SLR Digital Cameras, which one?!

[Lory]

The light in my office was rubbish, so the backgrounds are too yellow for my liking

Very nice!

What did you use as a light source?

As for the background colour..........its easy to change the background colour using Photoshop

Upload the photo

Select the Magic Wand tool, click on the background and it 'should select the whole area (if not, set the 'tolerance' to a higher number)

Then click on the 'Edit' menu and scroll down to select 'fill' - and select white (which will probably be your default 'background colour' )

and hey presto. a pure white background!

[Lory]

When you use a viewfinder, you usually have the camera on contact with your face, and also tend to have your arms tucked in closer to your body. This gives a more stable platform, reducing camera shake. This is still important, even with image stabilisation.

Also, amateurs tend to 'click' the shutter release button, instead of holding it tight and 'squeezing' it.

[Cruella]

Very nice!

What did you use as a light source?

None! I placed a white sheet of paper under and behind the wrappers. The only light source was the energy bulb in my ceiling light. I was just playing with the different settings to see what difference they made. I used a 10 second shutter speed I think on these!

As for the background colour..........its easy to change the background colour using Photoshop

Upload the photo

Select the Magic Wand tool, click on the background and it 'should select the whole area (if not, set the 'tolerance' to a higher number)

Then click on the 'Edit' menu and scroll down to select 'fill' - and select white (which will probably be your default 'background colour' )

and hey presto. a pure white background!

I tried this but the shadow then either disappeared completely or looked very odd as it had a hard line.

[martingold]

Does this help capture the perfect 'girl in swirly skirt flashing her knickers' picture? You seemed quite keen to get this at the last Daventry event

as it happens rob perhaps you should ask hannah why i was taking that shot (she happend to ask me if i would) and it had nothing whatsover to do with her knickers which if you saw the shot that i used from that batch you would know

[Cruella]

Does this help capture the perfect 'girl in swirly skirt flashing her knickers' picture? You seemed quite keen to get this at the last Daventry event

Can we not let this thread turn into a back biting fest like most seem to please. Lets keep it as a useful one about cameras and photography!

[Lory]

None! I placed a white sheet of paper under and behind the wrappers. The only light source was the energy bulb in my ceiling light. I was just playing with the different settings to see what difference they made. I used a 10 second shutter speed I think on these!

Nice one!

I tried this but the shadow then either disappeared completely or looked very odd as it had a hard line.

There are many ways you could reduce the hard line but I'm absolutely crap at explaining technical stuff in writing..

but you could try using the 'blur' tool to soften the edge, that would be the simplest solution

or if you wanted to get more advanced..

make a copy of the background layer
make a selection of the shadow area, using any of the lasso tools or pen tool, making sure that the edge is 'feathered'
Fill the selection with 'Gaussian blur' (you'll have to judge how much to blur)
Add a 'layer mask'
Then, making sure that your 'colour palette' is set to the default black and white
Select the 'gradient tool'
Then draw a line from top to bottom, through your selection, which should make the blurring effect run from nothing, to full blur.. smoothly.
Hit command D to deselect
Then hit Command E to merge the layers

Then have a cup of tea and admire your work!

[straycat]

When I use a viewfinder, I seem to concentrate more on the subject. However when I use a camera with a screen, I find that I worry more about the composition of the whole photo. I don't really know why.

I wonder.... look through a viewfinder, the view you get is an extremely close, immediate one, which you're only seeing with one eye, and which actually takes a little practice to look at and use properly. Or - at least - it did for me.

When you're looking at the screen, what you're seeing and the way you're looking at it is far closer to an actual physical photo, and the way you'd look at that.

[Cruella]

make a copy of the background layer
make a selection of the shadow area, using any of the lasso tools or pen tool, making sure that the edge is 'feathered'
Fill the selection with 'Gaussian blur' (you'll have to judge how much to blur)
Add a 'layer mask'
Then, making sure that your 'colour palette' is set to the default black and white
Select the 'gradient tool'
Then draw a line from top to bottom, through your selection, which should make the blurring effect run from nothing, to full blur.. smoothly.
Hit command D to deselect
Then hit Command E to merge the layers

[Lory]

OK, one thing at a time

You said to me on Sat, you wanted practical, easy to understand visual tips

Well here's one from me, picking up on what I said earlier in the thread, about changing the WB (white balance)

Following YOUR example, I've taken three pictures of the same subject, placed on my kitchen table, on a white sheet of paper. I've purposely used clear glass on the white background, to show the effect more

All 3 pics were taken in the same situation, under the same light conditions, using the same manual settings, the only thing I changed was the WB.

I hope this helps a little

File unavailable
The recovered backup contains the attachment record, but not the file: cloudy.jpg, shade.jpg, Incandescent.jpg.

[Cruella]

All 3 pics were taken in the same situation, under the same light conditions, using the same manual settings, the only thing I changed was the WB.

Excellent. What WB settings did you use for each picture?

[Lory]

Excellent. What WB settings did you use for each picture?

I've labelled each pic with the WB setting I used Just run your mouse over each pic

[Cruella]

So you have! Smart arse!

[Lory]

Smart arse!

and there was me, preparing your next lesson!

[Stuart M]

The newer Cannon models have Live View which lifts the mirror and sets the screen to display an image of what the lens shows (I'm certain that Nikon and others have the same thing in their DSLRs), it slows down the shutter though and becomes a much bigger drain on batteries. I don't use it myself though there have been a few times where I'm lining up a shot resting the camera against an object where I find looking into the viewfinder is a pain so then I could see it being helpful.

Most DSLRs have some form of Live View now, not just Canons. Mind you, I reckon Live View is pretty much a waste of time on most DSLRs if the screen is fixed. As you say, it chews up battery power whilst actually decreasing your ability to take a photograph - less stable grip and slower response.

My previous camera was a bridge camera (Nikon 8800) which had a viewfinder and a screen (which wasn't "Live" view, it not being a DSLR). Crucially however, the LCD screen was on a tilt-and-swivel mount, like you get with most hand-held video cameras. This meant the screen was actually useful for picture-taking, because then you were freed from being directly behind the camera. You could compose decent shots while holding the camera overhead in a crowd, down at ground level, or even from in front of the camera. It also made working with a tripod a lot easier.

As such, when I was upgrading to a DSLR, having a moveable screen was a significant factor (albeit not a dominating one). There are still surprisingly few out there: A couple of the Sony Alphas have a tiltable screen, but the only DSLRs with a fully articulated one are the Nikon D5000, and two Olympus models, the E620 and the high-end E3. I went for the E620 because it's also small, reasonably priced, and the lenses are good.

[Cruella]

and there was me, preparing your next lesson!

Oh goody, what's next?

[Lory]

Oh goody, what's next?

Your next lesson is on 'Depth of Field'

In very basic language, the depth of field, is how much of the photo is in focus.

If you have a very small/shallow DOF, most of the picture will be out of focus (blurred) and only the subject you've decided to focus on, will be sharp.

The first 3 photo's (I took this afternoon, using 'your' formula) are showing a very shallow DOF, as the objects are only roughly 4 inches apart, and yet, only one of them is in sharp focus at a time.

The other photo (I took a few weeks ago) has a longer DOF, as most of the picture is in focus, including the tree that's very close to me, in the foreground.

These effects are mainly achieved using 'Aperture priority' ("A' on a Nikon)

I'm trying to keep it 'simple'

File unavailable
The recovered backup contains the attachment record, but not the file: All Photo's_4278.jpg, All Photo's_4279.jpg, All Photo's_4280.jpg, Nature in Totteridge - Oct 09 -40.jpg.

[Cruella]

Your next lesson is on 'Depth of Field'
These effects are mainly achieved using 'Aperture priority' ("A' on a Nikon)

I understand 'depth of field' and I understand how to focus on each separate object, like in the first 3 pics. The bit I don't know yet is how to get a long DOF, like you have in the tree picture.

I'm trying to keep it 'simple'

You're doing a very good job and it's much appreciated. Can I call you Miss now?

[philsmove]

Cannon do a fantastic book "Canon EOS Lens Work"

You can download the entire Canon EOS Lens Work III book from Canon-Europe's web site. This download is comprised of 11 .PDF files totaling 32MB.

Have a look at "Photo Techniques"

[Lory]

The bit I don't know yet is how to get a long DOF, like you have in the tree picture.

I always find this confusing and the only way I remember this, is to simplify it like this....

For aLARGE depth of field: you need to use a small aperture (but forget that bit, its just to confuse us ), just remember it has a LARGE number

So, LARGE DOF =LARGE F/Stop/number,

Large number being something between F16 and F29 (and just to complicate matters more, this will depend on what lens your using, but I've only got one lens, so I'm no expert)

Secondly, to lengthen the DOF even more, move further away from your subject

And lastly, zooming 'out' will increase it further

Its the opposite for a Shallow (small) DOF

SMALL DOF, SMALL F/number (mine only goes down to F/4 )

Move closer

and Zoom right in!

You're doing a very good job and it's much appreciated. Can I call you Miss now?

[Cruella]

LARGE number

So, LARGE DOF =LARGE F/Stop/number,

Large number being something between F16 and F29 (and just to complicate matters more, this will depend on what lens your using, but I've only got one lens, so I'm no expert)

OK so, larger DOF = Smaller aperture, therefore a slower shutter speed and higher ISO is needed. Is that correct?