If you're shooting at 1.8@3200 ISO and still have trouble getting a sharp shot, you really just do not have enough light. As disanski says, 1/60th ideally is as low as you want to go shutter speed wise, tho i'm pretty comfortable taking shots at 1/30th if its a relative still subject or even as low as 1/15th if i've got something to steady myself with, one thing that is a good idea, is to take multiple shots in continuous mode in low light, as camera shake/blur is a random event, one shot is likely going to come out better than the others.
At 1.8 and close up your focus point is very important, in that shot there the focal point is on your nose, with the very narrow depth of field it makes the rest of your face blurry. Its always best to focus on the eyes, if the eyes are sharp and in focus the shot will always feel sharper, as the eyes are what we are drawn to.
I shoot wide open with my 30mm 1.4 often, where the bokeh is extreme and the focal plane is very narrow, you've gotta be very careful as a slight movement forwards or backwards after focusing and before snapping the shutter will affect your focus, it takes practice and lots of experimentation to figure it out.
For portraits exacting sharpness is hardly ever a goal for me, I dont really like to see every little skin poor in super detail, so I dont have a problem with slight blur most of the time, or the narrow depth of field of a 1.8 or 1.4 lens, again as long as your focal point is sound of course.
In this shot its clear to see that most of the image is out of focus and very blurry, but because the eyes are sharp and general features of the face, it has a high level of "perceived sharpness". Taking a straight on shot with the sensor parallel to the plane of the face also helps, to keep everything in that "plane of sharpness", when you do angled shots you need to use a smaller aperture with less narrow depth of feild to ensure sharpness, and thus a lower shutter speed. This shot was taken at like ISO 400(maybe 800? i'll have to check the raw later) at probably around 1/100th @ 1.4 in a rather well lit basement.
Poorly lit bars stress my 30mm 1.4 even at ISO 1600, i'de like my next camera body to be atleast usable at 6400.
[edit] ISO 800, 1.4, 1/400th, plenty of light in that basement =P
Well it says post ONE picture and i dont really want to fill up the thread with my pictures so I apologize but I have got 2 more from today that i like so I am posting them I hope you like them too.
Disanski, I hardly think anyone is going to complain! the problem is when someone post 15 random shots they took seeing some band or whatever, you know the type.
That first shot Paul .... damn
The films that you use for that camera are not the regular 35 mm films are they? Are those hard to get? do they still make them? I have a friend that owns one of those cameras and it just need a bit of work on it which may not be expensive. I think the shutter can't close fast enough for the fast exposures and it just needs some cleaning up
The Rollei takes 120 medium format film; Glazers Camera store in Seattle has a good selection of 120 film. 120/220 film is the only medium format film is still mass produced today and is the only type of medium format film that remains popular. Usually on old cameras like this it is the 1 second shutter speed that goes (breaks) first; if the optics and other mechanics are in good working order I'd suggest to your friend to repair the camera. It's good to keep this kind of vintage photography alive in the ever increasing digital world.
Thanks for your answer Paul. I will offer my friend to help with the expenses for the repair and try to find the right film- I no longer live in the states and I guess I will have to get them online but who know perhaps in some camera shop they have them:) I bet finding a place to develop them here in Bulgaria will not be easy:) Any way is that what happens when you get hooked with photography- you get a point a shoot at first, then you get a entry level dslr, as soon as you know what you need you get a bit higher class camera and lens and then you go back to film??
I must find a good read on how to develop my own films- you mentioned before you do develop your black and white films - is this expensive?
About the models - they are just my friends most of the time they are the people I go out shooting with and they are amateur photographers as well
I only had a real model to work with once in my life but I could not take good shoots because it was my first time working with lights and I was not so sure what was I doing
I find it very difficult to pose them and even if I do manage to pose them in the way I think it will work, then it is even harder to ask them for the right face expression...
If you guys know about a book that covers some of the posing and face expression for portrait photography i am all ears
Back to zbrush now
Thanks again
You'll need either an expensive dedicated film scanner (coolscans, hassy flextight etc) or a newer flatbed film scanner from epson or canon (canoscan). Dedicated film scanners feed on film, while the flatbeds function like regular scanners.
EDIT: Just saw your previous post. B&W developing is dead easy, especially with more forgiving chemicals like diafine. These days all I do is shake it for a couple of minutes and let the thing dry :P
Clearly my photos are not of the high quality being posted here, but I got a lil photo to post today!
My mom was dying for a shot of this bird that came to our yard today, and basically forced me to get my camera out and snap a picture. I got one that turned out rather well, though!
The bird is a redpoll, and my mom (an avid birdwatcher) wanted to post it online to find out if it was a common or a hoary redpoll. :P
So Mezz was itcommon or a hoary redpoll don't keep us waiting
I am just back from my friend and I found out what kind was the camera that she has and unfortunately is not Rolleiflex. It turns out it is a Weltaflex with a 75mm f/3.5 lens but I am still very exited to take it out. She said that it can be used as it is and no need to repair it for now
I have to order some films and play with it.
What would be a good and reasonably cheap b&w film medium format?
I was looking online and some of the films cost like 40 EU . Would this be OK film for that camera?
Paul ....
SO one more from me I am very open for critiques if anybody has any Was not sure about the composition and on purpose I am not using the rule of Thirds and i added some extra grain just experimenting - I Like it a lot but not sure if I am on the right path
Damn I wish I knew that many hot girls that like to get photographed...
Love the colors and contrast, but no big fan of the grain, and that angle in the door frame on the right really bothers me...
I agree, think the grain is a little too much, and i think you could have lined the border parallel to the door frame. But theres some nice side lighting and the colour contrast between the red and blue is really nice.
Thanks Xoliul and Ark. I dont actually know almost anybody here but i have been asking a lot of the girls I get to talk to and they tel their friends and so on.. and after i got few decent shots It has become easier to convince them because I can just show them the images and they like them most of the time
About the frame .. yeaaa have no idea I think it is just perspective because i was almost at a ground level and i did strait the floor.. I will also cut back on the grain
Thanks again.
I guess back to zbrush tomorrow even if i would love to edit few more of the photos from today... This is the same photo with a bit different pp
Paul ....
SO one more from me I am very open for critiques if anybody has any Was not sure about the composition and on purpose I am not using the rule of Thirds and i added some extra grain just experimenting - I Like it a lot but not sure if I am on the right path
I dunno if its just me, but I've always found bold colors and geometric lines go well together, straighting out the lines also makes the contrast between the organic women and the rigid walls stronger.
I actually took this for vein reference for a character I'm working on, but the wonky FOV made me chuckle. I snapped this with my garbage camera phone while cleaning up after an equally lackluster workout session.
Heh, on a bit of a serious note tho, I don't want to seem like I'm mocking the thread in anyway, I just instantly thought of this thread for some reason as soon as I snapped it.
took this with my HTC Inspire the first day I got it to test out the camera (8 mp). i swear it takes better pictures than my point and shoot 10.1 mp cybershot
sorry to anyone with a slow connection for the large image
ben it looks like the table continues back to the windowsill making it look like he has no legs. this is not a crit of the photo, because its a great picture, just a funny observation.
I think this is my favorite one from today (abandoned powerplant):
First time I do HDR, this one turned out best. I really don't get how people make these extreme fake-looking HDR's, it's so easy to keep it looking natural..
This pic is really sweet, I think they run a single image through some sort of HDR filter and then a de-noising filter in photoshop. It's really annoying and terrible I see it running rampant on car forums.
ben it looks like the table continues back to the windowsill making it look like he has no legs. this is not a crit of the photo, because its a great picture, just a funny observation.
I cant un-see this now. Awesome.
Experimenting with a cheap-o bounce flash, shooting manual, 50mm @ 3.5 1/200th ISO 100. Haven't really messed with flash much but using it to bounce of the ceiling opens open so many posibilities indoors, where I would normally be shooting at F1.4, ISO 800 and 1/30th of second or whatever.
that last photo Disanski is awesome! Great composition and the colors are just to awesome! Only thing I would have done different would be adding a bit more lighting to the head so she doesnt have that hard black shadow running through the head
Thanks Zpanzer. Good point. I guess I got carried away while adjusting the contrast. I will see if I can bring some more light back. I was just testing the cheap off camera flash I got and playing with some long (10 sec) exposures and shining a light in front of the lens... It was a lot of fun.
One thing you should watch out for on both of these (great shots btw) on the lighting, is the dark shadows on the face. This is what happens when you mix a flash with the sun, and their is no fill light. A popular one is a ring flash, or just an umbrella beside or behind you, but you need something "on-axis" to keep the faces from getting those unsightly shadows where the two lights don't overlap. Alternatively you can bring your flash closer to on-axis, but sometimes you want that volumized look, and that's where an on-axis fill comes to save the day.
Thanks guys. I am really glad you like those images. I had great idea about the first shot but I could not explain it well and it was first time for the model too so she was a bit stiff and I could not pose her the way I wanted....
Thanks Ben for the critiques. I see what you mean . I do have a flash but I have never used it outside .. still trying to avoid it because I feel like I need to work a lot more with the natural light before I feel comfortable with it. However for those shots I was using a big reflector with the golden side up, but if it looks anything like a flash that means I have failed to deliver the image I was after It was my first time using it. Next time I will use the white diffuse side of it so it is just a fill light...
Xoliul, I dont have a site up yet. I will get one soon for my character portfolio and could make a section for some of the photographs.
When I do post those images on a photography forum I don't really get a lot of positive feedback but considering how recently I started taking it seriously and looking at my images 1 year ago, I am very happy with them.
Perhaps I will upload some of them to flicker and drop a link here
Thanks again for the feedback I really appreciate it.
Here is one more image (little different this time)
Replies
At 1.8 and close up your focus point is very important, in that shot there the focal point is on your nose, with the very narrow depth of field it makes the rest of your face blurry. Its always best to focus on the eyes, if the eyes are sharp and in focus the shot will always feel sharper, as the eyes are what we are drawn to.
I shoot wide open with my 30mm 1.4 often, where the bokeh is extreme and the focal plane is very narrow, you've gotta be very careful as a slight movement forwards or backwards after focusing and before snapping the shutter will affect your focus, it takes practice and lots of experimentation to figure it out.
For portraits exacting sharpness is hardly ever a goal for me, I dont really like to see every little skin poor in super detail, so I dont have a problem with slight blur most of the time, or the narrow depth of field of a 1.8 or 1.4 lens, again as long as your focal point is sound of course.
In this shot its clear to see that most of the image is out of focus and very blurry, but because the eyes are sharp and general features of the face, it has a high level of "perceived sharpness". Taking a straight on shot with the sensor parallel to the plane of the face also helps, to keep everything in that "plane of sharpness", when you do angled shots you need to use a smaller aperture with less narrow depth of feild to ensure sharpness, and thus a lower shutter speed. This shot was taken at like ISO 400(maybe 800? i'll have to check the raw later) at probably around 1/100th @ 1.4 in a rather well lit basement.
Poorly lit bars stress my 30mm 1.4 even at ISO 1600, i'de like my next camera body to be atleast usable at 6400.
[edit] ISO 800, 1.4, 1/400th, plenty of light in that basement =P
Just got my 28mm f/2.8 and lovin' it!
Two photographs shot with the Rolleiflex; first one using Fujifilm Velvia film, the second photo shot with Kodak Ektar 100.
The films that you use for that camera are not the regular 35 mm films are they? Are those hard to get? do they still make them? I have a friend that owns one of those cameras and it just need a bit of work on it which may not be expensive. I think the shutter can't close fast enough for the fast exposures and it just needs some cleaning up
btw, Who are the models in your photos disanski?
I must find a good read on how to develop my own films- you mentioned before you do develop your black and white films - is this expensive?
About the models - they are just my friends most of the time they are the people I go out shooting with and they are amateur photographers as well
I only had a real model to work with once in my life but I could not take good shoots because it was my first time working with lights and I was not so sure what was I doing
I find it very difficult to pose them
If you guys know about a book that covers some of the posing and face expression for portrait photography i am all ears
Back to zbrush now
Thanks again
EDIT: Just saw your previous post. B&W developing is dead easy, especially with more forgiving chemicals like diafine. These days all I do is shake it for a couple of minutes and let the thing dry :P
My mom was dying for a shot of this bird that came to our yard today, and basically forced me to get my camera out and snap a picture. I got one that turned out rather well, though!
The bird is a redpoll, and my mom (an avid birdwatcher) wanted to post it online to find out if it was a common or a hoary redpoll. :P
I am just back from my friend and I found out what kind was the camera that she has and unfortunately is not Rolleiflex. It turns out it is a Weltaflex with a 75mm f/3.5 lens but I am still very exited to take it out. She said that it can be used as it is and no need to repair it for now
I have to order some films and play with it.
What would be a good and reasonably cheap b&w film medium format?
I was looking online and some of the films cost like 40 EU
http://www.macodirect.de/rollei-retro-tonal-p-2187.html
I am going to check on eBay as well.
Enjoy your weekend everybody
And two shots from my Leica M6, loving this camera.
SO one more from me I am very open for critiques if anybody has any
Love the colors and contrast, but no big fan of the grain, and that angle in the door frame on the right really bothers me...
About the frame .. yeaaa have no idea I think it is just perspective because i was almost at a ground level and i did strait the floor.. I will also cut back on the grain
Thanks again.
I guess back to zbrush tomorrow even if i would love to edit few more of the photos from today...
This is the same photo with a bit different pp
I see your cat photo, and i raise you mine
its been hot here for awhile so we decided to give the bunny a bath and a hair cut, couldn't resist taking a snap
I dunno if its just me, but I've always found bold colors and geometric lines go well together, straighting out the lines also makes the contrast between the organic women and the rigid walls stronger.
IMG_6456.jpg by mr-chompers, on Flickr
I actually took this for vein reference for a character I'm working on, but the wonky FOV made me chuckle. I snapped this with my garbage camera phone while cleaning up after an equally lackluster workout session.
Heh, on a bit of a serious note tho, I don't want to seem like I'm mocking the thread in anyway, I just instantly thought of this thread for some reason as soon as I snapped it.
sorry to anyone with a slow connection for the large image
Untitled
This pic is really sweet, I think they run a single image through some sort of HDR filter and then a de-noising filter in photoshop. It's really annoying and terrible I see it running rampant on car forums.
I cant un-see this now. Awesome.
Experimenting with a cheap-o bounce flash, shooting manual, 50mm @ 3.5 1/200th ISO 100. Haven't really messed with flash much but using it to bounce of the ceiling opens open so many posibilities indoors, where I would normally be shooting at F1.4, ISO 800 and 1/30th of second or whatever.
fish playing hide and seek,
and a flying goat.
Most people here are using $200-1000 cameras, with $100-500 lenses. Paul and Ben have thousands in gear =P
You can get started with a dSLR+lens in the $350-500 range.
Take a look here: http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=79655
Please never stop posting your awesome inspiring photos.
One thing you should watch out for on both of these (great shots btw) on the lighting, is the dark shadows on the face. This is what happens when you mix a flash with the sun, and their is no fill light. A popular one is a ring flash, or just an umbrella beside or behind you, but you need something "on-axis" to keep the faces from getting those unsightly shadows where the two lights don't overlap. Alternatively you can bring your flash closer to on-axis, but sometimes you want that volumized look, and that's where an on-axis fill comes to save the day.
Thanks Ben for the critiques. I see what you mean . I do have a flash but I have never used it outside .. still trying to avoid it because I feel like I need to work a lot more with the natural light before I feel comfortable with it. However for those shots I was using a big reflector with the golden side up, but if it looks anything like a flash that means I have failed to deliver the image I was after
Xoliul, I dont have a site up yet. I will get one soon for my character portfolio and could make a section for some of the photographs.
When I do post those images on a photography forum I don't really get a lot of positive feedback but considering how recently I started taking it seriously and looking at my images 1 year ago, I am very happy with them.
Perhaps I will upload some of them to flicker and drop a link here
Thanks again for the feedback I really appreciate it.
Here is one more image (little different this time)
Somewhat Illuminated by SauceyJack, on Flickr
nom nom.... (uhhh don't ask about the stick between his legs...Pandas....)
(from my flickr photostream)