Digital Photography

[Stereo]

Here's a photo of my cat. Turned out great IMO. (Obviously there's photoshop!)

[powerof1000]

Here's a photo of my cat. Turned out great IMO. (Obviously there's photoshop!)

I think that the eyes are a little too over-saturated.

[Stereo]

Looks fine on my monitor. Meh,

[Carcrazy]

That's really good man, tabby cat's rule...

[Zero260]

Tried to take some night photos of my car again and despite using a tripod and making multiple efforts in changing the shutter speed and aperture, I still get grainy photos. Does this mean my camera just sucks or am I doing something wrong?



Sorry, that first one is sideways, but you can tilt your head. I think that last one would have been pretty epic if it wasn't for the freakin' noise! I'm starting to think my camera may have gotten damaged or something... I know that I got a bit of sand in it at the beach once and I have used it in a very light rain before, but I was very careful. Would this have anything to do with it, or am I just in denial of having a crappy camera? It seems like it used to put out higher quality photos when I first bought it...

[xHaZxMaTx]

There are a number of things can cause grainy/noisy photos;

The ISO could be set too high. Set the ISO as low as possible; this will make the sensor less sensitive to light and make the photo turn out darker; however, since you're taking a long-exposure shot of a stationary object, the camera's sensor won't have to be very sensitive to light, and you can compensate by simply leaving the shutter open for a longer amount of time. Generally, however, the longer the exposure, the more grain/noise, but you can open the aperture, more, allowing more light into the sensor, thus allowing you to reduce the amount of time the sensor needs to be exposed. Besides that, even ambient temperature can dictate how grainy your photo is, but there isn't much you can do about that.

And last, but certainly not least: clean your lens! Spots and smudges on your lens will really show up during long exposures and even more-so with a more-closed aperture. Just as with how you get a better depth-of-field effect with a more-open aperture, the depth-of-field will be less-defined with a more-closed aperture, bringing more of the picture into focus, including 'faults' on/in the lens.

If you do decide to clean your lens, probably the best way to remove dust and lint is simply a can of compressed air, which you can pick up pretty much anywhere. Be extremely careful, though, not to shake the can or tilt it more than 45° from its upright position. If you've used a can of compressed air, before, you'd know that this will cause the canister to spray the now-liquefied gas that forms inside the can as the pressure decreases from spraying and that this liquid is extremely cold, and if it were to come into contact with the lens of your camera, the glass could very easily become warped or even crack from the sudden and extreme temperature change.

Also, if you want a better depth-of-field effect (car in-focus, background and/or foreground aren't), set the aperture to it's lowest setting (Æ’/3.5, or similar). This will also allow more light into the photo, lessening the amount of time the shutter must stay open to expose the sensor sufficiently. On the down-side, however, a more-open aperture won't give as much of that 'starburst' effect from light sources (the six beams of light in a hexagonal shape coming from the light sources in your pictures).

Hope that helps.

[Stereo]

But you forgot something, when using a higher shutter speed, always use a tripod.

And I'm happy for my success. I can finally use the Manual mode on my DSLR efficiently now. Can't wait till I get my flash.

[xHaZxMaTx]

That won't make the image less-grainy, and he's already said that he has a tripod.

[Stereo]

No I meant that if you were using lower ISO, then either open up the aperture or lower the shutter speed, but use a tripod to make it less blurry if lowering the shutter speed.

[xHaZxMaTx]

Well, yeah, that's a given.

Anywho, to further explain what was already mentioned about noise reduction, here are some photos I took while at work...


ISO: 1600, Exposure: 1/15" | ISO: 100, Exposure: 1"

Even though the right image has a longer exposure, it has less noise due to the lower ISO.

And to give an example of how aperture size affects depth-of-field:


Aperture: Æ’/4.5, Exposure: 1/50" | Aperture: Æ’/29, Exposure: 1"

The image on the right has a much larger depth-of-field and required a much longer exposure than the image on the right, due to the more-closed aperture.

[Zero260]

Awesome examples. I'm still learning what all this means so that helps a lot. Thanks a lot, HaZ. I'll give some of your suggestions a try.

[xHaZxMaTx]

Not a problem. More than happy to share what I learn with fellow photographers. Now for some photos.


Hueg pic is hueg. Tried my hand at stitching and failed, horribly.



These aren't particularly amazing, but I still like how they look.


30-second exposure + polarizer filter + polarizer filter = ?


I love how the colours came out in this one.


No Photoshop was used in the making of these photos (except Cloud, but that was only for stitching).

[Stereo]

Waaait... How did you use 2 polarizer filters? You can attach them? And the lake/river looks like ice.

I <3 the last one. Agree with the comment.

[xHaZxMaTx]

Yeah, the filters just screw onto the lens and one another.

By the way, one of the best things you can do to learn what you can do with your camera is just experiment and mess around with all the settings (as well as a bit of research). That's how I learned what I know.

Edit:
Holy shiznit!

[Stereo]

You should see the Carl Zeiss one. It can probably fit 50 cameras into itself.

[xHaZxMaTx]

...It looks like a blimp.

Ventured through the realms of teh Wiki, and decided to experiment with tilt/shift techniques. I'll have some more examples up, tomorrow.

[xHaZxMaTx]

Promised more examples of tilt/shift, but I didn't spend a whole lot of time with my camera, today, and I only have one good example. Note the very limited and unique depth-of-field.



And a photograph I really like.

[Stereo]

How do you do tilt-shift. Do you take the lens off and tilt it somewhere else?

That flower photo would do great with better lighting or some bloom.

[xHaZxMaTx]

You can buy a tilt/shift lens, if you want to spend $1,000+, or you can take the lens off the body and hold it.

I think the lighting is great as-is; it's got a very nice contrast and it's surprisingly vibrant for not be doctored. I just noticed, today, that the flowers are fake... <.<;

[Stereo]

Haha, if you look at the leaves you can notice they are.

[xHaZxMaTx]

Just FYI, these are photos of Amtrak's Coast Starlight, which normally runs from Sacramento to L.A. closer to and along the coast, a la Coast Starlight. However, track maintenance rerouted the trains (North and Southbound) through Bakersfield, where I live, the Tehachapi Loop, which you may have heard of, and Mojave. This has only ever been done twice before, as far as I know, and I was actually on the last train that went through, so I decided to not ride, this time, and get pictures of the train, myself.

All photos taken with UV and polarizer filters.


This is train #11 Southbound (left) in the Bakersfield train station - the only station stop between Sacramento and L.A. - next to an Amtrak California train (right).
(55-250mm lens, 1/200", Æ’/5.6, ISO 100)


Train #14 Northbound (my dad was on this train) on its way down from Bealville and Tehachapi into Caliente. This is right around where I often go driving in the Miata. In fact, about 200 feet down the road to the left of the picture is where I tore up the road.
(18-55mm lens, 1/125", Æ’/5.6, ISO 100)


Train #14 coming out of the horseshoe turn at Caliente. This was a really big event and there were a lot of other people there, taking photos.
(55-250mm lens, 1/200", Æ’/5.6, ISO 100)


Train #14 (left) and #11 (right) meeting at Caliente. Normally, you wouldn't be able to hang out the car windows, like the people in this photo, but this was a special occasion. This is, quite literally, a once-in-a-lifetime photo.
(55-250mm lens, 1/200", f/5.6, ISO 100)


Look familiar?
(55-250mm lens, 1/200", Æ’/5.6, ISO 100)


Train #11 leaving Caliente and heading towards Bealville. This is just before the tunnel seen in IMG_7359.
(18-55mm lens, 1/200", Æ’/5.6, ISO 100)



Train #14 in Bakersfield, a few minutes from the train station. You can see just how hot it gets here, with all the heat waves.
(55-250mm lens, 1/200", Æ’/5.6, ISO 100)


Train #14 just a few-hundred feet from the station. I really like this photo, because the grade crossing and its shadows are all pointing at the main focus of the image - the train.
(18-55mm lens, 1/200", Æ’/5.6, ISO 100)


Train #14 at the Bakersfield train station, with another Amtrak California train, in the background. I like how the colours are arranged in this photo; the blue sky with the blue top of the train and the grey concrete with the grey bottom of the train.
(18-55mm lens, 1/200", Æ’/5.6, ISO 100)

[Zero260]

Cool photos. I'm confused on how you got multiple shots of the same train passing by... I'd think the train would pass by once and you'd have one chance to get your shots. How'd you pull that off?

[xHaZxMaTx]

1. There were two trains.
2. I was in this magical thing called a car, so I could keep up with the trains. (And I totally wasn't going twice the speed limit. Nope, not me.)
3. These were taken over the span of a few hours.

[Stereo]

I like the one coming out of the tunnel.

(whats up with these dumb phpbb3 icons. Bring back the old circular ones...)

[Zero260]

Agreed.

Getting better, I guess...



I need to tighten up this hand-me-down tripod, though. I can't seem to press the button without slightly moving the camera causing a bit of blur... I also need some clips for my sagging side skirt.

Insta-Edit: I just thought of a solution: A one second timer/delay!