Low level light
philo
(low res for web...it's a 40 meg TIFF)
As mentioned I just got a 50D and over the weekend went out for my 2nd
photo shoot
In a night-club...shooting with a flash is not going to cut it...
unless you want to maybe risk one or two and pretend you're a tourist.
Took well about 500 shots and the camera did not bother anyone.
Mild telephoto...I stayed behind the scenes .
Talked to the band afterwards and they were flattered I was interested
in them and they are interested in the photos.
Got home and was initially slightly disappointed in that most of my
shots were either too dark...or else washed out by the red lighting.
I shot most between (effective) iso of 3200 and 12,800 @ f3.5
luckily the investment in a camera with that kind of sensitivity was a
good one..as the shutter speeds were a decent 1/125th or 1/60th at worst
Did I say it was dark in there? (G)
Then last night I wanted to see what I could salvage out of the shoot...
though even 12 good shots out of 500 was better than nothing...
as I've had ratios worse...
I was rather elated when I found that with only a little bit of
editing...I have at least 75 good shots...which for me is *way* better
than average.
What I did was first convert to gray-scale all shots I had taken in color...
then adjust brightness, contrast and gamma (possibly saturation too)
then, finally for some of then I tweaked the colors ever so slightly and
was able to bring out even more detail...it was a very subtle color
change and gave some of the images a slight sepia or violet tone.
(almost too subtle to notice on the screen, but showed up on the print)
here they are in action
http://www.myspace.com/delilahdewyldeandthelostboys
Thing is most of the stuff they do is traditional
Charles E Hardwidge
news:88ydnV0sru7vwJTW...@ntd.net...
> http://www.plazaearth.com/philo/DelilahDeWylde.jpg
>
> Then last night I wanted to see what I could salvage out of the shoot...
> though even 12 good shots out of 500 was better than nothing...
> as I've had ratios worse...
>
> I was rather elated when I found that with only a little bit of
> editing...I have at least 75 good shots...which for me is *way* better
> than average.
>
> What I did was first convert to gray-scale all shots I had taken in
> color... then adjust brightness, contrast and gamma (possibly saturation
> too)
>
> then, finally for some of then I tweaked the colors ever so slightly and
> was able to bring out even more detail...it was a very subtle color change
> and gave some of the images a slight sepia or violet tone.
>
> (almost too subtle to notice on the screen, but showed up on the print)
Besides the usual issues I've been looking at black and white photography to
draw things out of a scene and get around the limitations of my G9. I'm
genuinely looking at what B&W can do besides mitigating colour noise, not
just slapping a B&W filter on the image to save it from the trash can.
I'm still holding back from noise reduction as I'm still on a learning curve
with that to get the best results. But, some of the B&W film filters are
interesting. Noise /can/ be attractive in a scene or, at least, *not* be
distractive so that's something else to absorb and gently weigh.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
philo
Yes
I recall when instead of pushing my good old tri-x to 1200 asa
that IIRC Ilford came out with ASA-1000 film that could be pushed to 1600 !
(The film was very thin an I'd occasionally mis-wind it when I developed
it and ruined a few shots)
Anyway I liked the graininess and thought it helped emphasize the darkness.
Now I see that digitally I am getting noise when I use H1 and H2...but I
kind of like it.
Would hardly have expected a shot in a night club to look like it was
taken in bright sunlight....nor would I want it to
Alan Browne
> http://www.plazaearth.com/philo/DelilahDeWylde.jpg
I find that a bit stark looking. Do you have a few more to post?
>
>
> (low res for web...it's a 40 meg TIFF)
The size of the file has nothing specific to do with resolution. For
that matter, 40 MB is way over what that camera produces.
Charles E Hardwidge
"Alan Browne" <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:PcadnViHK7zsA5TW...@giganews.com...
At least he's not ANAL and BORING.
I had a classic print of some guys hanging off an old car on the edge of a
cliff. Can't remember who did it but it's a famous one. This photo has
captured a similar style. It's funny and dynamic. Doubleplus Un-Alan.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
philo
> philo wrote:
>> http://www.plazaearth.com/philo/DelilahDeWylde.jpg
>
> I find that a bit stark looking. Do you have a few more to post?
>
>>
Thanks for the feedback...
Purposely stark.
For me to post more I'd really need a regular web hosting site of some
type...as my website is using up most of my allocated bandwidth..
but I may put up a couple more
>>
>> (low res for web...it's a 40 meg TIFF)
you know what I mean...
a small jpg is sufficient for the web
>
> The size of the file has nothing specific to do with resolution. For
> that matter, 40 MB is way over what that camera produces.
The only reason the file is 40 megs is because I save them as TIFFs..
simply because I like TIFFs. the camera of course does not take them as
TIFFs.
Harddrives are cheap I'm not trying to conserve space ...
at least not yet <G>
philo
Thanks for the reply
I find that if I set off to do something specific ...it never ends up
that way anyway...so I let the situations regulate the final results.