PDA

View Full Version : Photography How-to



ryanm
26 May 2009, 10:49
How do you get the high-contrast white backgrounds in your photos stick? Always looks great, but I'm not sure how your doing it. I was playing with Photoshop the other day and couldn't quite get my pictures to come out the way I had hoped. Do you have a specific application recommendation?

Cheers!

Mute
26 May 2009, 11:55
It's not so much the application as it is controlling your lighting during the taking of the shot. You need to soften and even out the lighting. If you don't do this first, no software in the world can make the picture look the way you want.

zero7one
26 May 2009, 16:47
Mute is absolutely correct. Controlling your light is what makes great images. Strive to get the image correct in the camera. Photoshop and post-processing is to fix minor imperfections, not to create a miracle. Play with your lighting and always look for new techniques. Try to make your images stand out from what everyone else is doing. There are a ton of tutorials out there in how-to photography and there are a lot of DIY projects that you can do to recreate lighting w/o spending a million bucks.

Titleist
26 May 2009, 18:29
Agreed, great lighting can save a LOT of images. I've just started to really play with long exposures lately, and you can get a LOT of great detail by just making a good composition and screwing around with a few lights.

shadco
27 May 2009, 06:29
I would imagine they are using a light box which provides consistent and well understood lighting conditions, they really help for product shots where detail is critical.

I'm primarily a sport shooter and don't have the gear for product photography. I'll use a good tripod

http://www.pbase.com/shadco/image/28049238/medium.jpg

and I'll let the camera and metering do the work since I'll be shooting at higher apertures trying to increase depth of field.

A good lens like a Nikon 60mm macro lens also helps, I don't shoot nikon anymore so I just use my trusty 28-70 Lseries 2.8.

Shooting sports is quite different than product since things are moving quickly and you are trying to stop the action and create some pop so you are usually shooting pretty wide open.

http://www.pbase.com/shadco/image/24030763.jpg

Stickman
28 May 2009, 20:04
How do you get the high-contrast white backgrounds in your photos stick? Always looks great, but I'm not sure how your doing it. I was playing with Photoshop the other day and couldn't quite get my pictures to come out the way I had hoped. Do you have a specific application recommendation?

Cheers!

I tend to over or underexpose for my shots as needed. The easiest way to shoot a white background is to put down something white (paper, tablecloth, your wifes wedding dress etc.). Put it in shade, then take your picture. You will have to play around with the exposure, but raise it a bit, and see how you like it. If you need more white, and less gray, overexpose by a little more. The shade will provide a softer, more even light, and its a very easy way to shoot your pictures.

By doing this, you won't need to do much work in post processing, if anything at all. I know there are guys who cut out backgrounds and do lots of other work in photoshop, but since I am horrible at photoshop, I need to get the results I want in the camera.


There are lots of other ways to shoot on a white background, but the above is what I've found to be the easiest, and quickest.



Note that I didn't say exactly how much to alter the exposure, that because it is going to depend on a few different variables. Play around, and see what you like. Its digital, so shoot a bunch and see what you like best.

tac40
7 June 2009, 09:22
wife's wedding dress, let me think about that. I wish I could take damn nice pictures like stick or borrow his camera.

Venom
16 June 2009, 00:02
as I want to take my nikon d40 along on a hiking trip to canada, I'd like to ask you guys, what kind of pouc/bag youd take along that is not to bulky, yet provides enouh protection from the elements?

thanks!

rob_s
16 June 2009, 05:03
Venom, camera bags are a lot like gun bags in that the most easily accessed are not typically the most secure. Are you looking for something to carry on you that you can "quick draw" from, or are you going to be carrying thee camera on a strap during the day and are only looking for a bag to secure it when traveling to/from the hike?

Venom
17 June 2009, 04:26
actually I think I want something that keeps the cam safe from rain and impact, and the whole thing will be under the top lid of my pack. I think I wont need the quick draw, I'll probably stop, remove cam, take pic, put back and carry on hiking.

Jerry R
20 June 2009, 12:19
I built a light box "on the cheap" using 1" schedule 40 PVC pipe and clamp lights from Home Depot.

For the bulbs I use 100 watt Daylight rated spiral florescent. The daylight rating is important, it gives a white light (5000 to 6200 kelvin) as opposed to the yellow of incandescent bulbs or bluish tint of normal florescent.

Using the PVC allowed me to create an expandable light box - a picture below shows the frame set up for smaller items. When expanded for rifle sized items I place it on a 6 foot folding table and use more lights. A little effort before you push the button will pay off in reduced post processing time.

I went to a fabric shop with my wife and purchased some rolls of fabric for backdrops, you will need full width rolled fabric about 3 yards or so in length - peanuts on cost; mine ran from $1.99 per yard to $3.99 per yard. Have them roll it, not cut and fold. The creases and wrinkles will show. Re-roll it and bag it after use. Pick some neutral or soft background colors, and maybe a bright one for special things you may want to photograph. I have white, gray, red, green and black. Stay away from satins or shiny fabrics. On rolls they can also be hung behind someone for use as a portrait backdrop.

At a minimum you will need a relatively sheer white roll to drape the top and sides - always do that to mute or soften the light. You would lay the colored fabric on the inside of the light box as background - or just use the white.

Venom, I use a Tamrac sling pack - medium to large. I can swing it around, pull the camera and or different lens, take the picture and put it back. Seems to work okay for me.

Hope this helped.

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i106/pdogkilr/LightBox.jpg

You can even take pictures of cameras:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i106/pdogkilr/F631-2-2NoFrontsNoTopLight.jpg

rob_s
20 June 2009, 14:51
Jerry, a couple of questions...

First, do you just replace the cross pieces of PVC with longer pieces when you want to make it bigger, or do you have some other trick?

Second, where did you buy those bulbs? Home Depot or Lowes have them?

Third, about how many lights, total, do you have?

Great setup, I think you just saved me some money (or, gave me more money to spend on the tripod!)

Jerry R
20 June 2009, 19:42
Rob,

1) I pull it apart and put more cross pieces into the mix to make it bigger, there are also extra connectors. A great place to get unique PVC connectors is:

http://www.littlegreenhouse.com/accessory/pvc.shtml

They also have "clips" that snap onto the PVC pipe to hold your backdrop cloths, hint - buy a dozen. I thought I only needed 4 and had to re-order. Discounts based on pieces not order dollar total.

2) The bulbs are at Home Depot, Lowes does not have them. Look for blue paper in the bulb package, not the green that is in their "standard" florescent bulbs. You can see the temperature rating on the back of the package, again should be somewhere between 5000 and 6200 Kelvin - that is the "temperature" of daylight.

3) I have eight 10.5" reflectors and four 6" reflectors. I use the larger to "flood" the item to be photographed through the white cover cloth. I use the smaller ones to highlight the item, and to kill any shadows. The setup works best if all the incandescent lamps in the basement are turned off. I have forgotten that a couple of times, and I will find an orange highlight somewhere in the shot. The number used obviously depends on the item being photographed and the size of the light box at the time.

Good luck with the project and please keep me posted on your progress. If you have other questions don't hesitate to ask.

Venom
24 June 2009, 09:37
I think I'll be going with a 1400 Pelican case under my top lid of the ruck

Trav
24 June 2009, 14:37
Awesome light box Jerry R, we made one like it for portable crime scene fuming chamber for super glue at the scene. With only a few easy additions we now have a super cool light box. Thanks for the idea. I do have a question about cameras if you guys are still reading this thread. I have a cheapo Kodak easy share Z1285. It says 12 Mega Pixl on the side but it is a simple point and shoot, no SLR. Would it really be able to put out shots like you guys are posting on this site?

Jerry R
25 June 2009, 21:13
I do have a question about cameras if you guys are still reading this thread. I have a cheapo Kodak easy share Z1285. It says 12 Mega Pixl on the side but it is a simple point and shoot, no SLR. Would it really be able to put out shots like you guys are posting on this site?

It should have a tripod thread on the bottom. If it will shoot 12MP and you have a tripod, it should produce pretty good images. Glass is the real key to a photograph, but don't be surprised if you get some super shots with a point and shoot. The only downside to today's point and shoot cameras is that most do not have a cable release connection. When on the tripod, use the softest touch you can to release the shutter.

Take some pictures and show us what you got!!

Eric
25 June 2009, 22:00
The only downside to today's point and shoot cameras is that most do not have a cable release connection. When on the tripod, use the softest touch you can to release the shutter.
Also, just about every camera has a countdown timer that allows the shutter to release without the chance of the user inducing movement.

Stickman
25 June 2009, 23:23
It says 12 Mega Pixl on the side but it is a simple point and shoot, no SLR. Would it really be able to put out shots like you guys are posting on this site?



Its not about the camera, its about the setup and light. Yes, with a P&S you can do a lot. One of my favorite covers that I've shot was done years ago with a old Olympus point and shoot (C-750), and it was only a 4 mega pixel.

rob_s
26 June 2009, 08:06
Jerry, I'm hoping to get to Home Depot tonight!

Any thoughts on bumping up the pipe size a little? I'd like to be able to extend this thing out to as much as 4' feet wide (I'm planning on making the base part at 2', with a 1' and 2' insert to expand it) and I'm concerned about the 1" pipe at that span.

Stickman
26 June 2009, 11:01
Rob,

I've got them built up to 6'x4' without any problem.

Jerry R
26 June 2009, 19:45
Jerry, I'm hoping to get to Home Depot tonight!

Any thoughts on bumping up the pipe size a little? I'd like to be able to extend this thing out to as much as 4' feet wide (I'm planning on making the base part at 2', with a 1' and 2' insert to expand it) and I'm concerned about the 1" pipe at that span.

Rob, I would stick with the 1 inch, but get the schedule 40 pipe. Mine sags about a half inch when fully extended, but nobody can see it. All you are using the frame for is to hold your cloths - backdrops. Larger pipe won't be as portable, storable, and a lot of other ...ble's.

Like Stickman, mine is the length of a 6 foot folding table when extended - no problemo.

nitehawk1946
27 June 2009, 13:46
Thanks for the great "Light Box" tips Jerry R. Your ideas are great for being able to get some great close-up shots of small items. The ability to expand the box will definitely work to my advantage on full rifle shots. Your light set-up is one of the best I have been able to find. Sure beats the high $$$ regular photo style lamps...does the same on a light meter too. I checked out that web site for the pvc clamps...they have just about everything a person could want for putting together a super light box. Many thanks for your ideas.

Jerry R
28 June 2009, 10:38
Glad to help. I'm looking forward to seeing your pictures.

rob_s
4 July 2009, 08:41
I picked up eight bulbs, two 10.5" lights, and two 8.5" lights (the 5.5" weren't 100 watt rated) and a 10-outlet power strip to power them all.

Got two sticks of 1" sched 40, but they didn't have the 90 degree Ts so I'll have to order those from Jerry's link. I'm actually going to try some shots without them if I can successfully bounce the light off the ceiling/walls.

Bulbs are 5500K n:vision 100W with an output of 1400 lumens and supposedly 10,000 hours.

Which brings us to tripod/head suggestions. Under $150 for the combo would be good, under $200 would be OK.

Stickman
4 July 2009, 09:41
You really want to use bulbs that are all the same. Same wattage, same manufacturer, and same type (daylight, softwhite, etc..).

rob_s
4 July 2009, 10:08
They are. The housings are the only things that are different.

Stickman
4 July 2009, 10:12
They are. The housings are the only things that are different.



You should be good to go. 5500 degrees kelvin is pretty straight forward, and depending on what camera you are using, you might find that setting your WB on flash gives you just what you need.



As far as the 90 degree elbows, any Home Depot, Lowes, garden center, hardware store, plumbing or lawn/ irrigation place should also have them. I want to say that I grabbed mine at Home Depot, but it could have been at a real hardware store.

rob_s
4 July 2009, 17:11
This area is not very do-it-yourself friendly (everyone has landscapers, maids, etc. and couldn't believe it when I actually built my own fence with my own two hands) consequently the Home Depots suck.

I just ordered the 90* elbows from the link Jerry posted along with his clips.

Stickman
4 July 2009, 17:37
I've run into you before, and I admit, you don't look Cuban. I must point out that you didn't even say hi.....

Trav
5 July 2009, 10:17
I am still learning all the functions on this camera (the kodak easyshare) and my main subject is an ar15. The ar is a post ban that I just purchased a spikes tactical 37mm launcher for. My carbine is upper is down at elite firearms getting the barrell threaded for a flash suppressor. When it comes back I will start trying to get some good pics of it.

rob_s
13 March 2010, 15:50
I finally got around to using the lights. Quite the learning curve!

I used this

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/gun%20stuff/DSC_5468.jpg



to make this

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/gun%20stuff/Fig6-Rifle.jpg

critiques? I would have liked to have filled in the background a bit more but was running out of junk to throw in there.

Stickman
13 March 2010, 16:33
critiques? I would have liked to have filled in the background a bit more but was running out of junk to throw in there.

Each person who views the image will have their own take on what should or shouldn't be included.

When I talk with graphics people/ clients of mine, they have commented that there is an art form with layout that people either have, or don't, with little in between. At times I think I'm close, and there are other times I think I'm way off base.

The above shot looks like what I would expect to see from a writer in a magazine as opposed to what I would see from the photographer. I'm not sure if that is going to make sense to many people, but I think Rob might know what I mean.

Quib
13 March 2010, 16:38
I finally got around to using the lights. Quite the learning curve!

I used this

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/gun%20stuff/DSC_5468.jpg


Not much different than what I use. I need to get a couple more lights though.

Quib
13 March 2010, 16:42
Iíve had good luck in my lamps, using the energy savings bulbs that emulate daylight. When I need to defuse the light a bit, Iíll clip a piece of typing paper across the light reflector.

rob_s
13 March 2010, 17:39
Not much different than what I use. I need to get a couple more lights though.

Yeah, I'm going to spring for two more big ones. The little ones work well for fill, but the clamps suck and they don't stay put like the big ones do. I'm thinking of coating the whole rack in bedliner material so that it's not so smooth and the clamps have something to bite on.

Quib
13 March 2010, 17:56
Yeah, I'm going to spring for two more big ones. The little ones work well for fill, but the clamps suck and they don't stay put like the big ones do. I'm thinking of coating the whole rack in bedliner material so that it's not so smooth and the clamps have something to bite on.


Bedliner, or maybe a roll of grip tape? I bought a roll at the hardware store that I use on pistol grips, mag wells and such. The tape though might be quicker and less messy.

I like the PVC pipe light rig. I need to build one of those myself!

motorolahamm
16 March 2010, 13:55
I built a light box "on the cheap" using 1" schedule 40 PVC pipe and clamp lights from Home Depot.

For the bulbs I use 100 watt Daylight rated spiral florescent. The daylight rating is important, it gives a white light (5000 to 6200 kelvin) as opposed to the yellow of incandescent bulbs or bluish tint of normal florescent.

Using the PVC allowed me to create an expandable light box - a picture below shows the frame set up for smaller items. When expanded for rifle sized items I place it on a 6 foot folding table and use more lights. A little effort before you push the button will pay off in reduced post processing time.

I went to a fabric shop with my wife and purchased some rolls of fabric for backdrops, you will need full width rolled fabric about 3 yards or so in length - peanuts on cost; mine ran from $1.99 per yard to $3.99 per yard. Have them roll it, not cut and fold. The creases and wrinkles will show. Re-roll it and bag it after use. Pick some neutral or soft background colors, and maybe a bright one for special things you may want to photograph. I have white, gray, red, green and black. Stay away from satins or shiny fabrics. On rolls they can also be hung behind someone for use as a portrait backdrop.

At a minimum you will need a relatively sheer white roll to drape the top and sides - always do that to mute or soften the light. You would lay the colored fabric on the inside of the light box as background - or just use the white.

Venom, I use a Tamrac sling pack - medium to large. I can swing it around, pull the camera and or different lens, take the picture and put it back. Seems to work okay for me.

Hope this helped.

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i106/pdogkilr/LightBox.jpg

You can even take pictures of cameras:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i106/pdogkilr/F631-2-2NoFrontsNoTopLight.jpg

hey whats that little round blue and yellow thing that says 100hc in front of the camera????

OutlawDon
16 March 2010, 15:50
Indirect sunlight is my favorite source of lighting. Not always consistent though but looks the most natural.

Some of my pics with post-editing in photoshop...

http://healthbydon.com/ar15wet.jpg

http://healthbydon.com/glock19.jpg

http://healthbydon.com/savage12fvss.jpg

http://healthbydon.com/kimberdiamond.jpg

jeffy
17 March 2010, 13:17
Each person who views the image will have their own take on what should or shouldn't be included.

When I talk with graphics people/ clients of mine, they have commented that there is an art form with layout that people either have, or don't, with little in between. At times I think I'm close, and there are other times I think I'm way off base.

The above shot looks like what I would expect to see from a writer in a magazine as opposed to what I would see from the photographer. I'm not sure if that is going to make sense to many people, but I think Rob might know what I mean.I agree with you. The placement of each object is a bit too linear. The rifle is acting as a fence for the different objects behind it. Every piece seems to have a cordoned off zone and it draws the eyes evenly to each area. This creates very little tension which is not what you want. Also, try using extreme angles to create a more dramatic scene. It's a little heavy in the center which makes it feel too planted. The focus is pretty sharp which is good. I'd like to see a bit more light as the exposure seems a bit dark.

If you have Aperture, Lightroom or Photoshop you can play around with pic more so you don't have to frame everything in the camera.

rob_s
17 March 2010, 14:26
I missed stick's post before, thanks for quoting him!

Both of you are correct, and as stick noted I'm a writer not a picture-maker. There is a caption that goes with the pic that has to do with the carbine, and my concern was that I wanted to fill up the background with .... something but also make the rifle the focus. I was concerned that the belt actually was too distracting.

The critique re: the lighting is a good point, and it looks darker on my screen at work than it did on the screen at home where I did the cropping and fiddling. Anyone have a solution for that? I'm constantly fighting with it.

jeffy
17 March 2010, 16:03
I missed stick's post before, thanks for quoting him!

Both of you are correct, and as stick noted I'm a writer not a picture-maker. There is a caption that goes with the pic that has to do with the carbine, and my concern was that I wanted to fill up the background with .... something but also make the rifle the focus. I was concerned that the belt actually was too distracting.

The critique re: the lighting is a good point, and it looks darker on my screen at work than it did on the screen at home where I did the cropping and fiddling. Anyone have a solution for that? I'm constantly fighting with it.Since it's about the rifle, then you don't really need the extras in the backdrop. You can use a drop cloth or even white paper so it doesn't distract too much from the main object you're wanting to shoot. Smooth concrete or a sheet of wood would also be interesting without detracting too much.

You really have to play around with the objects in the background if you're wanting to keep them. Sometimes it's best to try letting the other items fall naturally. When you straightening them out they make the pic look flat. It's difficult to make it look natural but that comes with experience and trial and error.

You could calibrate your brightness and contrast for your monitor but not everyone will have their monitors balanced correctly. Many run them a bit dark as it's easier on the eyes. Not too many people really know how to use a test pattern anymore.

In general, I think going a bit too light is probably better then too dark. I bumped your picture's brightness and contrast up a little so it's a bit brighter. The lights and dark's start to separate more and things start to pop out with just a few little changes.

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/gun%20stuff/Fig6-Rifle.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/yokomura/Misc/Fig6-Rifle.jpg?t=1268863190

Defender3
17 March 2010, 19:40
Some excellent information in this thread. It looks like I'll have another project and some work to do to try and catch up!

Jerry - Are you using the white fabric to difuse any of the light? For instance, having fabric on the side of the light box and using the lights to the outside of the fabric. If so, did you find one fabric better at diffusion than others? TIA.

jeffy
17 March 2010, 20:58
Indirect sunlight is my favorite source of lighting. Not always consistent though but looks the most natural.

Some of my pics with post-editing in photoshop...

http://healthbydon.com/ar15wet.jpg

http://healthbydon.com/glock19.jpg

http://healthbydon.com/savage12fvss.jpg

http://healthbydon.com/kimberdiamond.jpg
I love shooting with natural light but it's one of the most difficult ways to shoot since you can't control it 100%. The first pic is nice but there is way too much glare. It looks like the sun is at the top of the picture so the glare is amplified. Always shoot with the sun to your back if at all possible. It will light up your subject instead of lighting up what's behind it.

The second pic has a bit too much exposure so everything looks washed out. A lot of the detail of the slide is lost. The background is a bit distracting with it's pattern which draws the eye away from the real subject matter. I'd also consider not shooting it straight on as it makes it look flat. Also, shoot from a tripod and then try not to use an ISO over 400 (you're at 1600. Lower is always better as higher ISO's introduce noise). I tend to shoot in manual mode as A-Mode tends to be a little too much exposure. I'll say more about that at the end.

Next is the Savage. The shadows are a bit too distracting and again it's a little over exposed. It isn't really sharp either. It's in A-Mode which explains the exposure. I think it would have been more interesting to stand it up and then use a ladder to shoot from a higher angle. Probably better to wait till a later part of the day as well.

Then the Kimber. Similar to the AR, there is a light source from a window or light from above. Much of the detail of the slide is lost in all that white. I would try to defuse the light more. Maybe sure a sheet or wait till later in the day. With natural lighting the best times are just after run rise and right before sunset. You usually only have 2 hours or so to work with. I like evenings an the sunlight gets a bit more defused and everything starts looking more vibrant. The angle is more interesting. I'd maybe try shooting from even lower. The one area that bugs me is the black of the base plate and how close it is to the bottom of the crop. There is a lack of detail there as well.

Here's a suggesting for everyone. Look at your light meters. This will tell you how might light you're getting and if your pic will be over or underexposed and by how much. Also, look at your histograms. Now this isn't always possible with a DSLR since most don't have a live viewfinder. But take a picture and look at it. It should have a nice bell shape to it. If the lines are all bunched up to one side then that's not good.

Also, try shooting at a slower shutter speed. This will help you get more detail but beware, if you go too slow, you will start to introduce blur. This is a good time to start using a tripod. Some cameras have image stabilization but that only helps so much. Also, it is good not to use it when you don't actually need it. You will find that the pictures will be a bit more sharper then with IS on.

Back to A-Mode. A-Mode is OK but I don't like how most tend to shoot with a bit more exposure then I like. I usually shoot a little on the underexposed side so the colors are a bit richer. If you have a DSLR then try setting up bracketing mode. This allows you to take 3 pictures at one time. Generally they will be 1/4 stop overexposed, normal exposure and 1/4 stop under exposed. This is usually seen as +1 0 -1. You should be able to set it to a number of combination. This will help hedge your bets as many times the one you really wanted wasn't at the setting you had it set for.

Don't be afraid of M-Mode. If you watch your light meter you'll get a hang of setting your Aperture manually. For those with P&S, you don't have much choice so it's either S-Mode or A-Mode. Also, shoot in RAW format instead of jpg if you can. RAW's are uncompressed files so there is no reduction in quality.

Oh and if you have an internal flash, try not to use it. If you have to try taking a piece of paper and reflect it upwards. Internal flashes aren't very good and cause artificial highlights that cause loss of detail. If you can get an external flash and bounce it off the ceiling. You'll get a more even light source.

Well, enough of me rambling. I hope this helps.

Stickman
18 March 2010, 02:19
I missed stick's post before, thanks for quoting him!

Both of you are correct, and as stick noted I'm a writer not a picture-maker. There is a caption that goes with the pic that has to do with the carbine, and my concern was that I wanted to fill up the background with .... something but also make the rifle the focus. I was concerned that the belt actually was too distracting.

The critique re: the lighting is a good point, and it looks darker on my screen at work than it did on the screen at home where I did the cropping and fiddling. Anyone have a solution for that? I'm constantly fighting with it.



Always better to go on the brighter side of things unless you are going for a very moody image. A lot of monitors tend to run on the dark side, and that kills images pretty quick.

Stickman
18 March 2010, 02:24
If so, did you find one fabric better at diffusion than others? TIA.



Different diffusers impart a different spectral quality, and a large part of it becomes a matter of what you are looking for in your images.

A lot of people will simply say to go with the thinnest thing you can find, I'm not one of them, but I won't argue their opinions. If those are the results they like, who am I to comment.

Defender3
18 March 2010, 08:19
I took a trip to Home Depot this morning to pick up some supplies for my new photography project. Here's a preliminary run down of some results before I even built the light box.

The goods minus the 3/4" schedule 40 PVC. Total at HD was under $130:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/defender3va/DSC_0921-1.jpg

The previous high speed 3-light setup with 200w bulbs (totally inneffective BTW since the temp of the bulbs is in the 2000K range:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/defender3va/DSC_0916-1.jpg


I took several pictures of an early M1 Garand bolt using a Nikon D40 on auto. I've not touched up any of the shots. The first is of the bolt under the incandescent lighting. While it's not a bad shot, you can see the yellows and the shot just isn't bright."

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/defender3va/DSC_0918-1.jpg

I then changed out the bulbs in the high-speed 3-light setup and took the picture again using the florescent 100W bulbs at 5500K.

Here's the set-up:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/defender3va/DSC_0924-1.jpg

Here's a picture with the hotter bulbs. I could immediately see a difference in the brightness with these bulbs:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/defender3va/DSC_0922-1.jpg

Here's a light box set-up I bought at Ritz Camera. It's a nice collapsible box with fabric diffusers and a blue shooting matt (fabric). The problem was the crappy little lights provided that couldn't light a bug. You can see I placed just one of the 10" lights ontop (quickly) to take a picture:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/defender3va/DSC_0928-1.jpg

Here's a picture of the bolt with just that one bulb on the top of the box. Not too bad:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/defender3va/DSC_0927-1.jpg

Who knows what I might be able to do once I get the lighting down, learn how to use my camera and use a tripod! Thanks again for the tips and advice.[adore]

rob_s
18 March 2010, 10:44
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/gun%20stuff/Fig6-Rifle.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/yokomura/Misc/Fig6-Rifle.jpg?t=1268863190

When I look at the original photo at home the brightness looks like the one on the bottom. When I look at it at work I see what I imagine you're seeing as the top one looks too dark.

Guess I should turn down my monitor at home.

jeffy
18 March 2010, 13:11
Here's a picture of the bolt with just that one bulb on the top of the box. Not too bad:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/defender3va/DSC_0927-1.jpg

Who knows what I might be able to do once I get the lighting down, learn how to use my camera and use a tripod! Thanks again for the tips and advice.[adore]I'd recommend adding two more lights from the sides to soften the shadow cast from the light above. The blue really looks nice and gives the bolt a more natural color. Green tends to come out a bit too bright.

Maybe come at it at a lower angle and not so straight on. The creases are a bit distracting. You'll either want to add more wrinkles or flatten it out completely. If you want to see really nice lightbox photo's check out Ken Lunde's site. http://lundestudio.com. IIRC he set up his stuff on his couch which probably helps create the natural looking wrinkles.

Defender3
19 March 2010, 20:56
I'd recommend adding two more lights from the sides to soften the shadow cast from the light above. The blue really looks nice and gives the bolt a more natural color. Green tends to come out a bit too bright.

Maybe come at it at a lower angle and not so straight on. The creases are a bit distracting. You'll either want to add more wrinkles or flatten it out completely. If you want to see really nice lightbox photo's check out Ken Lunde's site. http://lundestudio.com. IIRC he set up his stuff on his couch which probably helps create the natural looking wrinkles.

Thanks for the link - I'll check it out. I couldn't attach any other lights to the Ritz rig so I took that one shot just to see the difference with that hotter bulb. And yes, I'll have to iron out some of those wrinkles! I'll post additional shots as I progress.

jeffy
19 March 2010, 22:06
Thanks for the link - I'll check it out. I couldn't attach any other lights to the Ritz rig so I took that one shot just to see the difference with that hotter bulb. And yes, I'll have to iron out some of those wrinkles! I'll post additional shots as I progress.You don't need to hang additional lights to the rig itself. They just need to be pointed towards the sides. Adding a brighter bulb will just make the shadows more defined. You could try using a speedlight(external flash) and have it bounce off the back of the box as well to try to lighten up the shadows as well.

Here's the direct link to Ken's wallpapers. http://lundestudio.com/firearms.html

Stickman
19 March 2010, 22:58
D3- Or just use a piece of colored paper.

Defender3
21 March 2010, 08:08
Here's a picture using the already mentioned Ritz light box. I placed the PVC frame (3/4" PVC) around the box and hung three 10.5'" reflectors on the frame, on one top and one on each side. The piece is slightly elevated using a foam pillow and shot with a Nikon D40 on a tripod and auto. Thanks for the help guys as this is much better than what I was experiencing previously! FWIW - the part is an early numbered lower band for the M1 Garand.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v501/defender3va/DSC_0977-1.jpg

jeffy
21 March 2010, 14:23
Here's a picture using the already mentioned Ritz light box. I placed the PVC frame (3/4" PVC) around the box and hung three 10.5'" reflectors on the frame, on one top and one on each side. The piece is slightly elevated using a foam pillow and shot with a Nikon D40 on a tripod and auto. Thanks for the help guys as this is much better than what I was experiencing previously! FWIW - the part is an early numbered lower band for the M1 Garand.


I'd recommend you move the ISO from 400 to maybe 100 if you can. Since you're shooting from a tripod, you can go with a longer exposure to help compensate for the lower ISO. This will also help sharpen the detail. The focus seems to be a few MM's in front of the band your trying to focus on. The C and the 0 on the ends are noticeably blurry. I'd decrease the aperture size to increase the depth of field so more in in focus.

Timberwolf
26 March 2010, 08:04
hey whats that little round blue and yellow thing that says 100hc in front of the camera????

That's the "memory stick".

rob_s
11 April 2010, 09:25
too bright now? this is natural light, cloudy day

http://i428.photobucket.com/albums/qq10/tacticalyellowvisor/Reviews/Firearms%20and%20Accessories/BCM%20TandEs/BCMs.jpg

http://i428.photobucket.com/albums/qq10/tacticalyellowvisor/Reviews/Firearms%20and%20Accessories/BCM%20TandEs/DSC_5835.jpg

rob_s
11 April 2010, 09:26
I'm thinking that I might be better off buying a thin sheet of plywood and leaving it outdoors to get that grey weathered look as it might cause me less contrast issues with the dark gun(s)?

jeffy
11 April 2010, 13:49
If you play around with the contrast and brightness you can correct the exposure to some extent. You might try shooting on a some 1/4" High Density Fiberboard. Plywood has too much grain that it would be distracting. You might also consider shooting on your garage floor as you will not get as much direct light.

Maybe try dropping the ISO a bit or increasing the shutter speed.

You can also try using some post-processing with Lightroom, Photoshop or Element as well. Drop the brightness a little and maybe raise the contract a bit.

tac40
10 April 2011, 13:18
I've learned alot from this page. My funny visit to the monkey crew, I love this door art work.

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu319/horseplay/IMG_2076.jpg

HeavyDuty
10 April 2011, 18:43
I'm thinking that I might be better off buying a thin sheet of plywood and leaving it outdoors to get that grey weathered look as it might cause me less contrast issues with the dark gun(s)?

Rob, I purposely shoot on a piece of white wall covering and blow the background out for a high-key look. It all depends on what you're looking for...

rob_s
11 April 2011, 04:16
Yeah, that white-background look is something I'm trying hard to avoid, while at the same time avoiding the whole "I threw a bunch of tactical stuff on the floor and dropped a rifle on top of it" look. The old wire spindle I had at my old place worked great for that. Gave a texture to the background, the rusted metal pieces made a nice contrast, etc.

lingeringlight
11 April 2011, 18:07
Mega Pixels is one of the great marketing ploys perpetrated on an uninformed public. The quality of the sensor, regardless of MP count has a much bigger impact on image quality unless you are trying to blow up an image to a very large size. There are point and shoot cameras and even cell phone cameras that have large MP's. The problem is that they are just cramming more MP into a tiny sensor. the result is noisier images.

If you have some manual control on your camera and can adjust aperture, shutter speed, ISO, etc that is a start but won't totally overcome a bad sensor (when comparing a similar image to one taken by an expensive camera.

That being said, many times when you look at an image and say "wow!" it is often due to a few things: Composition (not camera dependent) Light (not camera dependent) Depth of Focus (can be camera or lens dependent) and finally a crisp, detailed final output (a lot of camera and some post processing)

Knowing that many of the above are not camera dependent, it tells you that with some work, your images can improve dramatically with whatever you are shooting with.

All of that goes out the window if you are a sports shooter, or a wildlife shooter since they are very gear intensive and it is nearly impossible to mimic the good shots you see without an expensive camera and even more expensive lenses.

Hope that helps.

Peter

so I replied after reading the first page and not noticing that there were already five pages [bash]

another thing to consider when working with light. side lighting that rakes across the subject is a great way to highlight texture whereas direct lighting tends to minimize it. A great book to pick up that will give you a wealth of info in terms of shooting different products is "Light, Science and Magic"
http://www.amazon.com/Light-Science-Introduction-Photographic-Lighting/dp/0240808193

Cheers and good luck to all.

Hmac
11 April 2011, 19:02
I just use a 40" soft box and 4 slaved flashes. I shoot RAW so I can tweak the exposure curve. Poster board in various colors works better for me than cloth backdrops because of the shadows from wrinkles.

Stickman
12 April 2011, 11:20
That being said, many times when you look at an image and say "wow!" it is often due to a few things: Composition (not camera dependent) Light (not camera dependent) Depth of Focus (can be camera or lens dependent) and finally a crisp, detailed final output (a lot of camera and some post processing)

Knowing that many of the above are not camera dependent, it tells you that with some work, your images can improve dramatically with whatever you are shooting with.


Hope that helps.

Peter


Very very very true. People want to buy into things when they could be using natural light and a point & shoot camera and shooting posters and covers.

Quib
12 May 2011, 16:38
I like some of the things this gentleman has to say:


But I will be the first to admit that there are many semi-pro and amateur photographers out there whose work easily rivals and even surpasses that of established professional photographers, so in my eyes there is no need to have any inferiority feelings by not being a full time pro. I have seen many images by amateur photographers that I would have been proud to have in my body of work.


Photography is about composition, subject, lighting, technical competence, etc. It is not about equipment. Yes equipment helps, but a creative and imaginative person with a cheap camera will always outclass an uninspired photographer with the very best equipment.

http://dannysteyn.us/how-to-become-a-professional-photographer.htm

WallaceLambert
11 June 2013, 09:15
I tend to over or underexpose for my shots as needed. The easiest way to shoot a white background is to put down something white (paper, tablecloth, your wifes discount wedding dresses (http://www.robustbuy.com/wedding-events-wedding-dresses-c-1165_1166.html) etc.). Put it in shade, then take your picture. You will have to play around with the exposure, but raise it a bit, and see how you like it. If you need more white, and less gray, overexpose by a little more. The shade will provide a softer, more even light, and its a very easy way to shoot your pictures.

By doing this, you won't need to do much work in post processing, if anything at all. I know there are guys who cut out backgrounds and do lots of other work in photoshop, but since I am horrible at photoshop, I need to get the results I want in the camera.


There are lots of other ways to shoot on a white background, but the above is what I've found to be the easiest, and quickest.



Note that I didn't say exactly how much to alter the exposure, that because it is going to depend on a few different variables. Play around, and see what you like. Its digital, so shoot a bunch and see what you like best.

I really liked your idea of white background with some white paper. I am new in photography so its lots to learn. Sorry for old thread reply and thanks for nice thought:)

Computalotapus
12 December 2013, 19:46
what is a good lighting setup to start with. I don't want to do this professionally but I want it to look nice. I need budget lighting that will just work

Jerry R
13 December 2013, 05:53
what is a good lighting setup to start with. I don't want to do this professionally but I want it to look nice. I need budget lighting that will just work

Post #11 in this thread has a photo of my lighting setup with some details on it. Inexpensive and easy to assemble when needed.

Computalotapus
13 December 2013, 07:34
Post #11 in this thread has a photo of my lighting setup with some details on it. Inexpensive and easy to assemble when needed.

Jerry that is perfect. Did you follow a guide on building the light box or just wing it and build to fit your needs.

I have a dedicated "shop" room in the basement that will serve as my reload/kydex/photo room. I like the idea of the expandable light box. I think I can hang the fabric from the wall and make it so I can just pull down the backdrop color I want then roll it back up when I'm done. The light box being portable is key as I have only the one giant table to work with for everything I am doing in that room.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

Jerry R
13 December 2013, 10:29
I drew out what I wanted, and just cut the pieces. Once I had the drawing, I contacted the greenhouse supply company for the connectors - corner pieces are the really hard ones to find locally - a three pipe connector - 90 degree with a vertical for the third pipe. When I expand it to six feet, the back has a couple of extra verticals to help support it without sagging. I bought the pipe clamps to secure a diffuser (white cloth) to the box and I put the colored backdrops inside that. You can see in the photo how the diffuser is pulled back for clarity on the frame. The small box is basically a two foot cube, to enlarge it I can add a two foot "wing" to either side, or both for a six foot box. When enlarged, the two front legs of the two foot box are removed - different connectors required. Hope that helped.

Edit: Nothing is glued, all pieces are press-fit when needed.

Computalotapus
13 December 2013, 11:33
I drew out what I wanted, and just cut the pieces. Once I had the drawing, I contacted the greenhouse supply company for the connectors - corner pieces are the really hard ones to find locally - a three pipe connector - 90 degree with a vertical for the third pipe. When I expand it to six feet, the back has a couple of extra verticals to help support it without sagging. I bought the pipe clamps to secure a diffuser (white cloth) to the box and I put the colored backdrops inside that. You can see in the photo how the diffuser is pulled back for clarity on the frame. The small box is basically a two foot cube, to enlarge it I can add a two foot "wing" to either side, or both for a six foot box. When enlarged, the two front legs of the two foot box are removed - different connectors required. Hope that helped.

Edit: Nothing is glued, all pieces are press-fit when needed.

I spent about an hour looking at your photo. I think I have an idea on how it all needs to be put together. I gotta find a way to flatten the surface of my table first..maybe screw down a sheet of plexiglass or lexan

voodoo_man
13 December 2013, 12:57
Skimmed through the thread, good info.

Once piece I'd like some people who do this to comment on is watermarking an image. I do not seem to bother with it (usually) and even though Stick's watermark is awesome, I do not want to copy his sweet idea, any suggestions?

Jerry R
13 December 2013, 16:50
I have started watermarking some of my photos. Not that they are worth stealing, but just to identify the "author". If done subtly, it does not distract from the image. Stick, and some of the other admins and staff are professionals. They need to protect their work. As to suggestions, pick a symbol/name/something that is not only unique, but meaningful in that it reflects on you - recognizable as being yours alone, something from your personal history.

MoxyDave
16 December 2013, 12:22
Hey guys, I've been using this setup for a while now. I get decent images, but my camera is old & busted and I could use more light. It's a Canon Digital Rebel that my friend saved - it was waterlogged and he got it working but several features don't work, such as the flash and Live View. I've used it a lot and I think I'm finally to the point where I believe I've exceeded the capabilities of the camera and setup.

I want to create a bigger, better setup to accommodate large items such as a full-length AR15. This will be necessary to post photos for my upcoming Stickman 50K giveaway rifle build.

I also want to do some video work with a green screen, so I need continuous lighting and lots of it.

I have about 150 square feet of space that I can dedicate to a studio. It will be multi-purpose, so it would be nice if everything were easily moveable & stowable so that I could rearrange for various work. I have to do a lot with this limited space, and I only have a couple 15 Amp outlets nearby so power efficiency is also a huge concern.

Should I try to find another, larger self-contained lightbox? Or build a setup myself? What lights would you recommend? Do you use a lighted table? Are specific fabrics important or will bed sheets work?

I'm more interested in feedback about the lightbox and the lighting. I'll upgrade the camera too, but that is a much more personal-preference kind of decision.

Any input would be greatly appreciated!

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44963125/Hosted%20Photos/WEVO/SmallLightbox.jpg

Stickman
16 December 2013, 17:40
Are you sure those are the only issues with the waterlogged camera? I'm curious to see some of your pictures from that setup. Maybe you've already posted some and I just missed it?

MoxyDave
16 December 2013, 20:12
Yeah it's kind of surprising he was able to recover it, but it seems to work ok for basic shots.

IIRC, most of these were taken with a Canon 35-80 lens.

Here are some examples, both in the lightbox and out:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44963125/Hosted%20Photos/WEVO/Canon%20Rebel%20Examples/Rebel%20Example%20Photos/small/Viking01.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44963125/Hosted%20Photos/WEVO/Canon%20Rebel%20Examples/Rebel%20Example%20Photos/small/BoBaby01.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44963125/Hosted%20Photos/WEVO/Canon%20Rebel%20Examples/Rebel%20Example%20Photos/small/LentilSkull01.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44963125/Hosted%20Photos/WEVO/Canon%20Rebel%20Examples/Rebel%20Example%20Photos/small/LentilSkull03.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44963125/Hosted%20Photos/WEVO/Canon%20Rebel%20Examples/Rebel%20Example%20Photos/small/LentilSkull01a.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44963125/Hosted%20Photos/WEVO/Canon%20Rebel%20Examples/Rebel%20Example%20Photos/small/LentilSkull01b.jpg

UWone77
17 December 2013, 18:52
Dave,

Your 3D printing models again are excellent. What can't you make?

The photos look pretty good as well. Not bad for a broken camera. Personally, I like the Alien Bee lights. They are cost effective (compared to other professional lights) and I was turned onto them by Roy from Weapon Outfitters. Might want to look into those.

MoxyDave
18 December 2013, 11:22
Thanks man! The skull is Lentil's, a French Bulldog born with a cleft palate:

My Name is Lentil on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/MyNameIsLentil)

We used imagery from a CT scan to create a 3D model, cleaned it up and printed it for his foster mom.

We've been pursuing work in the medical industry in addition to prototyping and other kinds of work. It's pretty amazing stuff.

I will look into the Alien Bee lights. Thanks for the tip!

I brought my camera rig home for the holidaze. I'm going to practice a lot so expect more photos soon [:)]

MoxyDave
2 January 2014, 17:18
I found a great series of videos that explains a ton about product photography. These answered so many questions for me! From setting up the camera to advanced post-production there is something here for everyone.

I learned how to use Tethered Shooting (camera attached to computer) with my Canon over the holiday. It makes a WORLD of difference. Now I can get my shots much closer to how I see them in my head with a lot less time and effort [:)]

Here's a preview. This is the first of 7 videos:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U89BNaXObd0

DMViergever
31 March 2014, 09:21
Awesome thread, thanks to UWone77 for pointing it out. The schedule 40 idea is awesome, I built mine out of 2x4s and made it too dang short. The biggest issue I have had is finding paper locally that is wide enough to fill in behind a rifle and shoot angles.
http://i702.photobucket.com/albums/ww27/DMViergever/Mobile%20Uploads/CAM00345_zpsglhpbmc2.jpg

For my full rifle shots I have a white piece of paper on the wall and I shine two 100 watt daylight bulbs on it and one on the rifle. The red circles are on the background the green is on the rifle.
http://i702.photobucket.com/albums/ww27/DMViergever/Mobile%20Uploads/2014-03-20-10-38-35_zpsfaamw6rj.png

The rifle is hanging about 3 or 4 foot in front of the paper from my rafters by black fishing line that I patch out with Gimp. Here is the results from that shot from above.
http://i702.photobucket.com/albums/ww27/DMViergever/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_3410_zpswblceqbk.jpg

For blackgrounds I use a felt cloth that drops down over my paper and then I drop down two windshield shades that I found in the basement to block light from my background. I stapled them together and them stapled them to the rafter directly above the rifle. A light is placed right in front of it facing down on the rifle. I have also started putting one one the ground and using a box covered with a black cloth to direct it up to highlight the features a littke better. Here is the setup and a result picture. The autoshade hasn't been edited out yet so you can see how close I get it. http://i702.photobucket.com/albums/ww27/DMViergever/Mobile%20Uploads/CAM00282_zpscy18twh1.jpg
]http://i702.photobucket.com/albums/ww27/DMViergever/IMG_3234_zps05b6277c.jpg

The extra light really helps
http://i702.photobucket.com/albums/ww27/DMViergever/IMG_3751_zpscd818e0b.jpg

I use a Canon 60D and use a Macro lens for nearly everything since it is so crisp and has my widest field of view.

I am playing with a new way of getting shadowless photos on a white background also. Hanging them works good for complete rifles but isn't great for accessories.

Jerry R
31 March 2014, 09:56
Personally, I like the Alien Bee lights. They are cost effective (compared to other professional lights).

I agree. I had been looking at the Bees for awhile. This year, the Wife gave me an early B'day present - a pair of B800's with air-cushioned light stands and umbrellas. I have been shooting with continuous lighting for decades, and I can't believe the difference strobes make. I've only had them a couple of weeks, so I'm still learning, but I really like them.

MoxyDave
31 March 2014, 14:45
Thanks for posting your setup DMViergever. I have been thinking along the same lines, suspending a full rifle with floss or fishing line ...

I did some research a while back into LED lights. They work so well for handhelds lights, too bad they suck for photography!

DMViergever
31 March 2014, 15:42
Thanks for posting your setup DMViergever. I have been thinking along the same lines, suspending a full rifle with floss or fishing line ...

I did some research a while back into LED lights. They work so well for handhelds lights, too bad they suck for photography!

For lighting I use heat lamps like you would for a chicken coop. I got them at wal-mart for like 10 bucks a piece. The bigger they are the further the bulb sits back in there and the better the light seems to work. As was said above, getting daylight bulbs and the same brand is very important. Some of my 100 watt are the GE brand and others are great value. Great value has a yellow tint where GE has a good clean white. I haven't seen the GE in stock again in a while or I would buy some. I diffuse with thin white cloth or I bought some 10 inch diffusers that have like a hair net sewn on that makes it stay put.

ETA: i might save up for the bee lights.

Computalotapus
13 April 2014, 20:58
Well my first attempts at making a lightbox. Need to get some brighter bulbs that is for sure but with some processing afterwards we get a decent picture.... not professional but decent

http://www.computalotapus.com/images/lightbox.jpg

UWone77
14 April 2014, 13:32
You guys are pretty creative on the lighting!

DMViergever
16 April 2014, 09:59
You guys are pretty creative on the lighting!

Haha creative is probably a kind way of putting it! I like the brick idea though!

Computalotapus
16 April 2014, 12:42
Haha creative is probably a kind way of putting it! I like the brick idea though!




Haha I just grabbed what was available. Gonna make some PVC adjustable stands soon.





Sent from my Nokia Lumia Icon using Tapatalk

DMViergever
16 April 2014, 20:36
Haha I just grabbed what was available. Gonna make some PVC adjustable stands soon.





Sent from my Nokia Lumia Icon using Tapatalk

I was being serious, I shoot a lot of different objects and am always moving and adjusting lights. You see what I use, big chairs and bar stools haha. I like the brick idea for sure.

UWone77
4 June 2014, 21:30
I keep getting messages about photography, so I'm just going to bump this thread as there is a lot more information here than I could give out. Please remember I am very much an amateur much like the rest of you guys, so we're all learning from each other.

Maybe some of the actual professionals will chime in this thread more...

Ride4frnt
4 June 2014, 21:52
Subscribed. Was looking for this one.

Pyzik
5 June 2014, 09:22
There are some GREAT tips in here! Glad I stumbled in!

Thanks UWone77 for the bump.

voodoo_man
21 June 2014, 12:30
Can anyone help me out on where to start - need to get a watermark going and I don't know if just putting "voodoo_man" on every picture is worth doing or getting a stickman style picture. Any opinions/suggestions?

RiverRat
21 June 2014, 15:10
Can anyone help me out on where to start - need to get a watermark going and I don't know if just putting "voodoo_man" on every picture is worth doing or getting a stickman style picture. Any opinions/suggestions?

I have to think an unobtrusive graphic of a voodoo doll, properly pinned with an AR in hand, is in your future.

UWone77
21 June 2014, 15:16
For me, it's just out of laziness I don't watermark. I've seen my pictures floating around the net once in awhile.

voodoo_man
21 June 2014, 17:56
I have to think an unobtrusive graphic of a voodoo doll, properly pinned with an AR in hand, is in your future.

You would be my hero.

DMViergever
25 June 2014, 12:07
I paid a decent amout for a logo for the website and stickers and such and ended up just using it. The Voodoo doll sounds legit.

UWone77
25 June 2014, 12:26
I paid a decent amout for a logo for the website and stickers and such and ended up just using it. The Voodoo doll sounds legit.

Your logo looks good. I like it.

You're starting to be a big deal... [adore]

voodoo_man
25 June 2014, 16:04
I was looking for a voodoo doll to photochop and/or find someone locally that can do it, but they wanted some, nearly crazy amount of money for it, and since this is a hobby-only type of work for me, its not really something I am willing to spend that type of money for. FYI, if I havn't posted this before, I refuse to take money for my pictures and/or reviews - I've literally ripped up checks and returned items on my own dime because this is a hobby for me and I don't want it to be anything else.

Ride4frnt
26 June 2014, 12:47
Here's a question for you photo folks. In the market for an external shutter release. Haven't looked into them much, but would prefer wireless. My question is, are there external release remotes with which you can manipulate the settings of the camera, or are they pretty much just for the shutter button alone.

Shooting with a canon T2i

voodoo_man
26 June 2014, 18:12
got an email just now - this is why I'd like to put a watermark on my photo's - https://www.facebook.com/FullOfWeapons/photos_stream - I see some others from WEVO guys, kinda sad. Really sad that some of them are credited to other users....

voodoo_man
7 August 2014, 08:32
buddy of mine put this logo together, opinions? Yes I put it there on purpose.

http://i.imgur.com/6yU9FPY.jpg

one more

http://i.imgur.com/FSyLi39.jpg

UWone77
7 August 2014, 09:00
Looks great!

Jerry R
12 August 2014, 13:34
I like it - tell your buddy - nice work !

Battle Cock
7 September 2014, 18:51
During this evening's photoshoot I happened upon a most interesting backdrop. I love how it looks like there are explosions going off in the background and I'm curious if any of you can figure out what it is.

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc43/lobacha/Stippling/bbaf2cbb-fe76-43f7-bf46-b4a4e0bd8d52_zpsf25a5b26.jpg (http://s212.photobucket.com/user/lobacha/media/Stippling/bbaf2cbb-fe76-43f7-bf46-b4a4e0bd8d52_zpsf25a5b26.jpg.html)

Ride4frnt
7 September 2014, 19:03
During this evening's photoshoot I happened upon a most interesting backdrop. I love how it looks like there are explosions going off in the background and I'm curious if any of you can figure out what it is.

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc43/lobacha/Stippling/bbaf2cbb-fe76-43f7-bf46-b4a4e0bd8d52_zpsf25a5b26.jpg (http://s212.photobucket.com/user/lobacha/media/Stippling/bbaf2cbb-fe76-43f7-bf46-b4a4e0bd8d52_zpsf25a5b26.jpg.html)

I'm gonna go with baking sheet.

Pyzik
7 September 2014, 19:04
I'm gonna go with baking sheet.
Oooh, good guess.

I was thinking some type of rusted steel but have changed my mind. That blue spot in the lower right is throwing me.

Battle Cock
7 September 2014, 19:05
I'm gonna go with baking sheet.

Its a good thing I didn't offer a prize or I'd already have to give it away!

UWone77
7 September 2014, 19:09
Stick tried to be slick with a baking sheet last year. People figured it out pretty fast.

Battle Cock
7 September 2014, 19:17
Stick tried to be slick with a baking sheet last year. People figured it out pretty fast.

I didn't even know that much. This was more of an epiphany I had while reheating a burrito!

Ride4frnt
7 September 2014, 21:01
I didn't even know that much. This was more of an epiphany I had while reheating a burrito!

And it was a pretty good one. Made for a nice photo.

CarbonScoring
6 October 2014, 22:01
Another thing people might find useful is to remember you don't need a lot of lights. Even a single flash can be used.

For me, the key to using 1 light source is reflectors. The great thing about reflecting light is that it's free (or close to). You can use almost anything as a reflector, as long as it's bright enough to not absorb the light. White tag board or poster board work well, are cheap, and can be cut down to whatever size you need. You can even bounce a flash off of a wall or ceiling to get nice soft, even light. One of my favorite materials is sheet styrene. It's stiff enough that is stands up well and is much whiter and more durable than paper.

This was shot with 1 flash, camera right, and a piece of styrene, camera left.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3755/12000013554_52750b8553_b.jpg

Just put the reflecting material as close as you can without it getting in the shot. If the reflected light is too much, start pulling it away.

Also, reflectors don't have to be white. You can add a nice, colored glow with a colored reflector.

Thompson
6 October 2014, 22:40
Another thing people might find useful is to remember you don't need a lot of lights. Even a single flash can be used.

For me, the key to using 1 light source is reflectors. The great thing about reflecting light is that it's free (or close to). You can use almost anything as a reflector, as long as it's bright enough to not absorb the light. White tag board or poster board work well, are cheap, and can be cut down to whatever size you need. You can even bounce a flash off of a wall or ceiling to get nice soft, even light. One of my favorite materials is sheet styrene. It's stiff enough that is stands up well and is much whiter and more durable than paper.

This was shot with 1 flash, camera right, and a piece of styrene, camera left.

Just put the reflecting material as close as you can without it getting in the shot. If the reflected light is too much, start pulling it away.

Also, reflectors don't have to be white. You can add a nice, colored glow with a colored reflector.

Hey Carbon, have any good links on using reflectors/tutorials? Have always loved photography (rockin' a Nikon D5100), and have primarily been doing candid/sports photography - but would like to try a shot in the firearms world.

CarbonScoring
7 October 2014, 03:04
There aren't a lot of good tutorials that I could find. Most were for portraits. This one has a decent look at the set up with examples of how white and black reflectors change the look.

http://makingniceinthemidwest.com/2014/01/20/lighting-tips-tricks-for-bloggers-photographers/

Here's another one. They talk about the store bought reflectors, but you can do the same thing with white poster board.

http://photography.tutsplus.com/articles/quick-tip-using-a-simple-portable-reflector--photo-3397



Also, this article seemed apropos

http://jefflynchdev.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/one-light-product-photography/

Thompson
7 October 2014, 08:00
There aren't a lot of good tutorials that I could find. Most were for portraits. This one has a decent look at the set up with examples of how white and black reflectors change the look.

http://makingniceinthemidwest.com/2014/01/20/lighting-tips-tricks-for-bloggers-photographers/

Here's another one. They talk about the store bought reflectors, but you can do the same thing with white poster board.

http://photography.tutsplus.com/articles/quick-tip-using-a-simple-portable-reflector--photo-3397



Also, this article seemed apropos

http://jefflynchdev.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/one-light-product-photography/
Many thanks; I'll take a look at them when I get the chance this weekend!

Ride4frnt
7 October 2014, 10:22
Many thanks; I'll take a look at them when I get the chance this weekend!

I know you asked him about his equipment in the other thread, but I didnt wanna clutter it up with more photography resources. One I recently discovered is borrowlenses.com

You can rent almost any lens you want, macro, tilt shift, telephoto. Also can rent strobes and light setups and even camera bodies. Pretty convenient to try something out before you drop a bunch of coin on it. As far as lenses are concerned, if you don't have canon or nikon money to buy name brand lenses, rokinon and tokina are both well reviewed and a fraction of the cost, and you can rent those as well. I'm looking to buy me a tokina 11-16mm

Thompson
7 October 2014, 11:18
I know you asked him about his equipment in the other thread, but I didnt wanna clutter it up with more photography resources. One I recently discovered is borrowlenses.com

You can rent almost any lens you want, macro, tilt shift, telephoto. Also can rent strobes and light setups and even camera bodies. Pretty convenient to try something out before you drop a bunch of coin on it. As far as lenses are concerned, if you don't have canon or nikon money to buy name brand lenses, rokinon and tokina are both well reviewed and a fraction of the cost, and you can rent those as well. I'm looking to buy me a tokina 11-16mm
You Sir - deserve brownie points [:D]. Have you ever had problems with renting from that website?

I don't have much money period haha. All of it's getting dumped towards my Jack Carbine [:)] Plus now's not really the time for me to be purchasing any more camera gear; between college, Army, and shooting haha. I'll have to take a look at Rokinon and Tokina. I've never heard of those 2 before, surprisingly. Back when I did all my research into camera stuff, I've run into Sigma and Tamron - but never those 2 you mentioned.

UWone77
7 October 2014, 13:50
Another thing people might find useful is to remember you don't need a lot of lights. Even a single flash can be used.

For me, the key to using 1 light source is reflectors. The great thing about reflecting light is that it's free (or close to). You can use almost anything as a reflector, as long as it's bright enough to not absorb the light. White tag board or poster board work well, are cheap, and can be cut down to whatever size you need. You can even bounce a flash off of a wall or ceiling to get nice soft, even light. One of my favorite materials is sheet styrene. It's stiff enough that is stands up well and is much whiter and more durable than paper.

This was shot with 1 flash, camera right, and a piece of styrene, camera left.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3755/12000013554_52750b8553_b.jpg

Just put the reflecting material as close as you can without it getting in the shot. If the reflected light is too much, start pulling it away.

Also, reflectors don't have to be white. You can add a nice, colored glow with a colored reflector.

Great pic.

I recall Stick first showed me how to reflect lighting from just using a paper plate. It's amazing how you can get results like that with simple household items. Some people are just naturals at mastering the light. Others like me, have to take a ton of pics, and then settle for "decent" [:D]

CarbonScoring
7 October 2014, 18:29
Lack of equipment really does force you to get creative. I started looking at reflectors when all I had was my SB-800. I wanted a more "professional" look and couldn't think how to get it until I heard someone talking about bouncing light and it was an epiphany.

mustangfreek
8 October 2014, 03:37
Great pic.

I recall Stick first showed me how to reflect lighting from just using a paper plate. It's amazing how you can get results like that with simple household items. Some people are just naturals at mastering the light. Others like me, have to take a ton of pics, and then settle for "decent" [:D]



haha...you should see me when i try to take anything remotely good with the old iphone 4...lol...

Your pics are good UW....

Thompson
8 October 2014, 10:28
haha...you should see me when i try to take anything remotely good with the old iphone 4...lol...
Hey - give the iPhone some credit - those things can take some really decent photos; even having some features modeling DSLRs. :P

MoxyDave
16 October 2014, 18:48
Note to self: be more careful shooting on a black background. I shot the Stickman 50K rifle using a black cloth background, and I didn't get it far enough away from the background. So now either I waste a ton of time trying to mask the rifle in Photoshop to make the background disappear, or I just drop the blacks down in Lightroom which makes everything else look too dark.

In retrospect, I should have used a green background. Then I could use a chroma-key filter to remove the background in about 30 seconds. This is how it's done in film. For example your local weather forecast is all performed in front of a green screen. They just eliminate the background and put the fancy computer graphics in it's place.

Oh well, lesson learned ...

CarbonScoring
17 October 2014, 07:31
You still would have needed to pull the rifle away from the background if you were using green. It might reflect green onto the rifle itself and then you run into the problem of accidentally removing part of the gun, or have a green edge to the gun.

Either way, if you want a sold color background, you want to move the gun away from it.

MoxyDave
17 October 2014, 14:14
Definitely. I look forward to trying it again [:)]

voodoo_man
17 October 2014, 14:25
You still would have needed to pull the rifle away from the background if you were using green. It might reflect green onto the rifle itself and then you run into the problem of accidentally removing part of the gun, or have a green edge to the gun.

Either way, if you want a sold color background, you want to move the gun away from it.


How do you suggest doing that?

I have experimented with putting on "stilts" using another tripod with a clamp, results vary...

Ride4frnt
17 October 2014, 14:35
How do you suggest doing that?

I have experimented with putting on "stilts" using another tripod with a clamp, results vary...

Suspended with fishing line.

voodoo_man
17 October 2014, 15:12
Suspended with fishing line.

You know I tried that, I might have been using the wrong fishing line...also have the wrong setup for that lol

Ride4frnt
17 October 2014, 15:31
You know I tried that, I might have been using the wrong fishing line...also have the wrong setup for that lol

Certain kinds (monofilament or fluorocarbon) react differently to certain kinds of light. When we fish at night we use fluorocarbon and hang a black light over the side of the boat. It looks about the size of a fluorescent light bulb shooting through the water.

voodoo_man
17 October 2014, 16:15
Certain kinds (monofilament or fluorocarbon) react differently to certain kinds of light. When we fish at night we use fluorocarbon and hang a black light over the side of the boat. It looks about the size of a fluorescent light bulb shooting through the water.

That's the problem I am not a fisherman, I just got some random fishing line. LOL

CarbonScoring
17 October 2014, 16:20
I agree, fishing line (or similar) to hang the item is probably the best. If your issue with that voodoo_man is the line showing up, you may need to remove it in Photoshop. You also need a pretty strong setup to support the rifle. I have a real cheap backdrop stand set, and I could never support something as heavy as a rifle with it. If you have overhead rafter, you could hang it from that. Otherwise, children work. [:)]

If you're taking a photo of a rifle, but won't be getting the ends in the shot, you can raise it up with boxes.

Ride4frnt
17 October 2014, 16:22
That's the problem I am not a fisherman, I just got some random fishing line. LOL

Is say your best bet would be some clear 4lb monofilament. It's very thin, and shouldn't transmit so much light. Keep in mind 4lb doesn't necessarily mean it will break with 4lb of force, it'll handle a bit more, should hold an ar and other things up

voodoo_man
17 October 2014, 16:26
Thanks guys.

I will try some stuff later on, I am thinking about building a dual use setup with PVC pipes, this might give me a reason to do it.

MoxyDave
17 October 2014, 20:27
Suspended with fishing line.

Bingo. That's what I used. I had to use heavy-duty 20lb line. The lesser stuff kept breaking. Also a good idea to tie off at least 3 points to keep the gun still. I used 2 and it worked but was not optimal.

Use the Spot Healing Brush in Photoshop to easily remove the lines.

voodoo_man
18 October 2014, 21:57
So I picked up some really thing 4lb fishing line, did the suspension thing on a white background and on green. Here are my results (did both black and white backgrounds for comparison of result)

One thing I couldn't get the white outline on the Glock to disappear on the black background. I also had trouble with the green background not reflecting onto the edges. I think I needed more light than I used (two stationary and a flash) Suggestions?

Opinions?

http://i.imgur.com/yikls9C.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/D8bNK7W.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/tZlunz6.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/UC9hXr7.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/aHo7UcH.jpg

Ride4frnt
18 October 2014, 23:38
So I picked up some really thing 4lb fishing line, did the suspension thing on a white background and on green. Here are my results (did both black and white backgrounds for comparison of result)

One thing I couldn't get the white outline on the Glock to disappear on the black background. I also had trouble with the green background not reflecting onto the edges. I think I needed more light than I used (two stationary and a flash) Suggestions?

Opinions?

http://i.imgur.com/yikls9C.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/D8bNK7W.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/tZlunz6.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/UC9hXr7.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/aHo7UcH.jpg

Nice! So the 4lb worked out for you? Try a rifle yet?

voodoo_man
19 October 2014, 08:07
Nice! So the 4lb worked out for you? Try a rifle yet?

It "sorta" worked. I just strung it up between two chairs...LOL

Difficult to get the object to get setup on the right place each time without swinging or the like.

I doubt the 4lb is going to work for a rifle. It barely worked for the glock.

voodoo_man
24 November 2014, 12:50
trying some stuff out


http://i.imgur.com/grTCe1l.jpg

Pyzik
24 November 2014, 13:23
I've been trying to figure out stringing up rifles too. Problem for me is that our backroom where I take pics has a drop ceiling and I'm afraid to damage it.

For your lighting issue, try lighting the backdrop more with it's own light to blow it out.
(Not to sound like I REALLY know what I am doing, just trying to help. I was having the same white outline issue you're having until I blew out the backrgound with it's own light.)

voodoo_man
24 November 2014, 13:25
I've been trying to figure out stringing up rifles too. Problem for me is that our backroom where I take pics has a drop ceiling and I'm afraid to damage it.

For your lighting issue, try lighting the backdrop more with it's own light to blow it out.

Believe it not it was done on a green screen bacakground and a white screen - tried both. So the green is the only one that blew the colors out

Pyzik
24 November 2014, 13:30
Believe it not it was done on a green screen bacakground and a white screen - tried both. So the green is the only one that blew the colors out

Gotchya. I haven't tried my black or green yet. Just white.
Maybe I'll play with the other two this weekend. I need to take some product pictures anyway for my local gun org.

I was doing the same as you. Too much post processing.
Example: The yellow on my shoulders in these and too much shadow on one side. I tried editing myself out. Having a hard time.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-_gAkezmfNkY/VGn8QPdlbUI/AAAAAAAAB88/oEZ-QQxSH7g/w801-h873-no/DSC_07161.jpg

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-MseWacKHuUI/VGn8QDCUYBI/AAAAAAAAB9E/LfKCyB-asew/w801-h873-no/DSC_07162.jpg

Might just have to breakdown and either leave myself in the photo as the "model" or buy a torso.

UWone77
4 December 2014, 08:47
Bumping yet again for the new guys who want to take pictures.

toolboxluis00200
4 December 2014, 09:27
i so need to build a box

Thompson
6 December 2014, 09:43
... so I'm curious, just hear what all lenses you guys use to shoot with - I guess for what I'll call firearm portrait photography (ie: the pictures that UW posts on Facebook). Do you guys shoot with anything less than a 35mm (I feel like any smaller and it will distort the picture due to fringing). Is 50mm a common focal length to shoot with (I know it's commonly used for people portrait photography).

Currently I have a 35mm f/1.8 and a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6

CarbonScoring
6 December 2014, 09:59
I use a 50mm 1.8 and a 100mm 2.8 macro almost exclusively. I've got other lenses, but I find I never use them.

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 10:03
... so I'm curious, just hear what all lenses you guys use to shoot with - I guess for what I'll call firearm portrait photography (ie: the pictures that UW posts on Facebook). Do you guys shoot with anything less than a 35mm (I feel like any smaller and it will distort the picture due to fringing). Is 50mm a common focal length to shoot with (I know it's commonly used for people portrait photography).

Currently I have a 35mm f/1.8 and a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6


This is going to be dependent on the camera and sensor size. With a medium format camera your field of view is much wider with the same focal length. With a 35mm it will be another and with a 1.5 crop (or any other crop) it will be yet another. So you could have a 50mm lens and have three different fields of view. Focal length is merely the measurement from the front element to the sensor. On my camera it's a 1.5 crop sensor so you have the whole equivalency thing.

Thompson
6 December 2014, 10:05
I use a 50mm 1.8 and a 100mm 2.8 macro almost exclusively. I've got other lenses, but I find I never use them.
Figured the 50mm would be ideal. Something I've been meaning to pick up ... until I got into guns ;) Macro is way out of my budget for the foreseeable future. Guess I'll be stuck with renting it for now.

I remember, a while back, someone posted a link (GOST maybe) to a website for camera gear rentals - does anyone remember what website that was?

Would like to take a shot at doing some portrait work when the Jack comes home.


This is going to be dependent on the camera and sensor size. With a medium format camera your field of view is much wider with the same focal length. With a 35mm it will be another and with a 1.5 crop (or any other crop) it will be yet another. So you could have a 50mm lens and have three different fields of view. Focal length is merely the measurement from the front element to the sensor. On my camera it's a 1.5 crop sensor so you have the whole equivalency thing.
Yeah, I got a Nikon D5100 - it's a half frame camera (1.5x crop).

If I remember correctly though, that crop factor only comes into play between a half frame camera and a full frame lens, right?

CarbonScoring
6 December 2014, 10:08
This is going to be dependent on the camera and sensor size. With a medium format camera your field of view is much wider with the same focal length. With a 35mm it will be another and with a 1.5 crop (or any other crop) it will be yet another. So you could have a 50mm lens and have three different fields of view. Focal length is merely the measurement from the front element to the sensor. On my camera it's a 1.5 crop sensor so you have the whole equivalency thing.

I didn't feel like typing all that up. Glad you did [:D]

I use a Nikon D700, which has a full frame sensor. My 50mm is 50mm.

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 10:10
Figured the 50mm would be ideal. Something I've been meaning to pick up ... until I got into guns ;) Macro is way out of my budget for the foreseeable future. Guess I'll be stuck with renting it for now.

I remember, a while back, someone posted a link (GOST maybe) to a website for camera gear rentals - does anyone remember what website that was?

Would like to take a shot at doing some portrait work when the Jack comes home.

Why do you need a special lens for macro? I shoot macro all the time. I have a decent legacy lens that is completely manual with an aperture ring on it ($100) and a $20 reverse ring and you have instant 1:1 magnification. With a 28mm lens you get even MORE magnification. (about 3x to be exact) It all depends on how small of stuff you want to shoot.

One of the perks of my camera system is it is 100% reverse compatible. Any lens ever made I can use... and they've never changed the lens mount. I have lenses that are at least as old as I am and I can use them so my 'macro' lenses are dual use...frontwards for normal shots and backwards for macro.

And if you get extension tubes you can get even really really macro.

You can use any lens for macro pretty much as long as it has an aperture ring on it. Primes are the best. 28mm and 50mm are the most common.

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 10:17
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8343/8209289427_636ec14a10_c.jpg

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5513/9440576504_da74624991_c.jpg

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 10:24
Check this out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmMcCjEU68Y

Here is his website.

http://thomasshahan.com/#photos

CarbonScoring
6 December 2014, 10:30
Figured the 50mm would be ideal. Something I've been meaning to pick up ... until I got into guns ;) Macro is way out of my budget for the foreseeable future.

My macro is a Tokina 100mm 2.8. It's relatively inexpensive at around $400.


Yeah, I got a Nikon D5100 - it's a half frame camera (1.5x crop).

Technically, that's 2/3 the size of a full frame sensor.


If I remember correctly though, that crop factor only comes into play between a half frame camera and a full frame lens, right?

Think of it like this.... (and I realize I may just make this more confusing)

A lens projects a circular image into the camera. The sensor has to fit inside that circle. Standard 35mm format lenses produce an image circle big enough to fit a 35mm piece of film (or a full frame sensor equivalent).

A cropped sensor is just smaller and will use the center of that same projected image. Because you are, in effect, cropping the image down to show a smaller field of view, you are getting an image more similar to a image taken on a full frame camera with a longer focal length lens.

See this illustration:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images4/scaly4.jpg

The difference is, though you are basically zooming in (a 50mm lens on a 1.5x cropped sensor has a field of view of a 75mm lens), the focal length is still 50mm.

On a cropped sensor of 1.5x, using a 35mm focal length lens, you get the field of view of 52.5mm, but you still will have the wide angle distortion of a 35mm focal length lens.

50mm is, generally, equivalent to the human eye and shows the least distortion. Shorter and you start getting barrel distortion (like a fish eye lens) and longer that 50mm and you start getting pin cushion distortion. For portraits of people, a slightly longer lens is generally favorable because it's more flattering and it puts the photographer at a good distance from your subject. Thus an 85mm-135mm lens is a popular choice. For art reproduction, you want to eliminate distortion, so 55mm Macros are popular.

I find that 50mm is really good for shooting entire rifles and 100mm is good for parts or sections of rifles. That's me, and you may be different.

Sorry if that was a bit of a ramble. I'll try to explain better if anyone wants clarification.

This is a good article if you want more info: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/dslr-mag.shtml

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 10:31
Yeah, I got a Nikon D5100 - it's a half frame camera (1.5x crop).

If I remember correctly though, that crop factor only comes into play between a half frame camera and a full frame lens, right?

No. This is incorrect. The larger the sensor the different the field of view. Or vice versa. There are about a dozen different sensor sizes and all will be different. What you see through the lens is called your field of view... or angle of view.... the smaller the sensor the tighter the shot. The larger the sensor the wider the shot...with the same focal length.

CarbonScoring
6 December 2014, 10:33
If I remember correctly though, that crop factor only comes into play between a half frame camera and a full frame lens, right?

No, even the Nikon DX lenses (the ones that only work on cropped sensor cameras) are labeled as full frame lenses. This is because the mm number is the focal length, not the field of veiw

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 10:34
I didn't feel like typing all that up. Glad you did [:D]

I use a Nikon D700, which has a full frame sensor. My 50mm is 50mm.

People often misunderstand crop sensors. A 50mm lens is a 50mm lens no matter what. It has the exact same characteristics on one body as the other. It does not offer more 'magnification' when you go to a crop sensor, you just see less of the frame. The camera just plucks out the center part of the light circle and records that.

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 10:36
Here is a basic chart of the camera sensor sizes...

http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2012/10/allsensors.jpg

Thompson
6 December 2014, 10:36
Why do you need a special lens for macro? I shoot macro all the time. I have a decent legacy lens that is completely manual with an aperture ring on it ($100) and a $20 reverse ring and you have instant 1:1 magnification. With a 28mm lens you get even MORE magnification. (about 3x to be exact) It all depends on how small of stuff you want to shoot.

One of the perks of my camera system is it is 100% reverse compatible. Any lens ever made I can use... and they've never changed the lens mount. I have lenses that are at least as old as I am and I can use them so my 'macro' lenses are dual use...frontwards for normal shots and backwards for macro.

And if you get extension tubes you can get even really really macro.

You can use any lens for macro pretty much as long as it has an aperture ring on it. Primes are the best. 28mm and 50mm are the most common.
Unfortunately I can't shoot with manual. My vision is way too crappy for that (every time I've tried shooting manual, the pictures are out of focus or not fully crisp). So, I'm stuck with autofocusing.

I'm not sure what type of camera you use, but I've thought about using extension tubes. My only problem is (if I remember this correctly - been a very very very long time since I've looked into camera gear) that with the extension tube - you lose electrical connectiion with the lens, in other words I'd lose autofocus and more importantly aperture changes.

And I'm not quite sure what an aperture ring or a reverse ring is.

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 10:44
Unfortunately I can't shoot with manual. My vision is way too crappy for that (every time I've tried shooting manual, the pictures are out of focus or not fully crisp). So, I'm stuck with autofocusing.

I'm not sure what type of camera you use, but I've thought about using extension tubes. My only problem is (if I remember this correctly - been a very very very long time since I've looked into camera gear) that with the extension tube - you lose electrical connectiion with the lens, in other words I'd lose autofocus and more importantly aperture changes.

And I'm not quite sure what an aperture ring or a reverse ring is.

Yes you will lose connectivity. And no you will not have autofocus. I have good vision and I use the live view to get my subjects in focus...but I do so by moving the camera back and forth until it's in focus. It's not as hard as you might think (until you start trying to take pictures of moving things)

A reverse ring is a ring that has a camera mount (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc etc) on one end and filter threads on the other. You screw it into the filter threads and mount your lens on backwards.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/121032821609?lpid=82


An aperture ring is one where you can control your F number f1.8, f2.8 etc etc and so on manually. You can pick up cheap lenses that are great for macro for $50. It doesn't matter the brand. just get your reverse ring and make sure the filter threads match up... my lenses are mainly 49mm so I have a 49mm filter thread to a Pentax mount...but you can get a 58mm thread to a Canon mount or Nikon or whatever you want... any combo is out there.

I use all Pentax gear.

http://theangelwing.weebly.com/uploads/7/9/0/0/7900012/4745152_orig.jpg

CarbonScoring
6 December 2014, 10:46
Keep in mind, macro has limitations too. Once you start getting that close to objects you have very little depth of field. The amount of the object that is in focus gets very small.


Why do you need a special lens for macro?

One reason for a true macro lens is the aperture. Mine will stop down to f32, giving me a bit more DoF than if I tried using a reverse ring on my 50mm which only goes down to f16.

BTW alamo, nice shots, even if that spider is making my skin crawl. ;)

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 10:53
Keep in mind, macro has limitations too. Once you start getting that close to objects you have very little depth of field. The amount of the object that is in focus gets very small.



One reason for a true macro lens is the aperture. Mine will stop down to f32, giving me a bit more DoF than if I tried using a reverse ring on my 50mm which only goes down to f16.

BTW alamo, nice shots, even if that spider is making my skin crawl. ;)

There are downsides to everything and some upsides... with a 28mm reversed and some extension tubes I can get WAAAAY more magnification than most other lenses on the market. The working distance to subject is small... you have to get right on top of your subject.

With a 'proper' 100mm macro lens you can stand back a little more but you might not have as much magnification with most lenses. I think Canon makes one that goes up to 5x or something. But other than that...

I have found that stopping down too much actually harms the image. The people who really do the extreme macro kind of cheat. They image stack using software. My shots were all shot as is :)

With my lenses I can stop down to f22...

The real issue with macro is again... lighting. Figuring out how to do lighting is the trick. Everything else is not that complicated.

And thank you :) I live in the country so there isn't much to take pictures of.... so I resort to bugs. LOL

CarbonScoring
6 December 2014, 11:01
I have found that stopping down too much actually harms the image. The people who really do the extreme macro kind of cheat. They image stack using software. My shots were all shot as is :)

With my lenses I can stop down to f22...

The real issue with macro is again... lighting. Figuring out how to do lighting is the trick. Everything else is not that complicated.


Yep, every lens has it's sweet spot.

I have done some focus stacking, but I usually find that I don't have the patience. [:D]

The good thing for me is that I do almost everything with artificial lighting. I can't really go outside anywhere around me to photograph firearms too often.

Thompson
6 December 2014, 11:01
Think of it like this.... (and I realize I may just make this more confusing)
Quite the opposite haha - makes more sense now.


Yes you will lose connectivity. And no you will not have autofocus. I have good vision and I use the live view to get my subjects in focus...but I do so by moving the camera back and forth until it's in focus. It's not as hard as you might think (until you start trying to take pictures of moving things)

A reverse ring is a ring that has a camera mount (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc etc) on one end and filter threads on the other. You screw it into the filter threads and mount your lens on backwards.
Oh ok got it. Did some quick digging - that's a pretty neat concept, for cheap. The only thing that freaks me out (more than trying to manually focus) is leaving the pin connection ends exposed. Did you ever have problems with dust/debris getting in your lens?


The real issue with macro is again... lighting. Figuring out how to do lighting is the trick. Everything else is not that complicated.
I think that's a problem with photography in general haha. It either works for you, or against you.

CarbonScoring
6 December 2014, 11:03
The only thing that freaks me out (more than trying to manually focus) is leaving the pin connection ends exposed. Did you ever have problems with dust/debris getting in your lens?

Get yourself a Giottos Rocket Blaster (http://www.giottosusa.com/rocket-blasters).

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 11:04
If I shot Canon I would get one of these:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/mp_e_65mm_f_2_8_1_5x_macro_photo

It offers 5X magnification...but I can do the same magnification with a reversed 28mm lens and some extension tubes.

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 11:06
Quite the opposite haha - makes more sense now.


Oh ok got it. Did some quick digging - that's a pretty neat concept, for cheap. The only thing that freaks me out (more than trying to manually focus) is leaving the pin connection ends exposed. Did you ever have problems with dust/debris getting in your lens?


I think that's a problem with photography in general haha. It either works for you, or against you.

This is why you buy a cheap manual lens from ebay. If you really get outside in the dirt and grit and grime then so what. You can find a cheap 28mm manual lens for $50 and if it gets dusty... clean it off.

By nature if you are outside taking pictures of bugs and stuff your gear will get dirty. Shooting other stuff inside or whatever... not so much.

But I've been pretty dusty and still no problems for me. Everything's been fine.

toolboxluis00200
6 December 2014, 11:07
... so I'm curious, just hear what all lenses you guys use to shoot with - I guess for what I'll call firearm portrait photography (ie: the pictures that UW posts on Facebook). Do you guys shoot with anything less than a 35mm (I feel like any smaller and it will distort the picture due to fringing). Is 50mm a common focal length to shoot with (I know it's commonly used for people portrait photography).

Currently I have a 35mm f/1.8 and a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6
get a 50mm 1.8 or better i have one for my canon and it rocks

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 11:07
I can't really go outside anywhere around me to photograph firearms too often.

What? Why?

I don't understand why.

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 11:09
Oh ok got it. Did some quick digging - that's a pretty neat concept, for cheap. The only thing that freaks me out (more than trying to manually focus) is leaving the pin connection ends exposed. Did you ever have problems with dust/debris getting in your lens?
.

Watch that youtube video I put up a bit ago and go to that guys website. He's a master at the art of macro.

Thompson
6 December 2014, 11:15
Get yourself a Giottos Rocket Blaster (http://www.giottosusa.com/rocket-blasters).
Amazon wishlisted.


Watch that youtube video I put up a bit ago and go to that guys website. He's a master at the art of macro.
Yep - I did. Was a very informative video - interesting to see the way he diffused his flash. Gonna try to play around with this when I get back home for Christmas break.

... and, just so I understand this correctly. To do this inexpensive form of macro photography - I'd need a lens that I could manually change the aperture too, right?

alamo5000
6 December 2014, 11:48
Amazon wishlisted.


Yep - I did. Was a very informative video - interesting to see the way he diffused his flash. Gonna try to play around with this when I get back home for Christmas break.

... and, just so I understand this correctly. To do this inexpensive form of macro photography - I'd need a lens that I could manually change the aperture too, right?

http://www.photographyjam.com/images/17.jpg

http://www.ianwallington.com/graphics/article4/fig3.jpg

If you look on that lens it has a little red box/circle around some numbers... those are your aperture values. You can change them by manually twisting that ring on the lens.

This is how things have worked for a very very long time, but when digital came along people now just control their aperture from in the camera body.

If you decide you want to try it I will help you get hunt a decent lens. You can be doing some major macro for less than $100 easy. Remember... with a reversed 50mm lens it is 1X magnification. With a reversed 28mm it is 3X magnification... and that is just stuck right on the camera body without any extension tubes. The tubes add more magnification.

But yes, you do need a lens with a manual aperture ring on it. They are all over the internet. I will help you get hooked up with something nice if you want.

A decent ring will be about 15 or 20 bucks. A decent lens might be 50-100 bucks depending on what you get. When I first start I wouldn't get tubes yet. Just try out one focal length at a time. But just about anything works.

Thompson
6 December 2014, 13:46
If you look on that lens it has a little red box/circle around some numbers... those are your aperture values. You can change them by manually twisting that ring on the lens.

This is how things have worked for a very very long time, but when digital came along people now just control their aperture from in the camera body.

If you decide you want to try it I will help you get hunt a decent lens. You can be doing some major macro for less than $100 easy. Remember... with a reversed 50mm lens it is 1X magnification. With a reversed 28mm it is 3X magnification... and that is just stuck right on the camera body without any extension tubes. The tubes add more magnification.

But yes, you do need a lens with a manual aperture ring on it. They are all over the internet. I will help you get hooked up with something nice if you want.

A decent ring will be about 15 or 20 bucks. A decent lens might be 50-100 bucks depending on what you get. When I first start I wouldn't get tubes yet. Just try out one focal length at a time. But just about anything works.
In that case, none of my current lenses allow for manual aperture change - all electronically changed.

Appreciate the help. Unfortunately that will have to be put on hold for now. Right I'm saving up for some ammo. But no worries, I'll get back to ya when the time comes [:D]

Ride4frnt
6 December 2014, 15:39
Figured the 50mm would be ideal. Something I've been meaning to pick up ... until I got into guns ;) Macro is way out of my budget for the foreseeable future. Guess I'll be stuck with renting it for now.

I remember, a while back, someone posted a link (GOST maybe) to a website for camera gear rentals - does anyone remember what website that was?

Would like to take a shot at doing some portrait work when the Jack comes home.


Yeah, I got a Nikon D5100 - it's a half frame camera (1.5x crop).

If I remember correctly though, that crop factor only comes into play between a half frame camera and a full frame lens, right?

Borrowlenses.com if it hasn't been mentioned yet.

Thompson
6 December 2014, 19:19
Borrowlenses.com if it hasn't been mentioned yet.
The exact website I was looking for. Thanks much!

Dstrbdmedic167
10 December 2014, 18:24
So I a question for the pros here. I was given a Nikon D40. Nothing special but hey are you gonna argue with free? Anyway all it has is the standard lense that came with it. Is it worth my time and money to mess with this camera since it is a quite a few years old. If it is worth the time what lense should I be looking at so I could attempt to take pictures like you guys. I plan to make a "lightbox" soon but wanted some input.

Ride4frnt
10 December 2014, 18:34
So I a question for the pros here. I was given a Nikon D40. Nothing special but hey are you gonna argue with free? Anyway all it has is the standard lense that came with it. Is it worth my time and money to mess with this camera since it is a quite a few years old. If it is worth the time what lense should I be looking at so I could attempt to take pictures like you guys. I plan to make a "lightbox" soon but wanted some input.

Kit lens should produce decent images once you learn the ins and outs of the camera james. I wouldn't worry about it being older, it's a perfect starting point. Check borrowlenses.com to try some different lenses out. The cheapest lens to buy, and one I feel everyone should have, is a 50mm prime. Check on amazon, b&h, adorama, etc. should be around 100 bucks or so.

Pyzik
10 December 2014, 18:41
I've been using a kit lens almost exclusively. I have a 55-200 that's I get out every once in a while but not frequently.

Learn on the kit lens before you start spending money.

Thompson
10 December 2014, 19:11
The cheapest lens to buy, and one I feel everyone should have, is a 50mm prime. Check on amazon, b&h, adorama, etc. should be around 100 bucks or so.
This might be different for other brands, but a least for Nikon $100 will only get you a manual 50mm prime. The autofocus 50mm prime f/1.8 is around $200.

Pyzik
10 December 2014, 20:57
This might be different for other brands, but a least for Nikon $100 will only get you a manual 50mm prime. The autofocus 50mm prime f/1.8 is around $200.
Yeah, I am dying for a prime (nikon here too). A 35mm is a little cheaper.

Dstrbdmedic167
10 December 2014, 20:59
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LEN4

Is this one not autofocus?

CarbonScoring
10 December 2014, 21:48
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LEN4

Is this one not autofocus?

That one is autofocus, just the older D version.

The D40 does not have a screw drive for focusing, which means you can only autofocus with AF-S lenses. This D version would only work as a manual focus.

Thompson
10 December 2014, 22:23
Yeah, I am dying for a prime (nikon here too). A 35mm is a little cheaper.
Whoo! Another Nikon user! Yes! Meh, it's cheaper by about $20 (depending on where/when you get it of course). I started out with the 35mm f/1.8 and the 70-300mm f/4-5.6. Don't get me wrong, 35mm is great ... but sometimes I find that the angle is a bit too wide for some of the shot I take (I did a lot of sports/candid - and a little bit of portrait), and for some of the portraits I ended up having to crop the image. Been wanting a 50mm f/1.8.

It's all about that bokeh [:D]


That one is autofocus, just the older D version.

The D40 does not have a screw drive for focusing, which means you can only autofocus with AF-S lenses. This D version would only work as a manual focus.
Correct me if I'm wrong, the D lenses, for those to autofocus, they'd need a camera with a built in motor for it to autofocus correct? I remember reading something about that.

CarbonScoring
11 December 2014, 02:20
Correct me if I'm wrong, the D lenses, for those to autofocus, they'd need a camera with a built in motor for it to autofocus correct? I remember reading something about that.

Yep, you successfully rephrased what I wrote. [:D]

As a way to cut costs in the more affordable cameras, Nikon removed the screw drive motor which was/is used on older D lenses (and all previous autofocus lenses). The AF-S lenses use a different technology. When AF-S was first released, it was only found in the best new lenses Nikon was making. The technology has since filtered down to more affordable lenses as well. My 50mm 1.8G lense is an AF-S.

Dstrbdmedic167
11 December 2014, 11:10
Yep, you successfully rephrased what I wrote. [:D]

As a way to cut costs in the more affordable cameras, Nikon removed the screw drive motor which was/is used on older D lenses (and all previous autofocus lenses). The AF-S lenses use a different technology. When AF-S was first released, it was only found in the best new lenses Nikon was making. The technology has since filtered down to more affordable lenses as well. My 50mm 1.8G lense is an AF-S.

Thanks CS!

Ok so tell me if I did ok! I got to looking around and my wife reminded me I had some Dell giftcards that we're going to expire soon. So I get up there and find what I feel is a pretty good package deal.

They had a Canon SL1 with 18-55mm IS STM lens and EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III lens. Added a small bag and a Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM lens all for $880 shipped before I threw in a few hundred in GC's. I also get 10% back on the $880. So total cost to me was $620.

Edit: The D40 was given to me but ill pass it on to someone else is in need as I just didn't feel it would meet my expectations. I've been wanting one of my own anyway and it didn't take much convincing on my part with the wife. I told her I guess I could take pics of the kids too... Hehe

Pyzik
11 December 2014, 11:31
I went back and was reading, forgive me if I missed it but if you're wanting to reverse a lens for macro and it's not got a manual aperture you can use one of these.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61%2BZL4qMoGL._SL1000_.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005ODKGLG/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o05_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Dstrbdmedic167
11 December 2014, 18:17
I went back and was reading, forgive me if I missed it but if you're wanting to reverse a lens for macro and it's not got a manual aperture you can use one of these.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61%2BZL4qMoGL._SL1000_.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005ODKGLG/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o05_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I learned something new... Will be ordering one very soon. After I recover from the SL1 purchase.

CarbonScoring
11 December 2014, 20:38
Thanks CS!

Ok so tell me if I did ok! I got to looking around and my wife reminded me I had some Dell giftcards that we're going to expire soon. So I get up there and find what I feel is a pretty good package deal.

They had a Canon SL1 with 18-55mm IS STM lens and EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III lens. Added a small bag and a Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM lens all for $880 shipped before I threw in a few hundred in GC's. I also get 10% back on the $880. So total cost to me was $620.

Edit: The D40 was given to me but ill pass it on to someone else is in need as I just didn't feel it would meet my expectations. I've been wanting one of my own anyway and it didn't take much convincing on my part with the wife. I told her I guess I could take pics of the kids too... Hehe

I don't know much about Canon, since I'm a Nikon shooter, but I'm sure that'll be a nice setup.

Dstrbdmedic167
11 December 2014, 20:40
I don't know much about Canon, since I'm a Nikon shooter, but I'm sure that'll be a nice setup.

Thanks CS!! What do you use?

Ride4frnt
11 December 2014, 20:50
That canon will serve you good for a number of years til you have the skills for a more expensive body. I know we discussed this but I'll reiterate.

Thompson
11 December 2014, 21:16
I went back and was reading, forgive me if I missed it but if you're wanting to reverse a lens for macro and it's not got a manual aperture you can use one of these.
Thanks for sharing! Wishlisted for now!

CarbonScoring
11 December 2014, 23:31
Thanks CS!! What do you use?

Nikon D700

Dstrbdmedic167
12 December 2014, 04:22
Nikon D700

Datsa nice!!

Dstrbdmedic167
15 December 2014, 18:28
So my new 40mm f/2.8 STM lens came in today. Still waiting for the SL1 and my 50mm f/1.8. Hopefully in the next few days they'll show up.

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/12/15/e760c2d9ad3775e5272d839a5648fa81.jpg

Pyzik
15 December 2014, 20:24
Very cool! Can't wait to see some pics

Dstrbdmedic167
15 December 2014, 20:51
Very cool! Can't wait to see some pics

Camera will be here Wednesday. 50mm Thursday. Many Pics will ensue!! I still say that's not too shabby of a pic with an iPhone 6!!

Dstrbdmedic167
20 December 2014, 19:29
Here's a quick snap with my phone of my "lightbox" thanks to jerry at the beginning of this thread. Seems to work quite well.

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/12/20/ebaf281864b4b0ce2bfa88ecf39ca554.jpg

Deadwing
15 April 2015, 04:32
Awesome tread! I have got A LOT to learn about taking photos!

Josh S.
27 September 2015, 19:20
Okay guys, I need some help. I decided to get into photography here recently and I've been taking amateur photos with an iPhone 6 for a couple weeks. My dad just gave me his old Canon Rebel XTI and I need help setting it up. I put together a lightbox earlier with 1" PVC and four 8.5 and two 5.5 inch lights with 100W 5000K bulbs. I took the first couple photos on "Flash-Off" and it was way too dark. Then I switched to Manual and tried adjusting a few of the settings, mainly the exposure, but couldn't really figure out a combination that worked. The image kept coming out very blurry. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Just let me know if you need any more info from me in order to help.

Thanks,
Josh

Pyzik
27 September 2015, 19:22
If not using a tripod, turn up your shutter speed, open the aperture and turn up ISO. Go from there.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Dstrbdmedic167
27 September 2015, 19:24
To add to that I recommend a tripod and then start in AV mode until you get a basic handle on things. Learn the triangle and how each setting affects the other. Them you can get an idea of which way each setting needs to go.

Pyzik
27 September 2015, 19:32
To add to that I recommend a tripod and then start in AV mode until you get a basic handle on things. Learn the triangle and how each setting affects the other. Them you can get an idea of which way each setting needs to go.
Better advice. I only meant to give an understanding to what can get you more light reaching your sensor.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Josh S.
27 September 2015, 20:03
Thank you guys. My budget is maxed out after the light box so I'll have to wait a couple weeks to get a tripod. Excuse my ignorance, but what is the purpose of AV mode?

alamo5000
27 September 2015, 20:04
I do have a question... what technique/equipment do you guys use to get a 'thru the scope' shot?

Ride4frnt
27 September 2015, 20:11
Thank you guys. My budget is maxed out after the light box so I'll have to wait a couple weeks to get a tripod. Excuse my ignorance, but what is the purpose of AV mode?

Aperture priority. You choose the aperture size (depth of field) and the camera does the rest.

Dstrbdmedic167
27 September 2015, 20:15
Aperture priority. You choose the aperture size (depth of field) and the camera does the rest.

Yep the lower the number the shallower the depth of field(in focus) area is, it requires less light but then everything isn't crisp. The higher the aperture is the more light is required. You can then in turn turn up your Iso but the higher that number is the more grainy looking your shot will be. It's a balancing act between everything.

Josh S.
27 September 2015, 21:57
I'm playing around with it right now and it's getting much better after switching to AV mode and adjusting the ISO, exposure, and the aperture size. As of now the best result has been from F18(I'm assuming this is aperture size), ISO 800, and exposure +1.67. Is there any way to avoid focusing on one point? It focuses on one point and everything except that point is just blurry enough that you can hardly make out the letters and numbers.

Thompson
27 September 2015, 22:20
Is there any way to avoid focusing on one point? It focuses on one point and everything except that point is just blurry enough that you can hardly make out the letters and numbers.
Hmmmm, you say you're out at f/18? Are you running a telephoto (zoom) lens? If so, that can affect Depth of Field (all in focus vs not). Even if so, at f/18 it shouldn't be that that out of focus (blurry) as you say.

Did you mean to say f/1.8?

Eric
28 September 2015, 00:03
I don't recall if it's mentioned here, but a decent resource is the book Understanding Exposure. I read it years ago and really need to revisit it (but it appears to have gone missing!).

Farva
1 October 2015, 08:01
Having a degree in photography, I always get the question "what should I have my settings on?" Well much like the building of a rifle it all depends on what your wanting to do. the thing I tell people is photography is nothing more than the understanding and mastery of light. Learn how light works and you'll get there. Subject matter is king though 😁

voodoo_man
1 October 2015, 08:22
Having a degree in photography, I always get the question "what should I have my settings on?" Well much like the building of a rifle it all depends on what your wanting to do. the thing I tell people is photography is nothing more than the understanding and mastery of light. Learn how light works and you'll get there. Subject matter is king though 😁

You have a degree in photography and your on the job?

Your "that guy" aint ya?

Farva
1 October 2015, 08:26
You have a degree in photography and your on the job?

Your "that guy" aint ya?

Haha yep sure am. As far as "that guy" I'm not sure what you mean as it could be a number of things, I'll assume you mean dashingly good looking in which case I'm your guy. I had a job in video production and photography and it kinda ruined my passion for it. Yeah it was much better money than law enforcement but I wasn't fulfilled with what I was doing. Having always been called to the mil/Leo world I just jumped in and never looked back. It's never been about the money for me. I know I'm a fool [BD]

voodoo_man
1 October 2015, 09:10
Haha yep sure am. As far as "that guy" I'm not sure what you mean as it could be a number of things, I'll assume you mean dashingly good looking in which case I'm your guy. I had a job in video production and photography and it kinda ruined my passion for it. Yeah it was much better money than law enforcement but I wasn't fulfilled with what I was doing. Having always been called to the mil/Leo world I just jumped in and never looked back. It's never been about the money for me. I know I'm a fool [BD]

Yep, totally that guy.

No crime scene or audio/visual spot for you?

SINNER
1 October 2015, 09:21
He discovered his love of law enforcement after his bootleg porn business was visited by them.

Farva
1 October 2015, 15:03
Yep, totally that guy.

No crime scene or audio/visual spot for you?

Nope. Not much on office settings. I like being out on the front lines.

Farva
1 October 2015, 15:04
He discovered his love of law enforcement after his bootleg porn business was visited by them.

Haha hey I gotta pay the bills

UWone77
1 October 2015, 17:54
Haha hey I gotta pay the bills

That's the problem with photography... I can't think of a Photographer without another job to make ends meet.

Farva
1 October 2015, 18:13
That's the problem with photography... I can't think of a Photographer without another job to make ends meet.

It's very difficult to make a living. Which is why I never really created a full business for myself doing it. Law enforcement is my primary job, I was born for this. I haven't picked up a camera for anything less than a few personal projects here and there in many moons. I need to get back behind the glass.

Battle Cock
10 October 2015, 14:23
Since I live on the road 10 months out of the year I have to get creative with my studio and scavenge available materials on location to make things work.
I figured y'all would get a kick out of my improvised blue light modifier.
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/10/10/25264992b1b8a07f5cbd15904854a659.jpg

Here's the resulting image
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/10/10/10899582b7a77f17c72f410439af1bc7.jpg

Thompson
10 October 2015, 16:59
I dig it. Nice

Deadwing
11 October 2015, 03:14
That's awesome lol.

Josh S.
25 March 2016, 19:42
I'm going to be in the market for a new lens in the next few months and I'm hoping some of y'all can point me in the right direction. It's for a Canon Rebel XTI and will mainly be used for pictures of deer in 1/4 - 1 acre pens, so anywhere from 10 yards to 100 yards. I will also be using it to shoot other miscellaneous wildlife out of deer stands so if I could reach out to 150+ yards that would be awesome. I got a few deer photos this past weekend with my 100-300mm lens and it left a little to be desired. I'm not sure what my budget will be, but I'll probably see what's out there first and then decide what I can afford.

Dstrbdmedic167
25 March 2016, 19:44
I'm going to be in the market for a new lens in the next few months and I'm hoping some of y'all can point me in the right direction. It's for a Canon Rebel XTI and will mainly be used for pictures of deer in 1/4 - 1 acre pens, so anywhere from 10 yards to 100 yards. I will also be using it to shoot other miscellaneous wildlife out of deer stands so if I could reach out to 150+ yards that would be awesome. I got a few deer photos this past weekend with my 100-300mm lens and it left a little to be desired. I'm not sure what my budget will be, but I'll probably see what's out there first and then decide what I can afford.

Decide what you can afford. Then we can tell you what lens lol...

Josh S.
25 March 2016, 19:53
Decide what you can afford. Then we can tell you what lens lol...

Haha! What could $500 get me?

Dstrbdmedic167
25 March 2016, 19:58
Haha! What could $500 get me?

Hmm tough one.

I know nothing of this lens but it's on sale for $449, has IS built in and has a USM, Its within your budget and has a good amount of zoom.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/397663-USA/Canon_0345B002_EF_70_300mm_f_4_5_6_IS.html

UWone77
25 March 2016, 20:23
Save up and find yourself a refurbished Canon 24-105 L series. Best all around lens you can have in the bag.

Josh S.
25 March 2016, 22:08
With the 24-105, is the image clarity good enough to where I could zoom in on a seemingly far away photo and retain most of the clarity? In other words, a photo at 100 yards at 105mm is going to look farther away than the same photo at 300mm, so would I be able to zoom in on the subject and keep a sharp image? If so, I would probably go with that lens due to the versatility and the ability to also use it for gun and truck pics. If not, I would probably just get a dedicated long range lens for now and then add a close-up lens to the arsenal down the road.

Farva
25 March 2016, 23:51
Most of if not all of the L series lenses are worth the money. UW is on the right track. Save up some more money (sucks to do) and get s quality piece of glass you'll use forever. Buyers remorse on glass sucks.

gatordev
4 November 2016, 18:46
Resurrecting an older thread... I'm in the market for a faster lens for my old but trusty Nikon D80. I'm trying to grab something in the 1.4 range but I'm also trying to keep it at the $500 or less price point due to budget (holiday travels and an ancient laptop are other priorities right now).

Use is pretty much still only and looking at a 30-35mm. For general still life/gun pics, this seems to give the best FOV for rifle sized subjects while also allowing other outside endeavors. Given that, I'm looking at this:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/918893-REG/sigma_30mm_f_1_4_dc_hsm.html

So given the limitations, am I out to lunch on this?

bzdog
11 November 2016, 21:49
I have a (old model) Sigma 1.8 50mm and I like it a lot. My guess is the 30 is probably decent. Of course you can get the Nikon 1.4 35mm for a lot less. I think reviews on the B&H site are pretty reliable.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

gatordev
12 November 2016, 09:54
I ended up going in another direction. Well, actually two directions. First, it looks like the Sigma 35mm is the better option, so that's now on the list. Lots of rave reviews on B&H and elsewhere. Unfortunately, it looks like you pay for that extra value. I may also be jumping on the Canon bandwagon on Black Friday, so for now, I'm just going to wait until I've confirmed which compatibility I would need until then.