Support NeoGAF

[PantherLotus]

Jesus man. The subject is a gut-punch, but that is fantastic. And leave the strings, they symbolize the connection to the home and life (in the b/g) that she will leave behind when the photos (her life) age and whither away.

 

[BronzeWolf]

pantherlotus

Hey! Good Job!

You have a cool pix. Those don't shoot raw, so don't worry about it for a moment.

Let me inject a cool, cheap and very awesome camera as a suggestion for a step up:

$650 and it has the following stuff:
-CMOS 12 MP with dust removal
- 720p 30 fps video capture
-Sleek Design
-11 point auto focus
-A good LCD
-HDMI out
-4 stops Shake reduction on camera
-ISO from 100 to 12800. Usable up to 3200, 1600 for cropping
-1/6000 max shutter speed
-96% viewfinder
-Catch-in focus
-GREAT White balance options
-GREAT Preset modes
-Continuos shooting 4.4 fps
-Digital filters: IN camera HDR, high contrast, toy camera, etc.
- 18-55 3.5-5.9 kit lens autofocus autoaperture lens. Nothing to write home about

There is a $750 package that throws in a 55-300 telephoto lens that is quite useful.
Lenses are cheaper too. A 50mm 1.4 is about $250

 

[PantherLotus]

I have to admit I love the crowd in here. Nice little subforum.

Hectorse: let me see if I can work on framing, perspective, lighting, and post production before I go that route. I want to prove I can before investing that much.

b.e.r.g.: I'm not sure if I'm trying to learn about photography or not, I think I'm just trying to be a better photographer--but I certainly understand the need for a better camera to do both.

mrkgoo: Thanks for the tip. I do have some photoshop chops (I think) and lean towards the artistic look of photographs (rather than calendar-style scenery). I'll probably screw around with this coolpix for a while (see above) before moving forward.


Any ideas for my next subject? One of my favorites from this thread is the beautiful orange apple. Wow. The cute eskimo chick in the 70s-style aged photographs (no contrast with a +blue and +red curve adjust) is also really cool.

I'd actually like to combine this with some typography to see if I can produce some magazine-style adverts. Zhenming's car photo is BAD ASS. I want to do that.

 

[mrkgoo]

I have to admit I love the crowd in here. Nice little subforum.

Hectorse: let me see if I can work on framing, perspective, lighting, and post production before I go that route. I want to prove I can before investing that much.

b.e.r.g.: I'm not sure if I'm trying to learn about photography or not, I think I'm just trying to be a better photographer--but I certainly understand the need for a better camera to do both.

mrkgoo: Thanks for the tip. I do have some photoshop chops (I think) and lean towards the artistic look of photographs (rather than calendar-style scenery). I'll probably screw around with this coolpix for a while (see above) before moving forward.


Any ideas for my next subject? One of my favorites from this thread is the beautiful orange apple. Wow. The cute eskimo chick in the 70s-style aged photographs (no contrast with a +blue and +red curve adjust) is also really cool.

I'd actually like to combine this with some typography to see if I can produce some magazine-style adverts. Zhenming's car photo is BAD ASS. I want to do that.

Looking for a subject?

NeoGad Photography Assignment:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=384303

 

[Dizzan]

My mom is very near the end after fighting cancer for 4 years now. I'm going through old photos and making some stuff for the viewing/funeral. Here's my first one:

I'm probably going to do some where I remove the strings so it looks like the photos are floating, but I liked them in this one so I left them in.

Sorry to hear mate. Post a few more if you can. That one is awesome and I like the strings too.

 

[BlueTsunami]

My mom is very near the end after fighting cancer for 4 years now. I'm going through old photos and making some stuff for the viewing/funeral. Here's my first one:

http://www.4thtimearound.com/photos/mama.jpg

I'm probably going to do some where I remove the strings so it looks like the photos are floating, but I liked them in this one so I left them in.

Lovely and heartfelt, Futureman. And I also like the strings being shown.

 

[PantherLotus]

Can anybody explain (in non LMGTFY terms) what HDR is?

 

[Milk Lizard]

Not really a big photo geek (just got a shitty sony camera), but felt like sharing anyway.

So fucking cold outside.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Can anybody explain (in non LMGTFY terms) what HDR is?

HDR = High Dynamic Range

Its taking a bunch of images at different exposures and blending the single scene together. The reason for using this technique is due to a high Dynamic Range (or light range) in a scene that the cameras sensor is incapable of capturing.

So, if you're trying to take a photograph of a sunset and exposing for the sky, the ground elements will most likely be underexposed. If you exposed for the ground, the sky will be overexposed. By shooting a bunch of images at different exposures (also called bracketing), and blending them in post, you'll create an image where everything is exposed properly.

 

[mrkgoo]

Can anybody explain (in non LMGTFY terms) what HDR is?

A typical camera can only see a certain range of brightness in any one shot. It's much much less than your eye. For example, you're probably familiar with photos where the sun/sky in the background is pure white (overblown) just to keep what's in the foreground exposed, or the opposite where the subject is in complete darkness, just to keep the sky blue. There's no way the sensor can capture both details.

HDR (high dynamic range) refers to extending this range. Typically, people use it in reference to a technique where you take a series of exposures such that the details in the bright and dark areas are captured correctly in at least one of the exposures. Using a computer, the images are combined in a single "HDR" image where the tonal range of each pixel has an extended value. No monitor can display this superhigh range, so a technique called 'tonal mapping', goes through and brings them to a range that is displayable. FOr example, take the darker vales for the sky pixels, and the brighter values for the subject pixels, and create an image that is evenly exposed for all areas (a lot of people call this the "HDR" image, but technically, that's incorrect).

 

[captive]

My mom is very near the end after fighting cancer for 4 years now. I'm going through old photos and making some stuff for the viewing/funeral. Here's my first one:

http://www.4thtimearound.com/photos/mama.jpg[img]

I'm probably going to do some where I remove the strings so it looks like the photos are floating, but I liked them in this one so I left them in.[/QUOTE]
I'm very sorry to hear that. Very nice work.

 

[PantherLotus]

Does the camera in question take each differently-exposed shot simultaneously? That's pretty damn cool. Can one attempt a static scenery shot (i'm assuming moving clouds would be an issue) doing this manually?

 

[BlueTsunami]

Does the camera in question take each differently-exposed shot simultaneously? That's pretty damn cool. Can one attempt a static scenery shot (i'm assuming moving clouds would be an issue) doing this manually?

If the camera has the ability to bracket (and most modern ones do) the speed at which each exposure is taken is dependent on its framerate (I believe). So its not exactly simultaneous but very fast. You may run into issues trying to take an HDR image of say, waves or other fast and constantly moving subjects.

There's also other ways to control the dynamic range of a scene btw. There's Gradient Filters (that darken a portion of the lens and falls off), this is great for sunsets. There's also just taking two different exposures for a scene (one exposing for the sky and one for the ground) and painting in the exposure in Post processing (like Photoshop).

I personally find HDR to be a little over the top in regards to trying to get everything perfectly exposed. That variance in light, the areas that are darkened or are bright usually adds a certain drama to the scene, something HDR can rob (but in place adds its own drama, as far as explosions of color).

 

[mrkgoo]

Does the camera in question take each differently-exposed shot simultaneously? That's pretty damn cool. Can one attempt a static scenery shot (i'm assuming moving clouds would be an issue) doing this manually?

CameraS don't do hdr, although you can set them to take multiple exposures. They won't be simultaneous, but sequential, so yes, rapidly moviNg clouds can be an issue. Make sure you have high shutter speeds.

Another way to extend your dynamic range is to simply shoot in raw. Raw contains a lot more data (provide you haven't blown to white) and with good processing you can tease the most out the range you did capture.

Some people even process multiple jpgs from a raw simulating multiple exposures an then blending them. Conceptually, however, you can't make data, and that data was all originally in the raw, so I think with good raw technique you could get a similar effect.

Edit: beaten by blue tsunami again.

 

[captive]

I personally find HDR to be a little over the top in regards to trying to get everything perfectly exposed. That variance in light, the areas that are darkened or are bright usually adds a certain drama to the scene, something HDR can rob (but in place adds its own drama, as far as explosions of color).

I dont know all the terminology and that stuff so anyone feel free to correct. It seems like there is two types of HDR(maybe more?)
The first type which I dont like.
Some people take say 5 exposures and then blend them and it looks completely unnatural and tone mapped? and look like this

Which no offense to anyone that does HDR, just looks hideous to me.

But you can still do HDR and still get a completely natural look. like the final results from this tutorial
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/high-dynamic-range.htm

btw just bookmark
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm
Awesome tutorials.

 

[mrkgoo]

I dont know all the terminology and that stuff so anyone feel free to correct. It seems like there is two types of HDR(maybe more?)
The first type which I dont like.
Some people take say 5 exposures and then blend them and it looks completely unnatural and tone mapped? and look like this

Which no offense to anyone that does HDR, just looks hideous to me.

But you can still do HDR and still get a completely natural look. like the final results from this tutorial
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/high-dynamic-range.htm

btw just bookmark
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm
Awesome tutorials.

That image is overdone. Most don't aim for that. Some like it like that.

I'm generally not one who likes it.

 

[BronzeWolf]

HDR Strong

 

[Spayro]

My mom is very near the end after fighting cancer for 4 years now. I'm going through old photos and making some stuff for the viewing/funeral. Here's my first one:

I'm probably going to do some where I remove the strings so it looks like the photos are floating, but I liked them in this one so I left them in.

Being in the same position as you, this was a real punch to the gut.
Amazing.

 

[BlueTsunami]

I dont know all the terminology and that stuff so anyone feel free to correct. It seems like there is two types of HDR(maybe more?)
The first type which I dont like.
Some people take say 5 exposures and then blend them and it looks completely unnatural and tone mapped? and look like this

Which no offense to anyone that does HDR, just looks hideous to me.

But you can still do HDR and still get a completely natural look. like the final results from this tutorial
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/high-dynamic-range.htm

btw just bookmark
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm
Awesome tutorials.

That type of image is a result of bad tone mapping (which is the process of translating an HDR image to a medium incapable of showing true HDR). If we think of a slider and label it "Luminence" then the person who created that image turned it all the way down to zero. The edges are not defined and creates this ugly halo effect (as exhibited).

I personally love HDR that retains that almost regular dynamic range look but nudging objects that are completely black out of being completely under exposed. Though, this depends on the photographer and their ability to appreciate the subtle use of techniques :lol

 

[captive]

HDR Strong

See nothing about this screams "pushed" or "overdone" to me. I like it.

That image is overdone. Most don't aim for that. Some like it like that.

I'm generally not one who likes it.

Are you sure? :lol i typed in HDR to find an example and the majority are over done like that. http://images.google.com/images?hl=...&hs=paU&q=hdr image&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

I personally loved HDR that retains that almost regular dynamic range look but nudging objects that are completely black out of being completely under exposed. Though, this depends on the photographer and their ability to appreciate the subtle use of techniques

I agree I like it when its not pushed too far.

I guess that goes to Ken Rockwell's latest blog about people that use these techniques vs people who know how to use these techniques while still producing a quality photo.

 

[PantherLotus]

See nothing about this screams "pushed" or "overdone" to me. I like it.

Are you sure? :lol i typed in HDR to find an example and the majority are over done like that. http://images.google.com/images?hl=...&hs=paU&q=hdr image&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

I agree I like it when its not pushed too far.

I guess that goes to Ken Rockwell's latest blog about people that use these techniques vs people who know how to use these techniques while still producing a quality photo.

Oh wow. I had no idea how many of my current scenery desktops I never use (because of the offensive glare and color saturation) are a result of HDR styling. Cool to know, but I still think this is a bad ass look.

 

[mrkgoo]

Hectorse: Was HDR+tone mapping necessary for that image, though? Below is a shot I took as JPEG, so while it's not quite 'there' as yours is, I would think a single RAW, exposed well, could retain enough latitude to get a similar look:

I haven't dabbled in HDR myself much, but when I have it was to try and pull outside lighting in indoor shots, such as windows on an interior shot (3 exposures):

For reference, here's one of the exposures used, and perhaps the shot I would have otherwise taken if I didn't have HDR in mind. It's pretty subtle, so it's also possible that a single RAW may have had enough data as well.

 

[BronzeWolf]

I did take plenty of shots of that composition. Fiddled around with it and took the best one. It does make a difference though and the in camera HDR is pretty good.

It definitively depends on the composition

 

[mrkgoo]

I did take plenty of shots of that composition. Fiddled around with it and took the best one. It does make a difference though and the in camera HDR is pretty good.

It definitively depends on the composition

Yeah, it definitely requires some work and know how (Of which I lack :/)

 

[Max@GC]

My mom is very near the end after fighting cancer for 4 years now. I'm going through old photos and making some stuff for the viewing/funeral. Here's my first one:

I'm probably going to do some where I remove the strings so it looks like the photos are floating, but I liked them in this one so I left them in.

That´s fucking sad man...my grandma and aunt died of cancer :/. But it´s cool to see you being strong and putting such a nice project together.

Some pics I took today...wandering around in the winter sun after heavy snowfalls.

 

[PantherLotus]

All three are good, but I especially like the last one in blue.

 

[movie_club]

Well i still feel like i have no idea what i am doing, and these pictures to me do not look "nice"- but i am not sure what i need to fix. These were taken with ISO 400- hectorse ISO at 100 had them coming out way to dark- and with F number 4.5 and exposure time 1/30

Also hectorse why do i want to turn off digital zoom? I did btw

 

[mrkgoo]

Well i still feel like i have no idea what i am doing, and these pictures to me do not look "nice"- but i am not sure what i need to fix. These were taken with ISO 400- hectorse ISO at 100 had them coming out way to dark- and with F number 4.5 and exposure time 1/30



Also hectorse why do i want to turn off digital zoom? I did btw

There are no 'rules' to setting the exposure. Exposure is a balance of the three settings, and you have to understand each to know what you want to achieve. And it's not really all that hard.

Digital zoom is the equivalent of enlarging an image with photo shop. You can't 'create' information so you're not really gaining anything. Like taking a 40x60 avatar and enlarging it to the size of your browser - result = pixellation. Basically, digital zoom is cropping the centre of the image and enlarging it. YOu may as well do it after the fact, because at least you control the process instead of the its bitty camera processor doing it.

 

[PantherLotus]

Well i still feel like i have no idea what i am doing, and these pictures to me do not look "nice"- but i am not sure what i need to fix. These were taken with ISO 400- hectorse ISO at 100 had them coming out way to dark- and with F number 4.5 and exposure time 1/30

Also hectorse why do i want to turn off digital zoom? I did btw

While I am admittedly quite the novice at photography, I think the first issue you need to deal with is learning how to frame a shot. The spotlight pointing at us in the pterodactyl is unfortunate, but we couldn't see the back half of it either way. The impressive stature of the T Rex is lost on the viewer by cutting off his feet. Not even sure what's going on with the whale/squid thing. Just something to think about while everybody else assists with your camera settings.

 

[sarcastor]

this is actually the composite of two images, one of the wall and the two beachstanders and the other one is of the beach and sunset.

 

[tiong_fi]

Finnish winter at its finest. HDR pics shot at Puijo Hill, Kuopio, Finland

(that last one is actually not an HDR photo)

More pics here

Equipment used: Canon EOS 400D with kit lens and EF 50mm f/1.8 II with gradient filter.

 

[PantherLotus]

I didn't really know what to do with this.

That's a bat signed by George Brett.

 

[Rentahamster]

My mom is very near the end after fighting cancer for 4 years now. I'm going through old photos and making some stuff for the viewing/funeral. Here's my first one:

I'm probably going to do some where I remove the strings so it looks like the photos are floating, but I liked them in this one so I left them in.

Beautiful.

My condolences for the situation you and your family is in. They're fortunate to have someone like you to document family members while they are still around.

 

[Bernbaum]

Finnish winter at its finest. HDR pics shot at Puijo Hill, Kuopio, Finland

http://tiong.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Talvinen+Puijo/HDR_IMG_0220.jpg/_small.jpg[img]

[IMG]http://tiong.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Talvinen+Puijo/HDR_IMG_0303.jpg/_small.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://tiong.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Talvinen+Puijo/HDR_IMG_0206.jpg/_small.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://tiong.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Talvinen%20Puijo/HDR_IMG_0296.jpg/_small.jpg[IMG]

[img]http://tiong.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Talvinen%20Puijo/IMG_0329.JPG/_small.jpg[img]
(that last one is actually not an HDR photo)

[url=http://tiong.kuvat.fi/kuvat/Talvinen+Puijo/]More pics here[/url]

Equipment used: Canon EOS 400D with kit lens and EF 50mm f/1.8 II with gradient filter.[/QUOTE]
Glorious.

 

[olbareun]

playing around with danboards for assignment. Oh man looking at other pictures in the thread I really need to learn how to do HDR. I hate it when it is overdone though.

 

[KennyLinder]

Do you use crazy Aperture settings to get the background out of focus? Looks great.

 

[captive]

Do you use crazy Aperture settings to get the background out of focus? Looks great.

to separate the background from a subject you want to use a smaller aperture number(wider). However from that distance of the background from the subject you could probably still get blurred background at f8. Not that you need f8 to get the entire subject in focus in this particular picture.

 

[Max@GC]

I didn't really know what to do with this.

That's a bat signed by George Brett.

Maybe something like this

 

[PantherLotus]

Hey that's cool as hell.

 

[movie_club]

While I am admittedly quite the novice at photography, I think the first issue you need to deal with is learning how to frame a shot. The spotlight pointing at us in the pterodactyl is unfortunate, but we couldn't see the back half of it either way. The impressive stature of the T Rex is lost on the viewer by cutting off his feet. Not even sure what's going on with the whale/squid thing. Just something to think about while everybody else assists with your camera settings.

yeah i know what you mean. This is a combination between me sucking and being at the museum with others so i did not have time to properly frame.

If others do not mind i think i may take some pictures of my desk like PantherLotus, and maybe someone can tell me what to improve?

 

[Always-honest]

My mom is very near the end after fighting cancer for 4 years now. I'm going through old photos and making some stuff for the viewing/funeral. Here's my first one:

I'm probably going to do some where I remove the strings so it looks like the photos are floating, but I liked them in this one so I left them in.

fucking cancer...

picture is beautifull. well done.

 

[Fireye]

Just got my first DSLR (Digital Rebel XS) yesterday, still getting used to it. I just tweaked the white balance to be a little bit cooler in Lightroom before uploading. I have a long ways to go, but figured dinner is always a good place to start

 

[BronzeWolf]

I tried the overexposing thingie and holy shit it works.

It might vary on your camera, some cameras have better dynamic range that others:

RAW:



Postproc:


You can see the detail brought up by the post proc exposure settings in the logs and blocks

 

[callous]

 

[mrkapawutzis]

I recently got an s90 and have been taking some pics. Any constructive criticism to help me take better photos, particularly post processing stuff. I have pixelmator but I don't know the first thing about the program so it's kind of intimidating just jumping in and messing around with it.

 

[RefigeKru]

What you made is really wonderful Futureman, I'm really sorry to hear about your mother though. It'll be a nice celebration of her life.

I've got some random shots here, I took them ages ago so once again I'm a lot better now.

Spoiler

Can't remember if I've posted any of these before :x

Random pictures..

Sorry for posting so much, I just find bulks of forgotten photos under my bed.

 

[elitehebrew]

I just wanted to drop in and say you guys are awesome at photography. I have always wanted to dabble and make it a hobby of mine, but if some of you have the time i'd like a recommendation on a more beginner camera. I have money but i don't want to go all out too soon.

 

[samusx]

These shots were all taken with my new Lumix TZ-7. Its a great little pocket camera. I have fallen in love with its small convenient size and super versatile 25-300mm zoom lens.

HDR shot

HDR shot

 

[KennyLinder]

I got myself a Canon EOS 500D today so will be joining in on the photo fun (if I can take anything worthwhile with it!).

 

[Max@GC]

Random pictures..

No idea why but this one is my fav out of your bunch.