Photography.

[Goafer]

Photos from VW Action at Santa Pod:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sméagol]

Came back from Marseille last week. Didn't actually take many pictures, even though I intended to. I even brought my analog camera, but I didn't use it, except for that one time when I put on my naughty shoes (.. that's a Dutch expression) and asked if I could take a picture of a hot waitress.

 

Anyway, the ones I took were mostly snapshots, but these are the ones I liked (after some slight editing of some).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coincidentally, these are all taken on an island in the coast of Marseille, so here's a snapshot to prove I've actually been there:

 

[dan-likes-trees]

^ Nice shots, looks like a lovely island! Like the lookout one (penultimate) a lot. Was it as deserted as it looks?

 

@Goafer, love the shots of the doggy on the previous page. What you shooting with these days?

[Goafer]

^ Nice shots, looks like a lovely island! Like the lookout one (penultimate) a lot. Was it as deserted as it looks?

 

@Goafer, love the shots of the doggy on the previous page. What you shooting with these days?

 

Still my 5D MK2 and the 70-200mm f2.8 lens. I can't afford shiny new cameras nowadays, but this one still works for me.

[Sméagol]

^ Nice shots, looks like a lovely island! Like the lookout one (penultimate) a lot. Was it as deserted as it looks?

[..]

It's on an island in the Frioul archipelago, Pomègues to be precise. If you ever want to visit it when you're in Marseille, it's an half hour boatride, and the ferry departs from the old port, which you can see on the last picture. Tickets are around 10 euros.

 

The lookout is an old WWII bunker.

 

Deserted? Not at all, but it was low season, and there weren't that many tourists. I think the far majority were locals coming there for a swim. The water was incredibly inviting, and I really wanted to dive in, but I wasn't exactly prepared for swimming.. Anyway, I think the locals just quickly try to find a "free" inlet (inlet is what you call them I believe?) to go swimming, not many people actually go there to take a walk, so there weren't actually that many people on the 2.5 km long road. Plus some people actually come using their own boats, like you see on one of the pictures, there are plenty around the island, including one expensive looking yacht. This island also had one or 2 tiny dedicated beaches, the other big island actually has a few people living on it.

[Goafer]

Photos from my trip to Bristol Zoo:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dan-likes-trees]

Great stuff as always Goaf. Lately been lugging my GH4 around for a bit of a focus shift to video but the stills really lack the kind of pin-sharp detail that you get.

 

Went to Crimea, Russia, and Finland recently

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 1, 2016 by dan-likes-trees

[Goafer]

From Flame and Thunder at Santa Pod:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dan-likes-trees]

Resurrecting dat thread!

 

 

 

 

 

[Goafer]

Haven't taken many new photos recently, but I have edited an old one in an 80's style:

 

[Goafer]

Some from MCM Comic Con London:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 28, 2017 by Goafer

[Happenstance]

Couple of mine from the same event

 

 

 

 

 

[Goafer]

Some photos from my recent trip to Barcelona, which is an utterly beautiful city, full of great people and endless stunning vistas (all of which I couldn't possibly have captured):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Found a stray cat:

 

Which we found out had a stray kitten sibling:

 

And then the stray mother came out to keep an eye on things:

 

The best view in the city, although the photo doesn't begin to do it justice. The angle of the seats, combined with how much of the city you can see is just breathtaking. I could have sat here all day:

 

 

 

Of course I found a retro VW:

 

 

 

[Goafer]

Got some free tickets to the British Touring Car Championship race at Silverstone:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Goafer]

Went to the Cotswold Wildlife Park today:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[drahkon]

Ultra bump.

Can someone explain white balance is and what this setting is for in an editor? 

I started taking some more pictures and am using the RAW format. I downloaded a free program (darktable) and played around a little bit last night. In the end I only corrected exposure and used the "sharpness" setting. No idea if I made the pictures better or not  

[Goafer]

White balance is basically the colour tint of the whole image. It's normally used to ensure colour accuracy, which is normally most noticeable in the white (or grey) areas of the image.

For example, this is an image with different white balances (in particular colour temperature):

As with all things in photography, there is a technically "correct" setting for each photo (in this case 100% accurate to the real life scenery), but it's ultimately down to you to decide how you want the image to look. I personally always warm up my outdoor photos so they look nice and sunny, unless I want a more moody shot, in which case I'll cool them down.

[drahkon]

I see. That picture kind of clears things up. Thanks  

There are so many things you can edit with these programs; it's insane. And I don't know anything about each setting  

[Goafer]

There will always be something new to learn with image editing. If I were to offer advice to a complete newcomer, I'd say master the 3 key points first: cropping, levels and colour balance. I normally edit in that order too, but will sometimes go back a stage if they need redoing after a colour balance.

Cropping is cutting the image down to emphasise the subject or remove any unwanted stuff from the edges of the photo. All you have to do is learn what makes a good crop. If you've framed the photo well to begin with, you won't have to crop at all.

Levels is a fancy version of brightness and contrast. As a general rule. Try not to have much clipping in the photo. Clipping is where certain areas are so bright or so dark that there is no longer any image there, it's either pure white or pure black. As with all things, this generally seen as bad in general photography, but can be used to artistic effect.

Colour balancing is exactly that: balancing the colours so they look the way you want. It's also probably the hardest part. In order to get accurate colours, look at whites, greys and blacks and see if they look neutral and don't have a tint to them. I personally like to get the image accurate first, then add a slight tint and boost or reduce the saturation/vibrance to suit the photo.

I'd say colour balancing is by far the hardest one, as it can entirely depend on the individual and what they want to achieve with the photo. There are also almost infinite ways to do it. As a general rule though, I'd say keep it subtle. Get it accurate first using the standard colour balance tool, then add subtle changes.

Edited July 2, 2019 by Goafer

[Happenstance]

@Goafer When you are cropping do you tend to try and do it to specific ratios or to just what looks good?

[Goafer]

13 minutes ago, Happenstance said:

@Goafer When you are cropping do you tend to try and do it to specific ratios or to just what looks good?

I think 4:3 is how most cameras take photos, so I guess that is the standard.

I personally go for 16:9 so that it fits phone screens and looks a bit more cinematic. I also sometimes go for 1:1 as it can look pretty good and some of my stuff ends up on my Instagram.

It also depends if you plan to print them. Standard print sizes are (in inches): 7x5, 6x4, 10x8 and 16x12 so if I were printing, I'd pick a ratio to suit.

[drahkon]

@Goafer

I've been asked to take some photos of an event tomorrow. Thing is: It's in a bar and most likely not very well lit. I know a little bit about apeture, shutter speed, iso, etc. but I will probably have to resort to using flash photography. What camera settings should I use?

Mind you, I don't have any special equipment. Just my regular Canon EOS 1200D

[Sméagol]

What you need is a low light lens, but they're expensive and won't do you any good for tomorrow.

I'm not an expert, but I googled a bit to confirm my suspicions: for flash photography, start out with average settings (daylight). Check your viewscreen, and adjust from there. But look at your flash, maybe it had indicators for settings, or a manual?

Keep in mind though, flash won't do you any good at a distance. I don't know what kind of event you're going to, and what the size of the bar is, but if's a sizable bar and you're at the back wanting to take a picture of whatever's happening at the front: not going to happen. So stick to close-ups.

Also keep in mind.. Again, not knowing what kind of event you're going, but if it's concert or something.. people may not like be photographed with a flash. For artists this can be annoying, so check with them first.

Edited July 26, 2019 by Sméagol

[drahkon]

Just now, Sméagol said:

Also keep in mind.. Again, not knowing what kind of event you're going, but if it's concert or something.. people may not like be photographed with a flash. For artists this can be annoying, so check with them first.

It's an event for an organization I'm volunteering for. Won't be the first time I'll take photos of the people there  It's nothing special so if the photos turn out to be horrible...meh  I'd like to at least take a couple of good pictures, though.

[Goafer]

Low light is a pain in the arse. People love to say things like "it's not the camera, it's the person behind it that counts" but low light is a situation where a good camera can make all the difference.

My general advice:

As wide an aperture (low f number) as your lens will allow. It'll allow as much light in as possible, allowing for quicker shutter speeds/less blur. It'll also add a nice shallow depth of field.

Speaking of wide apertures, most lenses' max apertures change depending on how much you zoom in. The more you zoom in, the more limited your range is. If possible, zoom out and stand closer, rather than standing back and zooming in. If you've got a constant aperture lens, ignore this advice. 

High ISO. How high you go will depend on your camera and how it handles noise at high ISOs. I never really go above 1600, but my camera is old and gets pretty noisy above that. That said, if there's a lot of movement, you may just have to go higher.

For low light, I put my camera in aperture mode, set is as wide as the lens will allow, then let the camera decide the shutter speed. Do some test shots and if the photos are blurry, up the ISO. You can predict if a photo will be blurry by what shutter speed the camera picks. 1/160 is ok, 1/125 is generally ok, 1/60 or slower will be a real challenge (but not impossible if it's just speeches etc).

I tend to avoid flash, especially if it's built into the camera and you can't adjust the angle. If you can adjust the angle, point it at the ceiling/wall so it bounces off and softens it.

Edited July 26, 2019 by Goafer