Hello everyone.
I recently bought a panasonic dmc lz40, first of all im not a photographer nor do i have any knowledge of photography.
I bake for a living.
I make cakes cupcakes things like that, and its the pictures that sell mostly.
Ive been trying to take pics with this cam for a few days now and while pictures do look better than my previous cam food doesnt look as appetizing as i had hoped.
Now it doesnt have to look cool or flashy the food just needs to look appetizing, how do i go about doing this on this specific cam?
Any help would be gladly apreciated.
This is a picture i took a few days ago on a candy table i had to do.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Panasonic Camera Model DMC-LZ40 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/3.4 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 22 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 2576 Image Height 1932 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 180 dpi Vertical Resolution 180 dpi Image Created 2015:11:16 14:11:32 Exposure Time 1/25 sec F-Number f/3.0 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 400 Lens Aperture f/1.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1263 Image Height 966 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Landscape Gain Control High Gain Up Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
With this sort of cam you're going to need really, really good lighting. Try to take pics in daylight, not by lamplight.
Any chance of being able to return this unit for something else? I dunno if you were constrained by budget or whatever, but if as you say it's the pics that sell you might want to invest a little more on the photogear - it would make what you're trying to do easier as well as being able to achieve way better results.
/p/'s a slow board, so don't be disheartened if you don't get many immediate replies.
>>2704704
To learn where you're going wrong you'll need to understand the fundamentals of photography. Composition, exposure triangle etc. It also doesn't help that the camera you have isn't exactly suited to this. If you're going to use these images in a professional setting I would suggest splashing out a bit more and getting a decent mid-range DSLR. You're also going to need a tripod and some artificial light sources, as well as bounce cards and the ilk.
http://www.seriouseats.com/2015/03/beginners-guide-to-food-photography.html this is my favorite guide to food photography. It covers everything I just mentioned (bar photography basics). Worth a read
Enjoy this nifty infographic presented by your friend Mr.Koala
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:09:22 07:13:14 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 640 Image Height 6031
>>2704724
Hey man thanks a lot this is super helpful
>>2704720
Yeah the thing cost me like 170 euros, guy at the store told me it would be ok for food pics but i guess he just wanted to make the sale and i was easy target.
Im gonna go return it if you guys dont think its that good for the kind of pictures i need.
Im on a 200-300 euro budget, any recomendations?
hellthyjunkfood on youtube. Ask them on their channel, im sure they will help.
>>2704738
Godammit. These people are real shits.
It's the only reason this class of camera, "bridge camera"
exist:
so that salesmen can make quick commission cash off unsuspecting soccermoms and clueless grandmas.
Basically, this thing as the same sensor size as a smartphone, but the body size of a proper camera, so worst of both worlds.
You could achieve a lot with such a get up, but it's certainly not optimal or advised.
>>2704743
>Im gonna go return it if you guys dont think its that good for the kind of pictures i need.
>Im on a 200-300 euro budget, any recomendations?
Nothing springs to mind, but some other yurpderp will probably chime in.
If you want other tips for shooting then google for "food photography" tips or some shit; might get some recs from people who also do it for a living.
>>2704747
yeah ive been looking into the previous link posted here, ill try to mess around with the options and see if anything comes out better but from what im gathering im just gonna go return it, save up a bit more cash and invest in a better camera.
Thanks a lot for your help guys, i only got 3 more days to return it and i might've ended up with this shit cam for life if i hadnt gotten your advice.
>>2704704
>peanut sensor
you goofed.
return it while you can.
>>2704705
there is motion blur because slower shutter and you have parkinsons.
high gain up so the exposure is blown up.
iso 400 but it still looks mushy because of the peanut sensor.
return it.
find a camera with 1", 4/3, aps-c or full frame sensor
>>2704756
thank you senpai.
Man im really regretting buying this shit now.
If they dont refund my warranty ima flip out too.
>>2704759
Don't feel bad.
Like I said, these cams are made to be foisted onto the unsuspecting.
I think the only people that truly get what they want with these are budget birdwatchers.
Do some research before going in to trade for something else though.
In this day and age, basically every purchase can and should be researched online. Internet word of mouth is the only thing consumers have to go on anymore because so many stores are run by ignorant shits that know as much about what they're selling as you do firsttime buying.
>>2704759
ask if they can change for another camera.
how much did you pay for it?
>$173 on amazon
well, that can't get you anything new that's decent.
>>2704762
I did look online and compared with other cams they were selling but i really dont know shit so i just compared prices mostly and settled for one in the middle.
>>2704764
yeah i dont see any dslr cams goin for less than 300 and thats a bit outta budget rn, ill save up and buy it in a few weeks.
the camera is not that bad, and just a better camera is not the soloution. better invest some efford in knowledge. you can make brilliant product pics even with an older phone cam.
Get Nikon D3300.
Perfect entry level for DSLR.
>>2704844
Thats only 350 here in europe, its not THAT expensive, you sure it would work for me?
keep in mind i dont know much but i am putting effort into learning and i will only use it for cakes and such.
>>2704922
You really don't understand photography at all. Simple rule:composition -> light -> lens -> body. So you can achieve great results even with phone if you can make a proper light for your composition. You can buy the cheapest DSLR and good lens and it will be far better than buying FF DSLR with kit lens.
>>2704928
so yeah? i mean the one i bought looks pretty grainy no matter the lighting on it.
>>2704928
>You can buy the cheapest DSLR and good lens and it will be far better than buying FF DSLR with kit lens.
So you're saying he should buy the d3300?
Pretty much related... again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk5IMmEDWH4
>>2704922
Get the D3300 or even the D3200 with or without kit lens and a nifty 35mm prime. The nifty 35 is a fast lens, has sharp IQ and quite cheap on the budget. It is the best tool for product/food photography.
And a tripod, a decent tripod with a ball head will do real good for you. Having a $5 wireless remote is also a plus.
>>2704977
This.
