Any photographers in here?

Awesome. Wish digital cameras were around when I lived in the mountains. My first digi was a Kodak DC 215 1.0 Megapixel. WOW!

000920-1812-04.jpg
 
Last edited:
altspace said:
Awesome. Wish digital cameras were around when I lived in the mountains. My first digi was a Kodak DC 215 1.0 Megapixel. WOW!
my first digital!

Sony DSC-F1 ... badass little camera (for the time). considered "small and compact" back in the day... got it in 1997.

Sony%20DSC-F1%20front.jpg
Sony%20DSC-F1%20in%20hand.jpg


640x480 resolution, 4mb internal memory, rear LCD, swivel head, good low light, can take about 100 shots before battery dies. PIMP huh? lol
 
Yea, it used the PMP format. Amazing that you can get a cell phone camera with 5x the quality now. What's next in 5 years?
 
altspace said:
Yea, it used the PMP format. Amazing that you can get a cell phone camera with 5x the quality now. What's next in 5 years?

I think the trend of higher MP for point and shoots is probably almost finished, I think things like shutter speed and image stabilation will start to improve in MP's place.
 
Hey guys, I need help!

How do you figure out how to size a picture for printing? If I have a picture that I want printed in say 8" x 10", but the crop isn't in that aspect ratio...is there anyway to fill the sheet w/out loosing info?

Also, here is some screwing around in PS.

leaves%20and%20log.jpg
 
BradC said:
Hey guys, I need help!

How do you figure out how to size a picture for printing? If I have a picture that I want printed in say 8" x 10", but the crop isn't in that aspect ratio...is there anyway to fill the sheet w/out loosing info?

Also, here is some screwing around in PS.

leaves%20and%20log.jpg

Brad, you are going to have to make two adjustments to your image in order to get good printing results. First, is to make your image the correct aspect ratio. As you have already determined, this process will result in some cropping of the image. That's just the way it is and it will never change; crop to 8x10 and be happy.

The other adjustment you need to make is to set the resolution of your image at the same resolution as the printer. For instance, if you are printing at 300dpi (dots-per-inch) you will need to make your picture 2400x3000 pixels in order to print 8x10. Now, your printer at home can automatically resize on the fly, but you are best served by doing it yourself ahead of time in PhotoShop.

As a bonus, if you are going to print at a Costco, or other quality printer, you probably can find a printer profile at www.drycreekphoto.com. This will allow you to preview the picture using a printer profile that is loaded into PhotoShop. You then can make adjustments to compensate for the brightness and reflectivity of the paper that they printer uses.

Good luck!
 
NVP5White said:
Brad, you are going to have to make two adjustments to your image in order to get good printing results. First, is to make your image the correct aspect ratio. As you have already determined, this process will result in some cropping of the image. That's just the way it is and it will never change; crop to 8x10 and be happy.

The other adjustment you need to make is to set the resolution of your image at the same resolution as the printer. For instance, if you are printing at 300dpi (dots-per-inch) you will need to make your picture 2400x3000 pixels in order to print 8x10. Now, your printer at home can automatically resize on the fly, but you are best served by doing it yourself ahead of time in PhotoShop.

As a bonus, if you are going to print at a Costco, or other quality printer, you probably can find a printer profile at www.drycreekphoto.com. This will allow you to preview the picture using a printer profile that is loaded into PhotoShop. You then can make adjustments to compensate for the brightness and reflectivity of the paper that they printer uses.

Good luck!
Ok, seems simple enough. 300dpi is a good quality, no? So if I want say x*y @ 300dpi, make the pixels (x*300) x (y*300)?

Thanks for your help. There is sooo much to learn it makes my head spin. I am definately learning though.

Thanks again.
 
BradC said:
Ok, seems simple enough. 300dpi is a good quality, no? So if I want say x*y @ 300dpi, make the pixels (x*300) x (y*300)?

Thanks for your help. There is sooo much to learn it makes my head spin. I am definately learning though.

Thanks again.

Your understanding of print resolution calculations is correct.

300dpi produces excellent results on a good printer. The Noritsu laser printer that my local Cosco uses is widely regarded as the best (or one of two best) laser printers of its type. They use Fuji Crystal Archive paper which is the best high-volume paper you can use; much better then Kodak paper.

Keep asking good questions!

BTW: Lurking on photo forums such as www.fredmiranda.com & www.dpreview.com will allow you to learn a lot about the complex subject of photography. All important topics are covered often; search is your friend, but I think you have to register (free) to use it.

Good luck
 
If you didn't use photoshop for this, that is quite amazing. What was your shutter speed?
 
cool light painting... have you tried using different coloured lights (or coloured filters)?
 
L8R said:
If you didn't use photoshop for this, that is quite amazing. What was your shutter speed?

Light painting involves long exposure with a small light source one uses as a brush to paint the subject with light. I used a 2 D-cell Mag Light as my light source and a 20 second exposure. I stopped-down to get a -0.3EV exposure at 20 seconds to keep detail and color in the sky. Since the sun was setting and the light constantly changing I kept adjusting the aperture to maintain [reletively] even exposure. Auto WB setting was used, but that was tweaked during RAW conversion.

Both of the pictures above are composites of three images taken back to back. Generally, I painted the body in one exposure, the wheels in the second, and either the front of the car or the streak of light above in the third.

This was the first time using this technique and on something as complex as a car there was a steep learning curve. I tried to keep the flash light from reflecting directly at the camera from the car. I also tried to keep the light even in these exposures. I did try to outline the body of the car in other pcitures but the results looked sloppy.

The final composite is really just the three elements brought together using layers and layer masks. I used the Healing tool to get rid of some lens flare on the second image. I removed the crane in the first image because from that angle it was destracting, but you can still see it in the second pic.
 
ChopstickHero said:
cool light painting... have you tried using different coloured lights (or coloured filters)?

No, this was my first attempt so I haven't had a chance to give color a try. I have seen a number of pcitures that use glow sticks and other light sources to create the streaking and outlining effect. I see online a lot of people attempt to use human subjects, and while the results are good, I think selectivly light more complex objects like a car or a room could result in a much more interesting result.

I'm going to keep trying different things; I'll pst anything that turns out.
 
^so whos your GF this weekend?
 
ChopstickHero said:
my gf last weekend. shot with a Canon 50mm f/1.4 prime.

Nice lens, nice picture. My only suggestion for improvement would be to get some light on those eyes to make them stand out. If you are using ambient light in the image then there is little you can do. However, if you are using a flash (off camera) and a reflector you can get some very nice effects.

I've been reading this blog called Strobist (http://strobist.blogspot.com/) and they have some excellent advice for lighting on a budget.
 

New Threads and Articles

Back