 | | What camera do you guys use?
|
|
My birthday is coming soon, and so I've asked for money. I'm saving up for a new camera, and currently my eye is on the (2 URLs) s602. > It has a 6x zoom, extremely fast shutter response and burst rates, a good macro- 1 cm focus (although this has (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jul-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Natural Lighting
|
|
(...) Sounds good. I'll try it out. Good thing shadows are useful, 'cause my driveway is boardered by trees and there's only a small amount of light in the center. (...) Yeah. I guess I'll have to deal with it tommorow when I take pictures of my new (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Natural Lighting
|
|
(...) Try taking your pictures in the shade or on overcast days. Even in the shade, it's still far brighter outdoors than it is inside, so you'll still get good results, without the stark shadows. I have a hard time getting good backgrounds for (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Natural Lighting
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) hey john. not that i'm all that good in either photography or lego photography, but i do know that time of day has everything to do with shadow effects. usually, early in the morning or late in the day gives the "best" soft (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
|
| |
| | Natural Lighting
|
|
Hello, all. I've been experimenting with natural lighting today in the bright Florida sun. I've got very good results, much better then with artificial lighting. (9 URLs) Pictures are also easy to edit. (URL) I have two questions for you'all. (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) While there is more color fideltiy at higher bit-depths, above a certain point the human eye can't tell the difference. 24-bit is also termed "true color" because it's 16.7 million color range is close to the limit of what the human eye can (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) I don't think I am. :-) I'm not saying that the end result of a 2x-downsampled 10x digital zoom will look any better in 24-bit color than a native 5x optical zoom would look in 24-bit color. It won't. What I'm saying is that a 2x-downsampled (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: What I made from the 4099 Robobots Designer Set
|
|
(...) Yeah! These are nice! Dang fleebnorks ruin everything! stuart (23 years ago, 1-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) I didn't think that sounded right, but I couldn't figure out why. This sounds an awful lot like how LCD laptop screens work, where they look fine if you set the screen size according to the actual physical pixelation of the screen, but if you (...) (23 years ago, 22-May-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) I think you are confusing color depth with image area resolution. If the CCD chip has an area of X-by-Y pixels and you are at maximum optical zoom, then any form of digital zoom requires interpolating between adjacent real pixels. The color (...) (23 years ago, 22-May-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) I tried using thick white paper tape over my flash...and all I got was a blurry large glare spot where previously I'd been getting a crisp large glare spot. The problem is not so much in the quality of light as it is in the direction. If the (...) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
If you don't have alternative flash solutions there's a trick, put a small piece a transparent (Scotch) tape over the flash lens, it acts as a little diffuser and cost ~$0.000001. Maybe even a smear of some vaseline on the flash lens would work (I'm (...) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) Ah, but that only works if you've got hand-held flashes. Not all cameras have that capability (I know mine doesn't). So, to be more accurate, never use the built-in flash to photograph LEGO bricks. If you can set up a flash source that's not (...) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) Yeah, I'll second that. The GIMP rocks. John -- GIMP is the GNU Image Manipulation Program. (URL) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) ^^^^^^ Err, I mean a 48-bit image (16 bits per channel) (...) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) Unless you know what you're doing. In which case: nothing beats flashes -- not even the sun.[1] --Todd [1] Yup, high-power strobe flashes are even brighter than the sun. Try making a 1/1000 second exposure at f/22 or f/32 from sunlight! And (...) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) I think that's changing. I've seen explicit aperture settings on $400 consumer-grade digital cameras. (...) Every digital camera has the capability to do multiple apertures -- the trick is coaxing the camera into doing what you want if there (...) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) That's if he wants the very closest spot to be in perfect focus. :-) If he can shoot with a small aperture, then he should be able to get as close as 1.8 ft -- or closer. It all depends where in the model the lens is focused. Also, just (...) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) I don't think that's quite correct. If your CCD or CMOS chip has greater than 8 bits of depth on each spectral band (most do), then an on-camera digital zoom should contain more information than a post-processed zoom. For example, suppose you (...) (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: taking good photos
|
|
(...) The GIMP is totally free and I think it should be useable for this kind of thing. (23 years ago, 21-May-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
