Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
We all have to walk before we run, but I'm not even near crawling!
Page <<first <prev 6 of 7 next>
Oct 6, 2012 04:03:00   #
The Watcher
 
SheenaghGebhard wrote:
I'm sorry to ask such a dumb question, but after trawling through many questions and answers regarding, depth of field, apeture, ISO settings etc., I don't even know where you find the information that tells you the settings your photo was taken on in order to address the problem in the image! The attached photo has the bubbles in focus but the child is blurred. I think this is because my DOF is too short? Can someone tell me where I can find the info on the picture so I could maybe begin to figure out how I could have taken them both in focus? I am in the process of organising some tutoring so the technical jargon of F stops, ISO and apeture do not remain what currently might as well be "Swahili"
I'm sorry to ask such a dumb question, but after t... (show quote)


Thanks to you all and to you TK - I've just checked it in Piccaso and this is what it says......EOS 7D, 1/1250s, focal length 52.0mm, f/6.3, ISO 400. Would that translate that I had set the shutter speed fast because the kids were moving and the day was bright and then the camera set the rest automatically? I think I might have been experimenting with Tv Shutter priority. If you were shooting photographing moving objects on a bright sun shiny day and you wanted to try something otherthan auto, what would you suggest would capture the best images, TV (shutter) priority or Av (apeture) priority. Apologies again for such a basic question!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Has anyone noticed when pretty women use their photo as a avatar, they get a lot of attention?
Started reading your post early this morning and wanted to respond, but was tied up most of the day. I haven't had time to read through all the comments, but have noticed there's a lot of confusion about depth of field. I don't want to stay on that trend, so I'll comment on your photograph. With any photo that one decides to shoot, the photographer needs to decide how the photo might be used. To make it simple you could shoot everything in raw mode and through adjustments you could cover anything that you want to do with the photo. Since your camera comes with 18 MP in raw, you could of backed away from your subject to increase the DOF and then cropped the photo. The crop would still have lots of MPs left over to produce a large print. A high jpeg setting could also work. Sarge gave you the right advise on how to focus, but even then the bubbles may fall out of focus. One way to prevent this, is to use a smaller aperture opening to give you a wider DOF. You could change the aperture setting without changing the shutter speed. But if you do that, you will notice the girls face will become darker. The photo is very overexposed and the exposure the camera has chosen works well for the girls face, but not for her hair and arm. The meter decided on this exposure because of the dark area in the background. A hand held meter would of give you the correct reading if you used it in incident mode. but to use that reading you would have to deal with the shaded part of her face. A fill flash wouldn't work here with the bubbles in the way. So you need to maintain the same exposure, and increase the DOF. There are two ways to do this. Back away from the subject or set the ISO to 800, not the 400 the meter chose, keep the shutter speed at 1/250 to stop motion. Now make the aperture smaller by going to a higher number. The correct setting should be about three clicks or one f-stop above the f 6.3 the meter had chosen. I hope I've worded this in a way that you can understand it.

Reply
Oct 6, 2012 04:11:17   #
rts2568
 
Shakey wrote:
rts2568 wrote:
Shakey wrote:
dickparkans wrote:
Tea8 wrote:
To me it seems like the DOF just isn't enough. A larger F stop would give you more depth of field in the picture so that you would have the bubbles and the girl in focus. Someone correct me if I'm wrong I'm still learning.


Please don't take this wrong but f-stops seem to be one of the most confusing things about setting a camera. "A larger f-stop". Someone might think this as going from f-8 to f-5.6. The opening is getting larger. It's all how you say it. If I am talking to someone about f-stops, I usually say "f-8 to f-5.6 is a larger opening and a smaller number.", "and this will give you a more shallow DOF." I hope I didn't step on anybodies toes. :-)
quote=Tea8 To me it seems like the DOF just isn't... (show quote)


I agree with almost everybody who has explained f stops. However, any newbie may be totally confused. To add to the confusion I created a graphic which may help somebody. (I confess that I got the idea for the image from another website.)
quote=dickparkans quote=Tea8 To me it seems like... (show quote)



To Shakey
From rts2568

Thank you Shakey,

Now that is a perfect example of the sort of positive thinking about the constractive help that UHHers will mostly appreciate and be able to learn from.


Take note everyone else.

Thank you Shakey,

rts2568
quote=Shakey quote=dickparkans quote=Tea8 To me... (show quote)


Thank you, rts2568, your compliment is much appreciated.
quote=rts2568 quote=Shakey quote=dickparkans q... (show quote)



To Shakey
From rts2568

You deserved it and you're welcome.

rts2568

Reply
Oct 6, 2012 04:12:07   #
Shakey Loc: Traveling again to Norway and other places.
 
You are right, Watcher. What we have here is a 'Confusion of Opinions'. (Could be described as a collective noun: flight of birds, herd of elephants, stampede of photographers.)

Reply
 
 
Oct 6, 2012 08:15:11   #
SheenaghGebhard Loc: Cornwall - UK
 
Many, many thanks again to all of you and having found the Private Message facility will try to reply individually! I've actually downloaded all your suggestions and advise and as a newbie it will take me a lot of time (and practise!) to try and assimilate this combined knowledge - but it has encouraged me to put to one side my 600D (temporarily) and pick up the 7D again - to the "Watcher" I'm taking your comment regarding my avatar with a wry smile and hopefully as a back handed compliment! but would ask you to check out my "new" avatar - now she really is a good looking blonde! lol - and as and when I learn how to attach a smiley face - that's how I would end the post - thanks again.

Reply
Oct 6, 2012 08:28:46   #
rts2568
 
SheenaghGebhard wrote:
Many, many thanks again to all of you and having found the Private Message facility will try to reply individually! I've actually downloaded all your suggestions and advise and as a newbie it will take me a lot of time (and practise!) to try and assimilate this combined knowledge - but it has encouraged me to put to one side my 600D (temporarily) and pick up the 7D again - to the "Watcher" I'm taking your comment regarding my avatar with a wry smile and hopefully as a back handed compliment! but would ask you to check out my "new" avatar - now she really is a good looking blonde! lol - and as and when I learn how to attach a smiley face - that's how I would end the post - thanks again.
Many, many thanks again to all of you and having f... (show quote)



to SheenaghGebhard
From rts2568

Reply
Oct 6, 2012 08:32:21   #
rts2568
 
SheenaghGebhard wrote:
Many, many thanks again to all of you and having found the Private Message facility will try to reply individually! I've actually downloaded all your suggestions and advise and as a newbie it will take me a lot of time (and practise!) to try and assimilate this combined knowledge - but it has encouraged me to put to one side my 600D (temporarily) and pick up the 7D again - to the "Watcher" I'm taking your comment regarding my avatar with a wry smile and hopefully as a back handed compliment! but would ask you to check out my "new" avatar - now she really is a good looking blonde! lol - and as and when I learn how to attach a smiley face - that's how I would end the post - thanks again.
Many, many thanks again to all of you and having f... (show quote)



to SheenaghGebhard
From rts2568


Love your new Avatar SheenghGebhard, she is a treasure too, just another of your children I imagine.

You've just beaten me to it, as it happens, I was about to suggest you experiment with inserting a different avatar. Glad you have.

rts2568

Reply
Oct 6, 2012 08:32:26   #
Zero_Equals_Infinity Loc: Canada
 
Grouping terms for animals are alway fun.

Consider the following:

A leap of leopards;
A pride of lions;
A murder of crows;
An unkindness of ravens;
A flutter of butterflies.


For photographers we can probably come up with some fun ideas.

A composition of photographers;
A blur of photographers;
An obsession of photographers.


Subtypes:

A blind of bird photographers.
A mountain of landscape photographers.



Feel free to contribute.

Reply
 
 
Oct 6, 2012 09:28:13   #
rts2568
 
SheenaghGebhard wrote:
I'm sorry to ask such a dumb question, but after trawling through many questions and answers regarding, depth of field, apeture, ISO settings etc., I don't even know where you find the information that tells you the settings your photo was taken on in order to address the problem in the image! The attached photo has the bubbles in focus but the child is blurred. I think this is because my DOF is too short? Can someone tell me where I can find the info on the picture so I could maybe begin to figure out how I could have taken them both in focus? I am in the process of organising some tutoring so the technical jargon of F stops, ISO and apeture do not remain what currently might as well be "Swahili"
I'm sorry to ask such a dumb question, but after t... (show quote)



To: SheenaghGebhard- new user
From rts2568


Hi SheenaghGebhard,

Yes, Your question strives after the word or phrase EXIF. You should have received a CD/DVD with your camera if you bought new and once loaded you will be able to open your photo and be provided with the information you seek.

Since however, I read you have found out anyway. Some of these settings will be discussed herein.

One useful piece of, to-do-research: http://www.slrphotographyguide.com/camera/depthfield-preview-button.shtml

I have to contradict most of the other offerings here because I don’t agree that this question relates to DOF (Depth Of Field), though DOF needs to be understood for a shot like this where a 52 mm focal length is set. There is no exif data with your photo so I can’t know for sure whether you are using a 52mm focal length on a mid range zoom lens, or a telephoto zoom on your APS-C sensored 7D, which in turn would put you approximately 6feet (2 meters) from your daughter & her bubbles. I’m guessing, but I’m guessing again that you were using this zoom lens hand held? – more on this in a minute. I must suspect also, that as you are a newbie the lens used will more likely be a kit lens? The question of which focal length range is impossible to tell with the limited information supplied, though this also should be in your EXIF information, especially if your lens was/is a Canon make, not an independent like a Tamron or other make, though their information may be shown also, depending on the model.

Why this other information would have been useful is because I don’t believe you had a DOF problem here, at least not in total, though you need to become familiar with DOF so that you don’t have lost depth in future shots of your daughter or other members of your family or friends/pets.

Now your actual question “…what would you suggest would capture the best images…”? Undoubtedly, aperture priority! This because one of the problems you face with shots like this is indeed DOF short-falls, so F8 or F11 or even F16 would be good options, while ensuring that the speed is sufficient to eliminate camera shake if the lighting was less.

Now I have to insert a short piece of advice. Your quote which I’ve highlighted in the above sentence, you’ve changed, it doesn’t exist anymore as I now re-check my text. If you have other questions, please, to keep yourself up to date with what you are asking, make a new entry with the new question.

Now back to the original question. The problem is, I believe, loss of sharpness (camera shake)!
There will be any number of detractors here-follows, but what appears to have been missed is that all of the bubbles, all, including the child are in fact out of focus or un-sharp. I haven’t seen in the multiplicity of replies to your question, mentioning that the bubbles at the front and at the back of the child are pretty much, equally unclear, as is the child in the middle. Yes, the background also but that isn’t a worry here, just doesn’t help to asses a focus point. Of course this will no doubt puzzle you more as you have mentioned that you thought the bubbles are all in focus. If this were the case, then the child would have to also be in focus. If you examine this photo closely, that you, and other readers, will come to understand what I am saying.

A close examination of this shot reveals what is suspiciously like movement. OK, everyone is going to jump down my throat and tell me, as if I hadn’t picked up on your mentioning that this shot was taken @ 1/1250th second. So I say, “so what”!

Normally a shutter speed of this rating would be more than enough to stop just about anything but in the circumstances of which you have included with your question and subsequent information, I suggest it isn’t anywhere near fast enough. Now a 1/4000th sec would be closer, or if it had been taken while the camera was on a tripod. The reasons for this are:
1/ the focal length of 52 mm which has forced you to come in close and therefore also
2/ the close proximity which increases the chance of shake/motion problems. Coming in close here could be viewed as parallel to doing close up work.
3/ the child’s movement – exceptionally emphasized at this close distance under any circumstances.
4/ your movement, combined with hand held camera shake etc. Again this movement increases camera shake at this distance especially, at this relatively close distance.


I’m strongly suggesting here that no matter what aperture you set in advance to ensure sufficient DOF, if you took the same photo again in the same lighting circumstances (seemingly near perfect), that the same blur(?) will occur.

There are two other possible causes.
A/ The quality of the lens you used.
A1/ the optics are one thing, this especially if a zoom – a single focal length lens is more likely to give you a better resolution – depending on the lens involved of course.
A2/ the aperture of F6.3 that you were given by the automatic system’s assessment, may not be the lens’ best optical resolution. You would need to carefully take some test pictures to clear that one up.

These are things that you will have to evaluate later on – you have enough to concentrate on first and although DOF is close to the front of the queue, it isn’t your priority at this point in your learning to properly use your camera; it’s how to competently handle your camera in a manner that will greatly reduce any chance of future blur problems; in all shooting conditions or with any subjects.

Firstly, read, re-read your instruction book because I’m guessing that holding your camera properly, especially if using a tele or tele-zoom, will be discussed in some sort of useful way, then go from there in both practice and more reading to form immoveable concepts in your brain.

Read up elsewhere on site, on the web or in library books perhaps, concentrating in your searches, on “avoiding camera shake”, “holding your camera correctly” and etc. Take note when using your camera’s strap is mentioned, to wrap your wrist with it, or have it firmly pulled into the back of your neck etc – most important when photographing subjects like this but generally also.

Tripods will of course be mentioned, though not necessarily applicable here. There will be various types, shapes and sizes of mono pods mentioned also and you may like to consider these seriously as one or the other will serve you well, even with this sort of capture. No way to describe the use of one or other of the monopod options in this entry, too complex to write about, though if you know someone who is a very serious, or professional photographer, who use mono pods, just might (no guarantee here either) be able to help with a hands on demo.

If you were confused at the beginning, then you don’t need to confirm that your mind will be in more turmoil now. Sleep well on this contradiction to just about every other entry; I’m not one to readily join in with mass hysteria games. However, I haven’t done this to mislead and I suggest you don’t dismiss camera shake too lightly, even though most of the other offerings herein might be a persuasion to do so.

I must add though, this photo, blurred or not is just great and will be a treasure of your’s for many years to come. Just an aside, when out in the sunshine like illustrated in this photo, your built in flash would come in handy when the prime light source is where it is, though specifically to this photo of bubbles, it would need to be less than if there were no bubbles, but this is again, another issue and will come in time if you follow this interest; and much greater understanding will arrive if you experiment, as you will come to terms with your camera’s bits and pieces in time.

I do hope you can understand this change of tack I offer and that the above gives a good start to head you in the right direction for constructive learning.



rts2568

Reply
Oct 6, 2012 09:33:44   #
stevenelson Loc: Pauls Valley, Oklahoma
 
This is the best advice I can give. Buy Scott Kelby's Digital Photography Book's 1-2-3-4. Just a littleover $55.00 for the set. Easy to read and understand. Here is the link. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_1_23?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=the%20digital%20photography%20book%20by%20scott%20kelby

Reply
Oct 8, 2012 10:44:32   #
emmons267 Loc: Arizona, Valley of the Sun
 
SheenaghGebhard,
The colors in the picture are great... did you do any post process editing ?

Reply
Oct 8, 2012 12:17:55   #
SheenaghGebhard Loc: Cornwall - UK
 
Hi "mfeveland" Thank you! My photoshop skills are as limited as my photography! I did slightly crop the image, but don't think I'd even found the "saturation" or "sharpen" tool when I took this picture. What I think is pleasing about the colours is that all the hues in her dress are relflected in the bubbles.

Reply
 
 
Oct 8, 2012 14:10:21   #
dachs
 
all splendid advice but I have to say, I woulld be way happy with the OP, great shot.
Sarge69 had the solution to another great shot.
Both are valid, keep tryimg!

Reply
Oct 11, 2012 08:23:28   #
Dun1 Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
That is what this forum is all about the question that went unasked was probably the same question others were just dying to ask and did not, and they were the student of stayed after class to ask the question and after the question was asked and answered three other people got the answer to the same question.

Reply
Oct 11, 2012 23:10:14   #
john merry Loc: tincan bay qeensland aus
 
dumb question wots an an avata

Reply
Oct 12, 2012 00:10:42   #
rts2568
 
john merry wrote:
dumb question wots an an avata


To john merry,
from rts2568

If your question is, a question "...wots an...avata(r)?..." then it is the picture you might like to put up in the left column of these pages to give your entries a bit of class, that sort of a picture that others put up just under their site names and which you had an opportunity to insert when you registered.
I'm lost as to who you are referring to here, "...dumb question..." but let us in on the question by giving us the reference, by your clicking the "Quote Reply" rather than leaving us in the dark by only clicking the "Reply", OK?

rts2568

Reply
Page <<first <prev 6 of 7 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.