasn't been altered, shopped, processed, filtered, or had any freshness additives, preservatives, artificial colors or crunch enhancers. That's a hand held shot with a point and shoot 200$ camera. I'll let you stew on that. Same with the ode to Lamble shots.

  15. #15
    Living in exile Threeteas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    2,859
    Quote Originally Posted by franze View Post
    The more I looked at the Van Halen shot, the more it looks like it's been messed with. Kinda looks like one of those half-tone postives I made on Litho film back in the days of yore when I took a photo manipulation class at SJSU , but, it isn't. It hasn't been altered, shopped, processed, filtered, or had any freshness additives, preservatives, artificial colors or crunch enhancers. That's a hand held shot with a point and shoot 200$ camera. I'll let you stew on that. Same with the ode to Lamble shots.

    Franze, Please sir, please Sir, me Sir, me Sir , I know, I know, me, me, me, me, I know, please Sir, sir, sir , sir , me, me, me!!!!!

    I won't tell!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •