Archived threads in /p/ - Photography - 195. page
- Home
- Board: /p/ - Photography
- Reading: Archived threads in /p/ - Photography - 195. page
Hi /p/, I'm a noob to this hobby and I've been taking photos of people and scenery for a while now. I want to move forward and try my hand at effects and fake light.
How do you get colored lighting effects like the pic I uploaded and which kind of light equipment I should buy? Does anyone know where to find cheap and portable fog machines? Every cheap fog machine I have seen needs to be plugged and the battery ones are in the €1000+ range.
Any help towards the right direction or suggestions would be much appreciated.
>>2714415
>How do you get colored lighting effects like the pic I uploaded
Shoot a nice sharp picture with a good camera and good illumination from speedlights, then do digital post with photoshop or some other editor.
The background with the gradient might even be shopped into the image.
>>2714415
> Does anyone know where to find cheap and portable fog machines?
Also, here: Dry ice. Not technically a machine, of course, but it is fairly portable and doesn't need a power plug.
Alternatively, try ultrasonic foggers like for fountains.
If you want portable power, use a like honda generator and power your fog machine - forget batteries for bigger appliances, they'll be way too heavy overall
What the fuck Adobe.
I noticed this after going through a bunch of pics. When I use the "previous conversion" option (not sure if that is what its called in english, sorry), that hideous banding shows up. Only and only when using that. If I input the same very settings manually, it doesn't happen.
Has anyone else experienced this?
>>2714298
Forgot to mention, the banding sticks even if I zero in each slider. I have to pick "default camera settings" in order to get rid of them.
Here's the same pic with the same settings that caused the banding.
>>2714300
Your shadows are blue
And your whites are yellow
Fix this
>>2714303
That's what happens when you shoot shade during the afternoon.
How do you get motivated to go out shooting when your city is boring as batshit?
I live in eggy HQ and the city is bland as fuck.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi
>>2714294
>eggy HQ
Wot?
Do you have a car? Drive up to another city, take a few days off work, see what you can see.
That being said, try and see things in your own city from a new perspective. Or, set up some scenes with friends in decent locations where you are.
>>2714302
Brisbane.
Another city (that's not the gold coast) is hours away.
>friends
Oh you...
Travel. You live in Australia, plenty of nice places to travel there or take a flight to some country in SEA, should be pretty cheap
I attempted a bit of product photography. How did I do, /p/?
>>2714281
I understand there is a christmas theme to the shoot, however I find the background very distracting. Perhaps shooting the drinks in a studio with some mistletoe or something may have been a better approach to it but I'm not sure.
seconding, backgrounds steals the attention, even if out of focus. it's way too busy.
your product is also quite in the dark, needs much more light on it. what's bright attracts the eye, and in here, your background is brighter.
by all product photography standards, you did bad. I kinda like your approach on colors though.
has lots of errors, but you got the mood right so youre well started. thats a key element.
box looks unimpresive. id put it centered, shot from an angle, and with more separation from background. aka. smoother bokeh.. id do this using telephoto from a corner (get up a chair) or some cool wide angle big aperture lens. also use back lightning on the subject to give it shape, right now its an ugly shadowy bulk. subject is underexposed, needs a direct light source too. also white balance, looks tungsten as fuck.
post corrected version anon.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:12:03 09:40:52 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 900 Image Height 819
I take lots of portraits but I think I can be making them better. I have two umbrellas, two spotlights and a handful of flashes that work wirelessly with my camera. How should I be setting them up? Diagrams and suggested reads would be great. Pic related, took this earlier today.
Also lighting general
[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 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:12:02 16:38:53 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1080 Image Height 1080
>>2714062
How you set your lighting depends entirely on the mood of the shoot you're going for. Are you just asking for every lighting setup known to man, listed for you at my expense? Or do you just not feel like googling "Portrait Lighting Diagram"?
>>2714062
Did you make the background white in post?
And it looks you're underlighting his (your?) face with the key--throwing unfortunate shadows from his nose and sweater.
And this framing is weird. Double amputee.
And it looks like you tried to kick from the same side that the key light is on, which is also weird and unconventional. This is just all backwards.
>>2714064
Sorry, I didn't intend to put the load of work on your shoulders Anon. Most of the results google has returned have been from c u c k s that don't actually produce good fotos. Tbh, I hadn't even thought about how mood would affect lighting when using artificial light.
Just wanted to share a beautiful picture.
She's pregnant.
6 months pregnant at that.
>>2713862
> Has so to complain about fat girls to seem edgy
> Spends so little time around women that anon can't tell when a woman is pregnant vs. overweight
Thanks anon I need a good chuckle in the morning
Let's post some comfy photography
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2048 Image Height 1357
I like it.
>>2700108
Are we all comfy?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 550D Camera Software GIMP 2.8.6 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2014:11:04 13:57:15 Exposure Time 1/250 sec F-Number f/13.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/13.5 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 533 Image Height 799 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2700119
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 550D Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2015:09:16 13:23:50 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2048 Image Height 988 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Single Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Macro Mode Normal White Balance Daylight Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
Hello /p/
I want to equip my bedroom with one or two always-on cameras. But there's so many choices out there... webcams, surveillance cameras, etc.
All I want is crisp and smooth 1080p at 30 fps and a sensor that has no IR flter. So I'll also need to have a hidden but fairly strong IR light source in the room.
Ideally, the video would be saved straight to the server I have in the guest room, and only save the last 3 days of footage.
Does any of you have a set-up like this in your home? Or anything similar?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Pixelmator 2.1 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2014:04:20 09:04:78 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 600 Image Height 460
>>2713835
Well you're either perverted (/s/) or paranoid (/k/) so good luck.
So I finally got my first few rolls from my Bronica SQ-A developed. Thought I'd share a few of my faves.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.3 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:02 11:25:56
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.3 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:02 11:25:54
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.3 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:02 11:25:55
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.3 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:02 11:25:58
How is this okay? How is this "photography" accepted?
He's a phototaker, not a photographer.
>Nikon buys Samsungs camera business
This rumor is being posted on a few different websites at the moment..
If true, would it be a good or bad move by Nikon?
I honestly liked the NX1 as a camera, though I did not need it I think the image quality seemed very good and the feature set (including huge firmware updates) was excellent.
But realistically, could the sensors compete with Sony offerings?
http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/some-disruptive-samsung-rumor-coming-soon/
http://www.slrlounge.com/disruptive-news-coming-samsung-pentax-ff-update-cp9-announced-daily-roundup/
>>2713674
>But realistically, could the sensors compete with Sony offerings?
Yes.
Is the thread over now?
>>2713674
>Implying Samsung didn't buy Nikon
>>2713679
>implying R I C O H didn't just buy both Samsung and Nikon
:^)
my canon ae-1's manual is broken. does anybody have any cheap/diy fixes? im desperate to revive this camera, please help
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Charles Lanteigne Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Color Space Information sRGB
get a new one for $5
>>2713565
lets assume i dont want a new one, just to repair my old one. honestly it has sentimental value so, humor me please
>>2713556
>my canon ae-1's manual is broken. does anybody have any cheap/diy fixes?
look up the manual online, duh
I'm pretty new to photography, I have a Canon Powershot SX520 (I know, kinda on the cheap side of things) I was thinking about getting filters, but I had questions that I didint know where else to ask. First, is it worth it to buy filters? Second are there specific filters for each camera or do they all work for all. I took this pic a few months ago. Settings on auto I think because I had gotten the camera two days prier so I was still figuring things out. (First camera that wasn't like a $50 Kodak)
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Model Canon PowerShot SX520 HS Equipment Make Canon Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Maximum Lens Aperture f/6.0 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Image Created 2015:11:15 06:20:16 Vertical Resolution 180 dpi Horizontal Resolution 180 dpi Exposure Time 1/500 sec ISO Speed Rating 200 F-Number f/6.0 Lens Aperture f/6.0 Color Space Information sRGB Metering Mode Pattern Exposure Bias 0 EV Image Height 3456 Image Width 4608 Focal Length 180.60 mm Scene Capture Type Standard Flash No Flash, Compulsory Rendering Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Mode Auto Image Number 100-0152
I have a better version of this, but not on my phone right now
Zero : there are many things much more important than filters, and you don't seem to even know what sort of filter you're looking for. I wouldn't recommend you to even bother with that, yet.
1: depends
2: no, it's dependent on the lens diameter.
I was thinking just the simple UV, maybe even a macro cause sometimes I like to try to do small things just can never do it
>http://petapixel.com/2015/12/01/annie-leibovitz-shoots-the-pirelli-calendar-into-a-new-direction/
>real womyn
>muh curves
>#whatmenreallywant
So Pirelli decided to let an overrated, jewish feminist take the pictures of their famous Calendar.
Why? She has no talent at all. All she does is pressing the shutter button. Her countless assistans do everything else for her.
How can she call herself a (professional) photographer?
[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 2015:12:01 09:14:19 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 640 Image Height 357
>The whole idea was not to have any pretense in these pictures, and be very straightforward, and show these women exactly who they are
Therefore, let us obviously produce the most pretentious photos of 2016 for the most pretentious calendar of 2016.
>>2713393
>All she does is pressing the shutter button
Incorrect, in absolute terms.
>professional photography is not about the actual photography, but how well you can sell yourself
Oh boy OP, you might be the first one to discover these, you should publish your results in a scientific magazine
![Adobe-Photoshop-Lightroom-CC-Logo[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/mrdnMWP.png "Adobe-Photoshop-Lightroom-CC-Logo[1]")
/p/, what is your philosophy on post-processing, and how do you utilize it?
I'm relatively new to serious photography and shooting in RAW. I've only just started using Lightroom and begun to understand the potential of the program. Recovering shadows and un-fucking blown highlights is incredible to me. And I have no idea how to utilize the color treatment options. I've only recently mastered white balance and now I can screw with individual channels. I'm drunk with power.
But I don't know think I've achieved a tasteful balance between maintaining the integrity of the photo and bringing out the best in it. I'm wary of my photos looking fake and yet I also know some really great photography has that quality to it. For instance I am going through my photos from New York City, where I was shooting a lot of buildings. I edit the shots such that the sky and the buildings are probably exposed but then everything looks like an HDR shot. I reduce the vibrance and saturation a bit to counter that effect. I really like what I made but think people will see it as "oh that's a cool Photoshop" and not "oh that's a nice picture."
Maybe I just need the self-confidence to go with what I think looks best.
I'm curious to see what the board thinks about this stuff.
>>2713008
>un-fucking blown highlights
You can't.
>>2713014
>You can't.
I'm new to the terminology. I guess they're not actually blown out but just brighter than looks good.
I guess blown out means truly unrecoverable and forever white?
>>2713014
You can recover detail in an area so long as there is at least one channel that is not maxed at 255. Don't be a pedantic shitface.
>>2713008
OP, just practice, and do what looks right to you. Do an edit, and if you think it's too heavy, get up and walk away. Come back 20 minutes later, and if it looks bad to you, then fix it. There's no way you would be perfect at it to start off with. Just go slowly, and make yourself happy.
That being said, a lot of photos handle heavy post processing very well. And conversely, a lot of photos don't. It will be situational. But you should always try to avoid hard clipped highlights, ugly crushed blacks, and heavy clarity. Remember that most people know what items in the world look like, so don't try to pass off weird blue trees, or green skin, etc.
