Newbie - advice on landscape shots
Darren Robertson
Quite recently I have started travelling a bit more. There have been several
places I've been where I would have loved to photograph a landscape in one
shot rather than taking 2 or 3 overlapping shots with my compact camera.
I have managed to get a manual focus SLR camera, but what, in your opinions,
would be the best way to achieve the shots I want?
Thanks.
D.
--
__________
Darren Robertson
Technical Support
ORC Software
__________
Tel: +44 (0)20 7942 0999
Fax: +44 (0)20 7942 0940
www.orcsoftware.com
__________
Orc Software e-mail Disclaimer.
If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail
disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to
http://www.orcsoftware.com/disclaimer or contact the sender.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.377 / Virus Database: 211 - Release Date: 15/07/2002
Simon H. Lee
high-kicking electrons to spell out:
>All.
>
>Quite recently I have started travelling a bit more. There have been several
>places I've been where I would have loved to photograph a landscape in one
>shot rather than taking 2 or 3 overlapping shots with my compact camera.
>
>I have managed to get a manual focus SLR camera, but what, in your opinions,
>would be the best way to achieve the shots I want?
If you want a wider field of view but don't want to have to
overlap multiple frames, a wide-angle lens would be the usual course of
action. (That or a Hasselblad XPan, but...)
--
__ (-o-) <*> A L L D O N E! B Y E B Y E!
(__ * _ _ _ _
__)|| | |(_)| \ "Mmm... unexplained bacon."
Mike Elek
> overlap multiple frames, a wide-angle lens would be the usual course of
> action. (That or a Hasselblad XPan, but...)
... Or you could jump to medium format and go for a 6x9 camera.
... or try a wide-angle lens. You'll get a wider field of view, but that
also includes the sky or foreground. So keep that in mind.
Either approach will cost more money.
Gordon Moat
more panoramic look. You could also not crop, but more sky and ground will then
be visible. Look for wider than 24 mm to get a large viewing area, but be
careful about tilting the camera too much to avoid lots of distortion.
You can also look into a panorama head for your tripod. This would still be a
large image on a few frames, but the overlap becomes minimal and more
accurately aligned.
If you find you like this quite a bit, and still want regular shots, check out
<http://www.xpan.com>. Really a very nicely done system.
Ciao!
Gordon Moat
Alliance Graphique Studio
<http://www.allgstudio.com/gallery.html>
Jim
Jim
*----------------------------------------------------------------*
* Check-out my new web site at: *
* http://home.earthlink.net/~swensonstudio *
* landscape and travel photographs, featuring gorgeous sunsets *
*----------------------------------------------------------------*
"Darren Robertson" <dar...@orcsoftware.com> wrote in message news:<TSw%8.5555$t4.1...@nntpserver.swip.net>...
Jeremy 1952
opinions,
> would be the best way to achieve the shots I want?
>
I'd recommend that you try and find Brian Bower's excellent book, "Lens,
Light & Landscape," for lots of suggestions about what lenses to use, best
times of day to shoot, and techniques that you should use. I bought my copy
over a decade ago, and I do not know if it is still in print. You might
check www.abebooks.com to see if one of their dealers has a used copy in
stock.
The photographer uses Leica and Hasselblad camera, and he specialized in
travel photos. The book has many examples of scenes shot from the same
location but with lenses of different focal lengths. You can see how the
use of different focal lengths changes your results.
I noticed that the photos shot on 35mm, with Leitz glass, seemed contrstier
and sharper than those shot with Zeiss lenses on Hasselblad. I was
impressed with the Leitz photos. I also realized that I preferred the
rectangular format of 35mm, as opposed to the square format of the
Hasselblad. It just seemed more natural, given the particular subject
matter.
Regardless of which lens you use, your two most important accessories are a
good, sturdy tripod and a lens shade. If you want those razor-sharp images,
you need to be sure that your camera is perfectly still. And you want to be
sure that off-axis light is kept from entering your lens, to the maximum
extent possible, to avoid flare.
It makes no sense to invest in an excellent lens, only to compromise your
results by hand-holding your photos. I know that there are some who will
argue that you can use a faster film, but I believe that you would probably
want a slower film for maximum sharpness, especially if you are shooting
wide vistas on a small 35mm negative. Use of a tripod and cable release (or
you can use your camera's self-timer to snap the shutter, rather than risk
adding vibration by pushing on the shutter release with your finger) will
also tend to make you slow down and think about your shot--not a bad thing,
especially cinsidering that the subject does not tend to move about.
Landscape photography, because it typically is oriented toward static
subjects--affords you an opportunity to concentrate on your craft (if only
because you aren't rushed). It is a type of photography that is different
from typical 35mm subject matter i.e., the "grab shots," where the
photographer must catch the "decisive moment" in a split second. Take your
time and ENJOY yourself!!
Cheers
SimRacer
"Darren Robertson" <dar...@orcsoftware.com> wrote in message
news:TSw%8.5555$t4.1...@nntpserver.swip.net...
>
> Quite recently I have started travelling a bit more. There have been
several
> places I've been where I would have loved to photograph a landscape in one
> shot rather than taking 2 or 3 overlapping shots with my compact camera.
>
> I have managed to get a manual focus SLR camera, but what, in your
opinions,
> would be the best way to achieve the shots I want?
>
> Thanks.
>
> D.
The *best* way I have found to do it is to just bite the bullet and shoot
multiple overlapping frames (I usualy try to do a 20%+/- overlap) and scan
them into a computer and use my photo editing software to stitch the frames
together into 1 panorama. Otherwise you'll need an ultrwide lens for 35mm
format (around 20mm or wider). Either that or you could move to a MF system
that takes 35mm and shoot panarama in-lieu as I like to call it. Bascially
uses 2 35mm frames at once, I think Mamiya makes a camera that can do this.
OR You can get one of the panorama cameras.
I like using a good telephoto lens and stitching them together, with wide
angle lenses, you get so much foreground and sky that it is very difficult
for me to get acceptable results. I use a tele-zoom and crop in-camera and
typically take 3-4 photos, aligned as best I can (using a level on my tripod
head) and work them together in the computer. I have done some impressive
(to me) shots of some NASCAR oval tracks this way from the stands. Setup and
shoot from 90º left of my position to 90º right of my position and end up
with a pretty good panoramic scene covering between 270º and 360º views of
my seated position. Who needs Ipix LOL!
Some tips about this stitching method: No matter how tempted you are, don't
use a polarizer, you'll never get the blues in the sky to match up if you
do. Also, and related to #1, determine and use one single *best* average
exposure among the differing shots you will require so they are all roughly
the same brightness when developed. Lastly, try to stay on the same 'plane'
so all the angles will lineup and overlap by about 20% from frame to frame
to assure yourself some latittude for stitching later. For levelness, I have
a micro geared head from Manfrotto (that I use on a Manfrotto tripod,
another must (not the brand, just the tool)) that has a level on it, plus I
use the grid lines within the viewfinder on my N80. All helpful features for
'quasi' panoramic lanscapes. AND, I almost forgot, leave the zoom setting
alone once you have found the ideal setting for the frame(s) that are
closest to straight ahead of your position. Changing the zoom is changing
the magnification and will screw up your effort if one or more of your
frames are done at a differnt mag setting. This is not an issue with a prime
lens.
Short of panoramic specialty lenses or cameras, digital stitching is the way
to go IMO. Allows me to shoot with lenses I already own...
zeitgeist
>
> Quite recently I have started travelling a bit more. There have been
several
> places I've been where I would have loved to photograph a landscape in one
> shot rather than taking 2 or 3 overlapping shots with my compact camera.
>
> I have managed to get a manual focus SLR camera, but what, in your
opinions,
> would be the best way to achieve the shots I want?
>
The number ONE thing you can do to get great shots is to get up before dawn
to get out in the territory to photograph in the sweet light of a new
morning.
Shooting on those wickedly cloudy days when it rains one second and the sun
peaks out under the clouds is also way cool, usually in the late afternoons
you can catch that.
and twilight, just before sundown, till almost dark.
William E. Graham
camera that has a "panoramic" mode. She uses it to take
waterfalls by turning it 90 degrees, but it's mainly for
landscapes, or group shots of teams or classes....
"Darren Robertson" <dar...@orcsoftware.com> wrote in message
news:TSw%8.5555$t4.1...@nntpserver.swip.net...
Dallas
them in and use software to stitch them together. The Canon Photostitch
software that comes with the D30 and D60 digitals works incredibly well. I
sometimes have to look quite hard to see where the stich was made.
--
Dallas
"I saw the crescent, you saw the whole of the moon"
www.eastcoast.co.za/dallas
.
.
"Darren Robertson" <dar...@orcsoftware.com> wrote in message
news:TSw%8.5555$t4.1...@nntpserver.swip.net...