Bobbruch1@AOL.COM on tue 15 jul 03
<<<< Bob, Can you share with the rest of us the method
you use to get good low light pictures without special lighting?
To start with, I was once told to shoot darker slides than I would have
normally done because they project and reproduce better. And low light shooting
tends to give one the ability to do that whether you want to or not.
A tripod, a cable release, and experimenting with shooting at 1/2 or 1/4 or
1/8 of a second. Film I use is Fuji Provia F - 100 ASA. No direct sunlight. I
share a studio with Bill Brouillard, who some people on this list may know,
and it is his method. The work is set up on the North end of an East facing set
of floor to ceiling windows, and shot after 11:00 AM so that there is no
direct light. Not a large window of opportunity, as I need to finish by 2PM at the
latest, and that is pushing it. No lights on in the studio. Professional
backdrop. Hand held metering although I got some good shots using my new old
Nikon's meter. Gray card for the meter settings. Bill uses an older meter with a
ball on it, I think it's called a spot meter. I picked up well used Scout 2
for $20.00 which is "supposed" to be used for pointing back at the camera to
see the light (sorry, I don't know the technical term for that) but I use it
like I used the spot meter, directly on the gray card - much to the amazement
(amusement?) of the camera shop. I compared the Scout to the spot meter directly
on the card and on my pots and both meters and the Nikon's 30+ year old meter
all gave the same readings. Sometimes I use an old projector to reflect the
light, sometimes I forget .... doesn't seem to make any difference - that I can
notice.
I believe that Mel and Hank both mentioned shooting at F22 .... daylight non
direct low light shooting probably won't allow that ...... but I usually
manage to shoot at F11 to F16. I live in Cleveland, so "enough" light in the
winter is sometimes an issue, though I have gotten decent slides on overcast days.
But then you will be shooting at F2.8 to F5.6+. The reason that the range of
F11 to F 22 is important is "depth of field." For those of you who think it
is in a foreign language, that just means using the F stops which allow the
least amount of light, i.e., those with the smallest openings. That forces one
to compensate by having the lens stay open longer. That requires a tripod,
since the camera is open for a longer time, and it needs to be very stable. Too
stable for the camera to be hand held. So stable that you don't even push the
button directly, but use a cable release to take the picture. That is also why
you need a "manual camera" - at least one with a manual option, to set speed
and F stops at non traditional levels. Luckily, those manual cameras are
bargains right now.
The depth of field issue is important is because magazines require strong
depth of field to reproduce photos. I am not sure how that works in projecting
slides, so maybe someone else could chime in on that. Good guess would be that
if Mel et al. want to be shooting at F22, you want to be close to that - at
least in the F11 to F16 range. In normal low light situations, you would tend
to shoot at F2.8 or 5.6, so you have to make adjustments to get to F11 to F 16.
It is not hard to do this.
I use this method rather than using lighting because someone showed it to me
and I liked the results better than the results I got using lights. I also
felt that my slides made a marked improvement when I started using the Fuji
Provia film. Started using it simply because the local camera shop suggested I try
it. I never noticed the blue cast (of the background, not the pot) that I
was getting, or at least never felt it was a problem. I actually liked it,
thought it added something positive to my slides. Then Bill mentioned that he was
having a problem with blue unless he shot at least at 1/30th of a second, a
killer for depth of field. Same exact process and he was getting a lot more blue
than I was. But he knows how to compensate, and fixed the issue. I would
have had to switch to a different film if I thought it a problem. Depending on
your lighting and type of work, you may have to experiment with different
films. The camera store says it is the film lab and that another lab would get
less blue, but I like the slides and have gotten into some juried shows and
publications using it so I will continue with Provia F for the moment.
This is not rocket science and anyone who can figure out how to make, glaze,
and fire a pot can do this.
Bob Bruch
phil davenport on tue 15 jul 03
You will get color shifts because----A. The type of light being used to illuminate
the subject-- OR--B. Reciprocity failure--which simply means the film does not
respond to very long exposures or very short exposures as predicted. The information
sheet that comes with the film will tell you to NOT expose the film longer than some
specific shutter speed or any shorter than some specific speed.
Depth of field is NOT controlled by the shutter speed but by the f/stop--the smaller
the number, the larger the opening, and the smaller the amount of depth of field.
Camera to subject distance also controls depth of field--as camera-to-subject distance
decreases so does depth of field.
If the developing chemical have been contaminated or not replenished (replace)
correctly then you could get some color shifting. Most labs, that develop slide film,
mix and replenish their chemicals under very strict conditions.
If you shoot the same subject under identical conditions, and use different films you
will see a difference in the colors--as each film will record colors differently. Run
some tests--both with film and with labs and settle on one film and one lab.
Also, each batch of film will be slightly different in the way they render colors.
Professional photographers will purchase a large amount of film, all from the same
emulsion batch, so they know what the final results will be.
Phil Davenport
Texas
Bobbruch1@AOL.COM wrote:
> <<<< Bob, Can you share with the rest of us the method
> you use to get good low light pictures without special lighting?
>
......Then Bill mentioned that he was
having a problem with blue unless he shot at least at 1/30th of a second, a
killer for depth of field. Same exact process and he was getting a lot more blue
than I was. But he knows how to compensate, and fixed the issue. I would
have had to switch to a different film if I thought it a problem. Depending on
your lighting and type of work, you may have to experiment with different
films. The camera store says it is the film lab and that another lab would get
less blue, but I like the slides and have gotten into some juried shows and
publications using it so I will continue with Provia F for the moment.
Bobbruch1@AOL.COM on wed 16 jul 03
<<<<being used to illuminate the subject-- OR--B. Reciprocity failure--which
simply means the film does not respond to very long exposures or very short
exposures as predicted. The information sheet that comes with the film will tell
you to NOT expose the film longer than some specific shutter speed or any
shorter than some specific speed.
I get the Provia out of the "cooler" with nada - no box, no instructions - I
can see the need to get the specs on any film I use.
<<<<f/stop--the smaller the number, the larger the opening, and the smaller the amount of
depth of field. Camera to subject distance also controls depth of field--as
camera-to-subject distance decreases so does depth of field.
So, we can get better depth of field using a 105mm or a 135mm lens than the
"usual" 50mm lens?
Mel mentioned telephoto adapters that he puts on the front of his lens, I
assume to go from 55mm to 110mm. I have a 2X teleconverter that goes between
the lens and the camera body. A book I have mentions teleconverters by saying:
".......the depth of field with the teleconverter attached, though, will be
only 40% of that effective f/stop."
Do you know if that means that there is no gain in depth field by using a
teleconverter lens?
Thanks,
Bob Bruch
Arnold Howard on wed 16 jul 03
The longer the lens, the shorter the depth of field. Wide angle lenses
are fun for snap shots, because everything is in focus. Long lenses are
good for portraits, because the background is fuzzy. For pots, I would
recommend a medium focal length lens for good depth of field.
A modern trend in commercial photography is to have an extremely short
depth of field (everything fuzzy except one thin plane). If you do that
with pots, you will lose a lot of detail and beauty.
Sincerely,
Arnold Howard
Paragon Industries, L.P.
www.paragonweb.com
> So, we can get better depth of field using a 105mm or a 135mm lens
than the
> "usual" 50mm lens?
>
> Mel mentioned telephoto adapters that he puts on the front of his
lens, I
> assume to go from 55mm to 110mm. I have a 2X teleconverter that goes
between
> the lens and the camera body. A book I have mentions teleconverters
by saying:
> ".......the depth of field with the teleconverter attached, though,
will be
> only 40% of that effective f/stop."
>
> Do you know if that means that there is no gain in depth field by
using a
> teleconverter lens?
> Bob Bruch
Hank Murrow on wed 16 jul 03
On Wednesday, July 16, 2003, at 04:12 AM, Bobbruch1@AOL.COM wrote:
> <<<<> speed but by the f/stop--the smaller the number, the larger the
> opening, and the smaller the amount of depth of field. Camera to
> subject distance also controls depth of field--as camera-to-subject
> distance decreases so does depth of field.
>
> So, we can get better depth of field using a 105mm or a 135mm lens
> than the
> "usual" 50mm lens?
>
> Mel mentioned telephoto adapters that he puts on the front of his
> lens, I
> assume to go from 55mm to 110mm. I have a 2X teleconverter that goes
> between
> the lens and the camera body. A book I have mentions teleconverters
> by saying:
> ".......the depth of field with the teleconverter attached, though,
> will be
> only 40% of that effective f/stop."
>
> Do you know if that means that there is no gain in depth field by
> using a
> teleconverter lens?
Dear Bob and Phil;
Depth of field for a given focal length is governed by the F-stop
chosen. Most macro lenses have a F22 stop, so they offer that extra
depth of field, in addition to the ability to focus very close for
detail. The longer the focal length, however, the less depth of field.
I have found that with a F-stop of 22 on my 100mm Vivitar macro lens, I
have plenty of depth of field for shooting my work. All is in focus,
providing I set the focus about 1/3 of the way into the object. This
works even for multiple pot setups.
Adding a closeup adapter will increase the focal length. However, the
reason to use a focal length of 85-105mm is to avoid foreshortening of
the object, to make it look as natural as possible. We've all seen
those funny pics of uncle Ed taken with a wide angle lens that makes
his nose look huge! 85mm to 15mm makes the nose take its proper place
on a face, that is why those lenses are the favorites for portraiture.
Except for WeeGee of course.
Cheers, Hank in Eugene
www.murrow.biz/hank
phil davenport on wed 16 jul 03
Hank Murrow wrote:
> .............. The longer the focal length, however, the less depth of field.
> I have found that with a F-stop of 22 on my 100mm Vivitar macro lens, I
> have plenty of depth of field for shooting my work. All is in focus,
> providing I set the focus about 1/3 of the way into the object. This
> works even for multiple pot setups.
>
> Adding a closeup adapter will increase the focal length. However, the
> reason to use a focal length of 85-105mm is to avoid foreshortening of
> the object, to make it look as natural as possible. We've all seen
> those funny pics of uncle Ed taken with a wide angle lens that makes
> his nose look huge! 85mm to 15mm makes the nose take its proper place
> on a face, that is why those lenses are the favorites for portraiture.
> Except for WeeGee of course.
>
> Cheers, Hank in Eugene
>
> www.murrow.biz/hank
>
> _Hank:
When talking about depth of field--what you are really talking about is the total
amount of area, in a scene that is in focus. When you focus on some object, say at
10 feet, then you will have roughly 1/3 of the total amount of depth of field, in
front of 10 feet and 2/3s behind the 10 foot mark. It is common practice for
professional photographers, when photographing large groups, to focus 1/3 of the
way into the group and shoot with a high f/stop number.
A close-up adapter does not increase the focal length--a teleconverter would do
that. There are 4 ways to change any lens so it will allow you to get closer to
the subject and thus have larger image sizes. Close-up lens, extension tubes, a
bellows unit and a reversing ring.
What you say about foreshortening is true and that is why it is better to be
farther away from the subject and use a longer lens (greater focal length). The
100mm lens set in the macro mode would allow you get closer to the subject and have
larger sizes. If you notice what the minimum focusing distance is for the 100mm
lens (when not set in the macro mode) and then go to macro--the focusing distance
will decrease.
If one is really concerned about critical depth of field there are charts that one
can purchase for any for any focal length/f/stop/focusing distance.
Testing is a sure fire way to come up with the solution and keep good records on
everything you are doing, that includesshutter speeds, f/stop, focusing distance,
focal length, and type of lighting. When you get something you like, you can
repeat those same results.
Have a great day...
Phil Davenport
Texas
> _____________________________________________________________________________
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots@pclink.com.
| |
|
