|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 1/1/2007
|
Nice to hear! Just go for it - manual settings and tripod. Best thing to do, just mount your camera permanently on the tripod and don't believe auto-settings at all. (Of course I just had to say that about belief ;-))
As about rockets, I'm just glad it's over. Yesterday night they converted this peaceful city in some kind of "war"! Only boom, boom, and silly music! Next year I'll assist the noises with my guitar! ;-)
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Annemette Rosenborg Eriksen
{K:55244} 12/31/2006
|
Okay- low ISO and tripod! I found out that I can change the settings of my camera, but not as much as I could wish for. When it´s possible I´ll get a nice camera with the possibility to go manual all the way.
Take care and don´t get shot down by a rocket/fireworks that is!
|
|
|
|
|
Annemette Rosenborg Eriksen
{K:55244} 12/31/2006
|
Thank you for this info which convinces me that I must soon obtain a tripod of some kind;-)
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/31/2006
|
Oops forgot to mention:
Indeed, a higher ISO value means higher sensitivity which of course is more likely to use in darkness. But even with a low sensitivity (i.e. low ISO) you can have great photos in darkness by using a high exposure time. (And of course again: Tripod, tripod, tripod!)
I used ISO 200 at the start, then I went to ISO 100, and now I am switching again to ISO 50 or even less. Still using ISO 100 or even 200 sometimes, especially when I want to have grainy images.
Best ISO-wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/31/2006
|
Hi Annemette!
Well, your ISO setting on your digital camera could be thought as the light sensitivity of the CCD. A low ISO simply makes the necessary aperture wider or the exposure time longer. But it also reduces noise/graininess. This is the result of the photon absorption mechanisms - hey, a real working device based on things our limited senses can't detect ;-) But the exact knowledge of quantum mechanical absortion processes are not necessary here. It suffices to know that with decreasing ISO your exposure time will increase. And that means... tripod!
Mount your camera on the tripod, switch to the lowest possible ISO value, select some aperture that gives you your wished DoF, and let the camera deside about exposure time.
On a side note: Brightest light (which means: great EV) is ideal for a low ISO anyway, since even at those low ISO values there is enough light to keep the exposure time low. Under such light conditions even the low sensitivity of the CCD will be enough for sufficient photon absorption and creation of a well defined image.
I hope that it helped but feel free to ask anything that I didn't explained well.
Best wishes and go low ISO!
Nick
P.S.: BTW, does your camera offer the possibility of manual settings? If you can't set the aperture manually using f/stops, then perhaps you could use the pre-programmed modes. I think that landscape mode corresponds to narrow aperture while macro or portrait mode corresponds to wider aperture. But that is subject to changes from one camera to the other, so perhaps your manual says something about that?
Anyway, if your camera has some kind of button labeled "All manual" then: Use it!
|
|
|
|
|
Annemette Rosenborg Eriksen
{K:55244} 12/30/2006
|
Thank you back, Nick:-)
You might be able to help me: When being in Greenland I´ve been told to use low ISO-value because of the strong light that is reflected by the ice and snow. A woman in a camerashop then told me that it was just the contrary: I had to use a high ISO-value which is sth. I combine with darkness. I´m confused about this! You walk in the bright mountains - what ISO do you use??
Best wishes
Annemette
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/29/2006
|
Amen to that, Andres!
Notices, awareness, thinking... how else could we learn?
We have to learn the simple chords before going for a great solo...
Nick
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66327} 12/29/2006
|
Hi Nick,
I feel the same way. If you do take a course, be sure to keep all of your work, even the mistakes... take lots of notes (exposure times and settings in the darkroom and camera)
ps Ironically, even the electric guitar is an enhanced version of the original accoustic guitar. :)
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/29/2006
|
Oh well, Andre, I was never convinced of "fast work" and "speed". Good things need good thoughts and good thoughts need time. And as the irish say, when God made time, he/she/it made enough of it. (And that from an atheist! ;-))
I guess there's nothing similar to the own good old "handwork" when you can really touch all the things involved, get some impression of chemicals, paper, and like... So perhaps it is that very personal approach that makes it much more interesting.
To use the analogy to music again: Yes, of course I can compose anything on a computer but the real electric guitar, when I squeeze some strange sounds out of the strings, it just makes it possible to feel like "the great master". ;-)
Thanks a lot and have a great time!
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66327} 12/28/2006
|
Hi Nick,
I think the biggest challenge you will have in conventional photography will be getting used to the time element. We are now so used to the almost instant gratification of the digital world, creating prints from film and paper will seem slow and awkward in comparison. But when you get it right, you will frame some images and you will feel like a great master!! :)
Good luck!
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/28/2006
|
Hi Andre!
Thank you so much for all that info! I also think that dealing with film processing myself will not only be nice but also reveal to me many things that are very useful when shooting, allowing thus for a better ability to do "the right thinng" for getting some photo as close as possible to what I carry in mind. B&W is as wonderful as ever to me. I wouldn't mind at all to start "only" with B&W and limited equipment. I think that this would have the benefit of thinging of ways to get more out of less. As ancient Greeks said: "Poverty is the mother of invention." ;-)
I know of a scoll in the neighborhood that offers photo processing courses, so I guess it will be my next step in photographic work. Wow! I can imagine the fun of the darkroom already now!
Many thanks and keep well,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66327} 12/28/2006
|
Hi Nick,
My experience in the darkroom has only been with Black and White. However, I don't feel bad because so many great photographers never did anything but B&W with very limited equipment by today's standards. I would bet that it would be very economical to get yourself set up with a small B&W darkroom and a first rate film camera now a days. So many people are just not using their film cameras now. The market will be flooded with excellent buys in all formats.
I think you would love the experience of starting all over in film and making your own prints.
What I would recommend is that you see if you can take a basic photo processing course and go from there. Most technical schools and high schools over here still offer this kind of course. Although not as many are around as in the past.
The good thing about learning to print your own images the "traditional" way is that you can still scan the prints or negatives and show them here or anywhere else on the net.
Difficult is not the right word to use. It is challenging and very fullfilling when you get it right. You will definitely enjoy it!
If you don't have time right away, keep it in the back of your mind to try conventional printing. There is nothing like the feeling of seeing your work come out before your eyes in the darkroom. :)
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/24/2006
|
Hi Andre!
The think is that the transitions between areas would be too sudden when composing a single picture as a stich from many others with different light. So even the single frames must show a behavior of slowly altering light to "meet" at some point.
Interesting to hear that the manual work in the darkroom is easier to do than the electronic manipulations with image software. I would think the opposite were true. Perhaps I should go for a small darkroom too.
Technically speaking, the electronic is already available for "dividing" the CCD to arbitrary regions and using different exposure oparameters for each of them in a way that there is some smooth transition at the boundaries of one region to the other.
For analog photography it could be a bit more difficult to achieve that. Back in the eighties, when I was studying, we used a T90 for laboratory photography of spectral lines/bands exactly this way. The camera had a special lens constructed for that purpose. It could "concentrate" the light from different parts of the object to different parts of the film frame, each part with its own exposure parameters. The multi-exposure capabilities of the T90 allowed combining the different parts to a single frame. The camera was connected to a PC since at that time the controlling electronic was too big to fit in the camera case, but in our days it is surely possible to get all that in such a small case. The question of course remains if such a lens would be affordable.
BTW, is it difficult/expensive to have some darkroom? Is it hard to learn how to process films?
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66327} 12/23/2006
|
Hi Nick,
I'm not sure if anyone has invented that kind of in camera technology yet. I suppose the best way is to use a tripod and get your exposures from two or three different areas in the image and take them all.
You can do some fancy work combining the images in Photoshop or other software. Or you can use the selective lasso tool to isolate any adjustments (also post processing) I actually find this method very similar to what I used to do all the time in the darkroom... dodging and burning using my hands or other different method of cutting off light during the enlarger exposure time. It was always one of the reasons why I tried for longer exposure times in the darkroom. It was easier to dodge and burn that way to get the required effect with a nice blend.
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/22/2006
|
Exactly, Andre! I asked myself what a little correction of some EV third upwards would have done to the almost completely black tree silhouette, but I also think that it would turn the water and the sky less interesting for themselves and also in relation to each other.
Still waiting for a camera that is able to apply different EV to different parts of a capture. Is there anything like that already?
Thank you very much for the comment and best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66327} 12/21/2006
|
Hi Nick,
The relationship between the sky and water looks great in this one. I think because you got the sky and water to show up so well the exposure on the pier at the left and the buildings on the horizon were compromised to some extent.
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/20/2006
|
Thank you very much, Angela!
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/20/2006
|
Thanks a lot, Jefferson!
All the best,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/20/2006
|
Thanks a lot for the nice detailed comment, Annemette.
The clouds are indeed grainy. As always I hadn't the right film, which would be one with a low ISO value that keeps graininess so low that it can't be seen on the photo.
To avoid graininess/noise using a digital camera you can manually set some low ISO value. Just try some value below ISO 100. This makes the sensitivity of the CCD lower and thus the necessary exposure time longer, but the graininess/noise disappears. Of course a longer exposure means: Tripod. A somewhat uncomfortable method but the results make it worth trying.
The poles are for towing the boats and ships in the lake. I think that's the reason why they are so big.
Best wishes and thanks again,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Karagiaouroglou
{K:127263} 12/20/2006
|
Many many thanks, Seda!
Best wishes,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Angela DeLong
{K:3050} 12/19/2006
|
Lovely shot.
|
|
|
|
Jefferson Oliveira
{K:358} 12/19/2006
|
Very sweet image, the colors are fantastic.
|
|
|
|
|
Annemette Rosenborg Eriksen
{K:55244} 12/19/2006
|
Dear Nick
Indeed a neccessary compromise to make that worked out well. I like the atmosphere in this one. The clouds seem to be slighly grainy, but mine get that way too. I dont know how to avoid this.
The angles are quite funny making it difficult to find any straight line to go by.
I´m amazed by the size of those poles when noticing the seagull!
Take care
Annemette
|
|
|
|
|
Seda Ozen
{K:634} 12/19/2006
|
very very good time of the day cong Nick well done
|
|
0 
