|
Post by dupes on Jan 11, 2014 9:37:55 GMT -5
As I was reading through one of my Tankart books yesterday (Rinaldi), it dawned on me as I was looking at his pics that every single one of them is in focus throughout the entire shot - there's no front-to-back fuzziness as the camera tries to decide where it should be "locked on". Each picture in that book is flawless.
So my question - is he just a Photoshop master that can make composites of multiple pics focusing on different aspects of the model? Or is there a way to make your camera "see" the entire build at the same time?
I have a Canon T3i, if it makes a difference.
Would llllllooooovvvvveeeeee to be able to take better pics like his!
|
|
|
Post by wouter on Jan 11, 2014 9:46:43 GMT -5
well, depends, I guess you can make multiple shots and assemble them, but it seems like a lot of work. Ideally, if you can adjust the aperture you can get a complete focus (usually F numbers between F11-F16 should do the trick). All depends on your camera, type of lense (if you have a DSLR you can get a macro lense, though that's not necessary), and distance from the subject.
Not sure but I thought there was a 'taking photo how to' somewhere on this forum...can't find it though
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by tigrazor on Jan 11, 2014 10:06:04 GMT -5
well, depends, I guess you can make multiple shots and assemble them, but it seems like a lot of work. Ideally, if you can adjust the aperture you can get a complete focus (usually F numbers between F11-F16 should do the trick). All depends on your camera, type of lense (if you have a DSLR you can get a macro lense, though that's not necessary), and distance from the subject. Not sure but I thought there was a 'taking photo how to' somewhere on this forum...can't find it though Cheers It for sure is. Im an educated graphic designer, we had that in school. Composing in this way is very hard to do, cause every picture needs the same lighting, position etc. Plus retouching and so on. Keep it basic. Im no professional photographer by myself at all and have basic equipment only - black and white cardboard, a daylight lamp, Canon Exlim 12.5 camera (very good macro mode!)... You wont need that much for your first steps. Maybe that helps? photoguide.tiono.com/Regards, Lucas.
|
|
|
Post by TRM on Jan 11, 2014 10:56:48 GMT -5
Dupes, I would add "Depth of Field" to the mix. By taking the highest resolution you can, the camera placement is set back from the subject. When the shot is taken the entire subject is in focus. You can crop the photo after the fact effectively zooming in to the subject and everything should be nice and clear.
This happens a lot on the obligatory "Money Shot" where the business end of the tank is closest to the camera and the tank ends up in focus and the barrel is not. This will solve this issue!
|
|
doogsatx
Senior Member
Feb and Sept 2014_ MoM Winner
Member since: November 2012
Posts: 1,642
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
|
Post by doogsatx on Jan 11, 2014 12:27:07 GMT -5
Dupes, it's ALL about your aperture settings. The camera, glass, etc etc all factor, too, but in the end, it's aperture that determines your depth of field. I could go on and on about why this is, but simply - a large aperture (small f/number) = a shallow depth of field and a small aperture (large f/number) = a deeper depth of field. This image covers it pretty well. Here's an example in the real world: For model photography, I set my Nikon D300s (w/ Nikkor 35mm lens) to f/22 - as small as it will go - and then adjust shutter speed to get the exposure right. Larger apertures like f/2 drink in a TON of light, so you can get away shooting handheld in less than ideal situations. But smaller apertures - it's like sucking light through a coffee stirrer. That means either 1) cranking up the ISO and introducing noise or 2) slowing the shutter speed for a longer exposure. With my Nikon, I'm routinely shooting at something like 1/3 second - IF that. To keep things steady, I use a tripod and set the camera on self-timer with a delay of 2 seconds. That way I can hit the shutter, then get my hands away to fight any camera shake. A few examples...
|
|
|
Post by wouter on Jan 11, 2014 12:38:24 GMT -5
mind though, not all camera's don't have that aperture or even field of depth mode (basically the same sort of)...I used to take shots with a Sony Cybershot and didn't have those possibilities...glad with me DSLR now
Cheers
|
|
doogsatx
Senior Member
Feb and Sept 2014_ MoM Winner
Member since: November 2012
Posts: 1,642
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
|
Post by doogsatx on Jan 11, 2014 12:50:57 GMT -5
mind though, not all camera's don't have that aperture or even field of depth mode (basically the same sort of)...I used to take shots with a Sony Cybershot and didn't have those possibilities...glad with me DSLR now Cheers Very, very true. Dupes' T3i certainly does, but the majority of point & shoots leave you swinging in the breeze, and their auto settings suck for model photography. I picked up a used Canon Powershot S90 for bench shots because it's one of the few that allows full manual settings.
|
|
|
Post by dupes on Jan 11, 2014 20:59:09 GMT -5
Guys - this is EXACTLY what I needed. Aperture is the answer!
Doogs - thanks for the diagrams...I have a muuuch better understanding of how the numbers work now.
Time to drag out the T3i book and figure out how to shoot manually!
|
|
|
Post by wbill76 on Jan 12, 2014 18:13:38 GMT -5
Yep, it's all about your settings Dupes. I use a T1I in combination with an EF-S 60mm macro lens for my shots. If you're using the 'standard' lens that came with your camera, be aware of the minimum focal length the lens has to be away from the subject (usually 0.8ft, or 9.6 inches on the default EFS lens Canon supplies with the bodies), if you have the lens too close, it won't be able to focus properly either. Instead you'll have to use the manual zoom to tighten up the shop and use the f-stop settings to get it all in focus.
|
|
|
Post by dupes on Jan 14, 2014 13:13:45 GMT -5
...with an EF-S 60mm macro lens for my shots. If you're using the 'standard' lens that came with your camera, be aware of the minimum focal length the lens has to be away from the subject (usually 0.8ft, or 9.6 inches on the default EFS lens Canon supplies with the bodies), if you have the lens too close, it won't be able to focus properly either. Ahhhh, that could have something to do with it as well. Still using the 'standard' lens, and that tends to be juuuuust about how far away I am when I'm trying to shoot (especially with 1/72 or smaller stuff). Might be time to invest in a macro lens. Any ideas about who would have one at a decent price?
|
|
|
Post by dupes on Jan 14, 2014 13:16:00 GMT -5
Wow, just looked up a few prices...they aren't cheap! Even active bid items at Ebay are running $275+ (and aren't over yet). Yikes!
|
|
doogsatx
Senior Member
Feb and Sept 2014_ MoM Winner
Member since: November 2012
Posts: 1,642
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
|
Post by doogsatx on Jan 14, 2014 15:36:20 GMT -5
Wow, just looked up a few prices...they aren't cheap! Even active bid items at Ebay are running $275+ (and aren't over yet). Yikes! Nope! Macros are not cheap! Personally I rarely use them. My favorite lens for my D300s is a Nikon 35mm prime lens. It can focus very close, it's tack sharp and I like the perspective better than, say, a 50mm, which I feel "crunches" models and makes them look rather toylike. Liked it so much that I've ordered an FX-format 35mm f/2D for my new D610. There's a Canon 35mm that looks pretty similar, price-wise, and can probably be nabbed used for at or slightly below $200.
|
|
|
Post by dupes on Jan 14, 2014 18:58:44 GMT -5
So another question that probably needs a diagram - what's changing in the mm measurement? From a 60 to a 35, what's the actual physical difference?
|
|
dylan
Full Member
Member since: September 2013
Posts: 152
Sept 19, 2013 10:00:01 GMT -5
Sept 19, 2013 10:00:01 GMT -5
|
Post by dylan on Jan 14, 2014 19:37:33 GMT -5
Dupes. your kit lens is most likely a 18-55mm (let me know if I am wrong).
I find that I get awesome results with just the kit lens. Before dropping a couple hundred on a new lens try developing some techniques for the kit lens.
I bought a 105mm macro to use on my D800, and I found it was overkill for models.
|
|
|
Post by dupes on Jan 14, 2014 20:09:21 GMT -5
Not wrong - 18-55 definitely rings a bell.
I guess I'm not entirely sure what the macro lens does for you versus a 'standard' lens (think this goes back to my previous question about mm measurements). There must be things that you CAN'T do without one?
|
|
|
Post by wbill76 on Jan 14, 2014 20:54:42 GMT -5
Not wrong - 18-55 definitely rings a bell. I guess I'm not entirely sure what the macro lens does for you versus a 'standard' lens (think this goes back to my previous question about mm measurements). There must be things that you CAN'T do without one? A 'standard' lens has an adjustable barrel that zooms in/out (that's why it has the 18-55mm designation...it's an indication of the maximum zoom it can achieve) while a macro lens is 'fixed'. That means that when you are taking photos with the macro lens, you move the camera's position closer/farther from the subject instead of using the zoom function. Macro lenses are 'specialized' to take sharp up-close photos of small subjects vs. the standard lenses which are more suitable for portraits, landscapes, etc. type of photography. The macro lens allows you to get much closer to your subject as opposed to the minimum stand-off distance you'll encounter with the 18-55mm lens. It's possible to take good photos with the standard lens of models, no question about it, but you'll have to play a lot more with the manual settings with each subject and lighting to get the same results. All a case of 'pick your poison'. The 60mm lens I use for 1/35 armor models is just right, a 105mm would definitely be overkill IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by wbill76 on Jan 14, 2014 21:05:05 GMT -5
|
|
doogsatx
Senior Member
Feb and Sept 2014_ MoM Winner
Member since: November 2012
Posts: 1,642
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
|
Post by doogsatx on Jan 14, 2014 21:43:18 GMT -5
So lenses are their own beasts.
The mm designations refer to a lens' focal length. There's a fun explanation involving trigonometry, but basically, as you go from small numbers to large you go from a wide picture angle to a narrow one. Short focal length lenses are called wide angle, long focal length are telephoto.
A standard lens is a lens with a picture angle roughly equivalent to the human eye (or what we can see in focus...peripheral doesn't count). On 35mm cameras, that's a 50mm lens. On your T3i and other DSLRs with APS sized sensors, there's a 1.6x crop factor to account for the smaller sensor area. So in APS world, a 50mm lens is basically a 75mm, and a 35mm acts like a 50.
On top of that, you have zooms and primes. A zoom is any lens that can alter its focal length and thus zoom in and out. Lenses like the 18-55 that play beneath 50mm are generally called wide zooms.
Primes are fixed focal length lenses. The way you zoom in or out is with your feet. Primes tend to be faster (larger aperture), smaller, lighter, sharper, and until you hit a threshold, cheaper. Personally, I own six lenses and only two zoom.
Okay, finally, macro. The definition of a macro lens is simple: it can record a life-size image of an object on the camera's image sensor. This is called 1:1 magnification. Macros are generally fixed length and, fair warning, exhibit crazy shallow depth of field. In my opinion, for what we shoot, you're better off going with a high-end point-and-shoot (manual settings, etc) if you need macro. You'll almost certainly save money, too. Personally I find the 35mm lens has a pretty tight minimum focus distance and outside of something like biplane rigging I've never felt constrained.
|
|
dylan
Full Member
Member since: September 2013
Posts: 152
Sept 19, 2013 10:00:01 GMT -5
Sept 19, 2013 10:00:01 GMT -5
|
Post by dylan on Jan 14, 2014 21:53:56 GMT -5
I did a super scientific comparison of the 2 lenses. first the 18-55mm kit lens on my D7000 18mm F3.5 then at F20 not really much difference in these 2 now 55mm F5.6 it starts to get soft towards the front and back. now f36 most of it is in focus now. now the Big gun. my 105mm macro on a D800. overkill for shooting models same distance and focus point. first one at f3.2 very shallow depth of field and now at f36 I decided to get as close to the driver as possible. so you can see why it is overkill so do you really need anything other than what you have? not really. the photography bug bit me pretty hard a few years ago, so I bought a bunch of expensive stuff. If all you are shooting is your models, then you already have more than you need.
|
|
|
Post by dupes on Jan 14, 2014 22:51:24 GMT -5
Doogs and Dylan - I am now fully informed! Thanks to both of you for the help.
Seeing each lens at each F-stop makes a huge difference...you'd think there'd be a guide layed out that way somewhere? Maybe there is. Heh.
|
|
bigjohn
Reviews member
Member since: December 2011
John Hale
Posts: 3,438
Dec 21, 2011 2:17:45 GMT -5
Dec 21, 2011 2:17:45 GMT -5
|
Post by bigjohn on Jan 21, 2014 19:53:45 GMT -5
Very informative, I just bought an EOS T3 I today, so lots of playing around is in order.
|
|
|
Post by dupes on Jan 21, 2014 21:40:22 GMT -5
John - you are going to loooove that camera!
|
|
Return_To_Kit_Form
Full Member
Dec 2013 MoM Winner
Member since: December 2012
Posts: 320
Dec 10, 2012 23:52:30 GMT -5
Dec 10, 2012 23:52:30 GMT -5
|
Post by Return_To_Kit_Form on Jan 24, 2014 9:00:12 GMT -5
Some good info here blokes. One question.
I only have a point and shoot jobbie and struggle to get decent pics. Do you need a DSLR or can you get good enough with some practice?
I would prefer not to get another camera.
|
|
doogsatx
Senior Member
Feb and Sept 2014_ MoM Winner
Member since: November 2012
Posts: 1,642
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
|
Post by doogsatx on Jan 24, 2014 9:50:56 GMT -5
Some good info here blokes. One question. I only have a point and shoot jobbie and struggle to get decent pics. Do you need a DSLR or can you get good enough with some practice? I would prefer not to get another camera. You don't need a DSLR. What you really need is enough manual control to set up the shot. That usually entails a firm grip over aperture, ISO and shutter speed, which most point and shoots don't give you.
|
|
|
Post by wbill76 on Jan 24, 2014 12:17:01 GMT -5
As Doogs points out, it all depends on what your camera is able to do. There are some very nice non-DSLR cameras out there that give you a lot of control in a small package but the 'point and shoot' types are designed for just that, the ability to take good photos without a lot of settings or manipulations options. I've seen some amazing photos of models done with nothing more than an iPhone for example, so it all comes down to what you've got, how well versed you are in its features/capabilities, etc. DSLRs, even low-end ones, aren't cheap but if you're looking to achieve maximum control over your photos, they offer that for sure. One of the big advantages of DSLRs and other higher capability cameras is the ability to shoot in RAW formats, this is particularly useful if you're considering taking photos for publication or other similar efforts as that gives you a digital 'negative' file to work with for editing and other uses.
|
|
doogsatx
Senior Member
Feb and Sept 2014_ MoM Winner
Member since: November 2012
Posts: 1,642
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
Nov 14, 2012 21:29:10 GMT -5
|
Post by doogsatx on Jan 24, 2014 13:53:37 GMT -5
I would add that there are certainly P&S cameras out there that can support model photography. I have a Canon Powershot S90 that has manual exposure controls (aperture, shutter speed, ISO etc) and shoots in RAW. I don't think it's quite as good as a DSLR, but for things like quick bench shots it's solid. Here's a picture I took of my Challenger WIP with it recently: Typically the controls needed to properly handle model photography come with a manufacturer's higher-end point-and-shoots. Below that, the simpler point-and-shoots tend to be optimized for things like taking pictures of people in moderately decent lighting...but that doesn't translate well to what we're trying to capture, hence the disconnect. Mobile phones can do a decent job, too...I find the biggest hassle with phones is the metering. Good enough for quick bench/in-progress shots, but I prefer a step up for more milestone and finished shots.
|
|
Return_To_Kit_Form
Full Member
Dec 2013 MoM Winner
Member since: December 2012
Posts: 320
Dec 10, 2012 23:52:30 GMT -5
Dec 10, 2012 23:52:30 GMT -5
|
Post by Return_To_Kit_Form on Jan 25, 2014 9:37:16 GMT -5
Awesome, I just re read the thread and more has soaked in. I found the settings for ISO, aperture and shutter speed on my P&S. So if I read the above correctly I need a lower ISO, and high F stop setting (mine tops out at 9) but what shutter speed should I use? The setting ranges from 4 to 1600. Any tips on white balance and focus settings? ATM I have those set to auto WB and center auto focus.
I have to get a tripod too.
Cheers,
Brett
|
|
bigjohn
Reviews member
Member since: December 2011
John Hale
Posts: 3,438
Dec 21, 2011 2:17:45 GMT -5
Dec 21, 2011 2:17:45 GMT -5
|
Post by bigjohn on Jan 25, 2014 9:45:50 GMT -5
I use my iphone a lot for model photography. It likes lots of light to get a good picture. I have a home made photo both set up that has 5 lamps with daylight bulbs.''This is an example of a picture taken with an IPhone.
|
|
|
Post by dupes on Jan 25, 2014 10:01:51 GMT -5
That's an Iphone pic? Pretty smooth! Can you make any manual adjustments with the built in camera? Or is it all P+S?
|
|
bigjohn
Reviews member
Member since: December 2011
John Hale
Posts: 3,438
Dec 21, 2011 2:17:45 GMT -5
Dec 21, 2011 2:17:45 GMT -5
|
Post by bigjohn on Jan 25, 2014 10:10:26 GMT -5
Dupes, all I have done with it is point and shoot. I use photoshop to make any needed adjustments after move the picture to my computer.
|
|