Login
 |
vp_s_wagon
Post #176
Cheers Tyler, |
|---|
28th July 2006 - 11:34 PM
 |
Nickle
Post #177
I think the problem with the flash is that we did it in a much bigger space so it didnt reflect back into the lens as much.... and aswell did you have the candles lit? we did it in complete blackness. why don't you try it in an open area outside???.... |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #178
QUOTE(Nickle @ Jul 29 2006, 04:08 PM) [snapback]1280105315[/snapback] I think the problem with the flash is that we did it in a much bigger space so it didnt reflect back into the lens as much.... and aswell did you have the candles lit? we did it in complete blackness. why don't you try it in an open area outside???.... and your grandma is so not 200! don't be mean hahaha! I tried it today in complete blackness with no luck. My grandma's one was done with a torch, not a flash. And ur right she isn't 200, shes more like 130. I'll try again, when I can find an open area outside that is black, so i need to wait for no moon. |
|---|
 |
Ghetto Panda
Post #179
Your photo's are unbelievable your one of my favourite photographers on this site. |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #180
My mum is an ex-chef and she wanted some food photos, so after looking at some cookbooks and magazines i tried some myself. |
|---|
|
|
Ghetto Panda
Post #181
The third one the matt keeps drawing my attention too much looks like the matt is more in focus (in the left hand corner), if you know what i mean. |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #182
yeh agreed. I had the f.number too high. |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #183
Ignore Nickle's crazy talk about photos, I have the real shit right here! Nickle and I went to Cott Beach today and took some pix for her art thingo, anyway she put up the shitty, unedited, basic quality (as opposed to med, high or RAW) so I have told her to take them down and I'll put up the edited RAW's. |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #185
QUOTE(DR1F7 @ Jul 31 2006, 08:34 PM) [snapback]1280111969[/snapback] Number 3 looks like its not in focus, or the shutter speed was to slow, nice pics still thou Harry. lol, yeh it was really windy! the camera moved a bit |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #187
wtf is going on with these pix? they are not showing up any more, but the attchments are still showing up in my controls? anyone? |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #191
I cant even re-add them, this is really pissing me off! |
|---|
|
BigShow
Post #192
QUOTE(vp_s_wagon @ Jul 29 2006, 05:34 PM) [snapback]1280105239[/snapback] Cheers Tyler, I did one of my Grandma last night, she is like 200 years old so it looks like a victorian painting. I tried the Flash thing as well but it didnt work very well... oh well shit happens. Cheers Harry I'm liking this idea. Would be ace to have the camera dead side-on to the scene, instead of the slight off-centre you have it here. Also, instead of having her just sit there through both flashes, have her pouring tea in one of them.. or even easier - just merge two photos... I dunno, these are just my ideas anyway. |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #193
QUOTE(BigShow @ Aug 1 2006, 11:15 PM) [snapback]1280114355[/snapback] I'm liking this idea. Would be ace to have the camera dead side-on to the scene, instead of the slight off-centre you have it here. Also, instead of having her just sit there through both flashes, have her pouring tea in one of them.. or even easier - just merge two photos... I dunno, these are just my ideas anyway. yeh, i see what u mean about the merging, but i wanted to get it without photoshopping, call me old fashioned! The exposure was about 1 min per pose with a torch to highlight her, not a flash (flash looks shit), it was about a 5 min exposure in total, with the adjustment of the dimmers in the room to expose the room, then, after the room was exposed enough, we had to get a very confused old lady to pose for 2 minutes without moving! I definatley should have done it side on though, it would have looked much better I am less frail so i was able to do something like it with myself as the model here: https://www.boostcruising.com/forums/index....entry1280103225 Cheers Harry |
|---|
|
|
BigShow
Post #194
QUOTE(vp_s_wagon @ Aug 2 2006, 01:20 AM) [snapback]1280114362[/snapback] i wanted to get it without photoshopping, call me old fashioned! I really appreciate this. Great attitude!  Flashes are shit? What flash do you use? EDIT: Good to see someone actually putting some thought into a photo, too! |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #195
i dont mean that they are shit in general, just that they are shit for that particular type of shot. |
|---|
|
|
BigShow
Post #196
Welllll not saying your current methods are bad or need reviewing, but using a flash in the right way would probably get much more precise and effective results. Perhaps a new flash would be in order? Can be expensive I know, but a good 550/580EX can work wonders. Then get one of those ST-E2(?) remote flash triggers for some interesting results, or perhaps even better still, get a second 550/580EX as they have the remote flash triggers already in them. Use one on the camera hotshoe to bounce light off the ceiling, and another to add interesting highlights or bounce it off wall somewhere. |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #197
QUOTE(BigShow @ Aug 2 2006, 12:13 AM) [snapback]1280114384[/snapback] Welllll not saying your current methods are bad or need reviewing, but using a flash in the right way would probably get much more precise and effective results. Perhaps a new flash would be in order? Can be expensive I know, but a good 550/580EX can work wonders. Then get one of those ST-E2(?) remote flash triggers for some interesting results, or perhaps even better still, get a second 550/580EX as they have the remote flash triggers already in them. Use one on the camera hotshoe to bounce light off the ceiling, and another to add interesting highlights or bounce it off wall somewhere. I know what you are getting at but perhaps I didnt fully explain my method of getting these sorts of shots. 1. Open shutter (ISO 200, f.28) 2. switch on lights for 1-2secs. (initial exposure of the room is for the ghost effect) 3. get model into position, shine a torch over the models body (moving the torch from head to toe), but NOT the background. 4. (for the next 2-3 positions) move model, repeat torch exposure on new position for another 30secs-a minute. 5. close shutter. This way the whole room doesnt get over exposed, with a flash u would get the people 1/3rd as exposed as the room so it would look shit. Every time u re-expose the room with the flash, the previous exposure (of the model) is drowned out by the room's new exposure, making the model lighter again. Trust me, trial and error! Flash versions end with an over exposed room and extremley faint outlines of the person. In my experience. The torch way gives a single exposure of the room and single exposures of the person/s without over-exposing the room and therefore they are far more visible. Flash's just arent precise enough to only expose the person, they always do the rest of the room. If u consider the over exposure of the room with the flash but know of a way to only illuminate the person and nothing else then please let me know. But like u said. I think about my shots! (a little too much it seems... damn i feel like a loser, im a 17 yr old photo nerd!! nah dw, i am also a normal schoolie!) anyway, i'll stop rambling Harry |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #200
Big Show, Have u look at the rest of this thread. I have shitloads up! |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #201
OK, it finally started working again so i have some new pics for you all. |
|---|
 |
BOOSTMEISTER
Post #202
Love the colour in your 3 of the water etc....maybe a slower shutter would give an even better effect...30sec would blur it all rather lovely |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #203
QUOTE(BOOSTMEISTER @ Aug 2 2006, 07:20 PM) [snapback]1280117728[/snapback] Love the colour in your 3 of the water etc....maybe a slower shutter would give an even better effect...30sec would blur it all rather lovely  last 2 are funky....cool.u mean number 1 and 2? number 3 is the sky. 1 and 2 were actually flukes, i was using ISO 1600, f.3.5 and a 1/2sec shutter because I was trying to get a shot 2 show how rough the sea was. As it turned out they look decent... even at ISO 1600! so i kept them, but I agree the sea would look better blurred, but i think a 2 second would do niceley... I like some definition in the water sometimes. The last 2 were fun! Cheers Harry |
|---|
|
|
Ghetto Panda
Post #206
In the Old i would have to say my favourite for each is |
|---|
|
|
Psi
Post #207
QUOTE(dj_brad_k @ Aug 2 2006, 09:35 PM) [snapback]1280117804[/snapback] awesome harry, i am loving this new style you have started. im still confused on how its done, can ya give us some steps how its done, i would love to give it a try. always quality work harry tyler its pretty easy to do, this is how i do it, u have a dark room u take a pic with long exposure, turn the lights on to lighten up the room when its empty, then turn the light off so u can go into the photo then when ur in the right spot u get someone to turn lights on then turn lights off then move to a differnt spot then repeat with turning lights on and off. You can use a torch to just light up a small area, the best way to do it tho is if u hav flashes like the last 2 harry put up. |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #208
yeh, very close. except that u the room can have a dim light in it, and u only use a torch/flash on the person but dont turn the lights on or u will over expose the room compared to the person. |
|---|
|
|
vp_s_wagon
Post #210
Ok, I have just been lazy and i think I am getting worse at photography! I have tried a couple of times and I am only getting shit photos. I think I am running out of places, Perth is very limited in terms of photo ops. |
|---|
-
Member Login
If you have a BoostCruising account enter your user name and password into the yellow box.
Alternatively, you can quickly login with Facebook.
If you don't have an account create one below.
Create Account -
Login using your Facebook account!