Just a few shots

King Damager

King Damager

King Damager

Soldato
Joined
16 Nov 2010
Posts
16,513
Location
Swimming in a lake
A couple from the snow times, and one of a friend I managed to nab whilst we were working the other day. First kind of casual people shot I've really done.

Not really caring for C&C on the Snow ones (although feel free to), looking more so for C&C on the people shot.


Snowberry by King Damager, on Flickr


Snowberry by King Damager, on Flickr


Sam by King Damager, on Flickr


First thoughts are I should have removed the bokeh ball by the steering wheel in the background (distracting), and perhaps not gone with quite so much contrast on the face?

kd
 
The shadows are really harsh which is probably the biggest problem - anabolic lighting is for abs only, when it's just a face there's no point suffering shadows that harsh. It looks like the light was almost directly above his head so I would have either made an edgy portrait and covered the face in shadow with the hair backlit, or just moved him back a couple of feet so that the light wasn't falling so much from just above him. The contrast doesn't help either, as you suggested, as it means that the shadow cast by his nose melts into the background grey, which in turn makes his nose look mahoosive because there isn't any lit skin surrounding it.
 
Also looks like your hands were shaky, either drink less coffee or up the shutter speed.

Actually just checked the exif, there is no need to be at 0.25 of a second when your at ISO400. Up the ISO. If your using Av, turn on the auto ISO and dial in your minimum shutter speed in the settings (assuming the 6D has this feature like the 5d3).
 
C&C on the person:
Looks really, really soft. Motion blue/hand shake looks to be the culprit. What Focal length and shutter speed were you using?

A general rule of thumb is you need a shutter speed 1 over the *effective* focal length. Effective meaning if you are using a crop sensor hen you need to take into account the crop factor.


Furthermore, this was rule of thumb worked well on film camera with a nominal resolution of around 20MP ISo200, modern DSLRs have much higher pixel densities so you will need to push to faster shutter speeds. It is also a rule of thumb, if you have shaky hands you will want even faster speeds. If you want to increases your probability of a sharp photos you will want things faster again.


So a 50mm lens on a 1.5x crop camera you will want to be looking that least 1/80 second shutter speed but I would aim at 1/125 if you are well composed, 1/160s if you are shaky.



EDIT: Just seen the EXIF, 75mm lens on a 6D I would have shot at 1/100th second, minimum. Likely you would have wanted a flash, or to use a faster lens.
Second EDIT: no doubt someone will come along saying they can shoot a 400mm lens at 5s hand held while sitting on a tank driving down a mountainside. Not everyone is a trained military sniper.

secondly, composition is not comfortable.
 
Last edited:
D.P. said:
C&C on the person:
Looks really, really soft. Motion blue/hand shake looks to be the culprit. What Focal length and shutter speed were you using?

A general rule of thumb is you need a shutter speed 1 over the *effective* focal length. Effective meaning if you are using a crop sensor hen you need to take into account the crop factor.


Furthermore, this was rule of thumb worked well on film camera with a nominal resolution of around 20MP ISo200, modern DSLRs have much higher pixel densities so you will need to push to faster shutter speeds. It is also a rule of thumb, if you have shaky hands you will want even faster speeds. If you want to increases your probability of a sharp photos you will want things faster again.


So a 50mm lens on a 1.5x crop camera you will want to be looking that least 1/80 second shutter speed but I would aim at 1/125 if you are well composed, 1/160s if you are shaky.



EDIT: Just seen the EXIF, 75mm lens on a 6D I would have shot at 1/100th second, minimum. Likely you would have wanted a flash, or to use a faster lens.
Second EDIT: no doubt someone will come along saying they can shoot a 400mm lens at 5s hand held while sitting on a tank driving down a mountainside. Not everyone is a trained military sniper.

secondly, composition is not comfortable.
Click to expand...

Why has no one told me this rule before! xD

Very useful for future reference though! As for flash, that's in the 'to buy' list :p

But yeah, AE, it does have that feature :p

kd
 
Ksanti said:
The shadows are really harsh which is probably the biggest problem - anabolic lighting is for abs only, when it's just a face there's no point suffering shadows that harsh. It looks like the light was almost directly above his head so I would have either made an edgy portrait and covered the face in shadow with the hair backlit, or just moved him back a couple of feet so that the light wasn't falling so much from just above him. The contrast doesn't help either, as you suggested, as it means that the shadow cast by his nose melts into the background grey, which in turn makes his nose look mahoosive because there isn't any lit skin surrounding it.
Click to expand...

Isn't anabolic lighting just a single light setup? Never heard if it before, in fact the only instance of it I could find on google is from a bodybuilding thread over here.

Anyway, I think everyone else has covered the lighting and blur, although you can often cheat the 1/focal length rule by tucking in your elbows, timing your breathing (I release the shutter just after exhaling, some inhale, hold their breath then press the shutter) and squeezing the shutter release instead of jabbing at it. You can often go an extra stop slower just by doing that.
 
GTRacer said:
Isn't anabolic lighting just a single light setup? Never heard if it before, in fact the only instance of it I could find on google is from a bodybuilding thread over here.
Click to expand...

Sounds like some kind of steroid, I just though he meant parabolic? As in the little reflectors often seen on bare bulb light sources.
 
The photo of the man doesn't feel striking enough for me, like sharpness and a blurrier background. Not that I know anything about people photography though.
 
Anabolic lighting, refers to the concept of lighting that emphasises shadows to make muscles look larger.

A very front spot light will flatten muscle and texture out. A shot of abs from above, would allow the muscle to cast a shadow on the top of the muscle below, making the indent look deeper.

I think that explains it.

Again, GTR, great tip, thanks.

I'll admit was slightly limited by the Candid, although the rule of thumb on shutter speed seems particularly useful.

kd
 
An Exception said:
IS turns that rule on it's head, until subject movement becomes the limiting factor.
If you would have shot that on a lens without IS, you wouldn't have even posted it up.
Click to expand...

True :p

But it'll be useful to know to work out how many stops over this I can get with is.

Once I've worked this out, I can go off the rule with adjustment :)

kd
 
An Exception said:
IS turns that rule on it's head, until subject movement becomes the limiting factor.
If you would have shot that on a lens without IS, you wouldn't have even posted it up.
Click to expand...

IS is only useful in emergencies though, should be switched off until such time as you absolutely need it (or you are being lazy).
In order of precedence (assuming fixed aperture and no flash):
1) Tripod + remote shutter + MLU
2) Monopod + slightly higher ISO
3) Hand hold with ISO up to moderate levels, but before impact IQ for the scene (some scenes that e.g., will require pushing shadows then ISO should be kept low).
4) Switch on IS/VR, but only if the subject is static
5) Switch on IS/VR and up the ISO even further.

And it doesn't turn the rule on its head, the concept is still fine you can just knock a couple of stops off.
 
5 stops now supposedly with latest gen VR.
200mm at 1/6 is turning the rule on it's head imo.

Edit:
Aside from the tripod stuff, as you are never likely to catch a candid moment with that setup, I would much rather have what Pentax bodies have, i.e. in body stabilisation. Then you don't need to worry about turning it on/off and dealing image degradation from the stabilisation.
 
Last edited:
Anabolic lighting (as in anabolic steroids) is a bodybuilding joke - small, hard lightsources above the subject can make pretty much anyone look ripped because it gives such hard shadows. It's not a proper photography term haha
 
An Exception said:
5 stops now supposedly with latest gen VR.
200mm at 1/6 is turning the rule on it's head imo.

Edit:
Aside from the tripod stuff, as you are never likely to catch a candid moment with that setup, I would much rather have what Pentax bodies have, i.e. in body stabilisation. Then you don't need to worry about turning it on/off and dealing image degradation from the stabilisation.
Click to expand...

5 stops manufacturer claim, 3-3.5 stops in reality.
Just like in VR1 and VR2 Nikon (and canon) claim 3 stops but it was more like 2 stops.
Thom Hogan probably has the most informational content out there:
http://www.bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm

The first and most important rule of VR is this: never turn VR on unless it's actually needed
.......
Rule #2: VR should normally be off if your shutter speed is over 1/500.

Indeed, if you go down to the sidelines of a football game and check all those photographers to see how their lens is set, you can tell the ones that are really pros: VR is usually off (unless they're on a portion of the stadium that is vibrating from fan action). Those pros have all encountered the same thing you will some day: if you have a shutter speed faster than the sampling frequency, sometimes the system is running a correction that's not in sync with the shutter speed. The results look a bit like the lens being run with the wrong AF Fine Tune: slightly off.
Click to expand...



VR/IS is great when you have no choice but it shouldn't be used if there is a way around the problem. Furthermore, this doesn't change at all the problem that you need a certain shutter speed to get a sharp photo.


As for sensor based solution, they largely suffer the same fate. You still have image degradation if you are unlucky.
 
To clarify, in this situation King Damager correctly had IS switched ON because he had no flash or faster lens, AND the ISO would have to be pushed too high without relying on IS.

The bottom line, and the message to King Damager, is that the shutter speed has to be higher enough to prevent camera blur, the shutter speed is proportional to the effective focal length AND the pixel density. Image stabilization can let you get away with slower shutters speeds but the minimum shutter speed rules still apply.

King Damager, I would learn what shutter speeds are needed without IS, not least many lenses wont support IS and many scenes cannot use IS (moving subjects). Then learn to see the effectiveness of IS, typically you can get away with 2 stops slower but not always.
 
D.P.... Not really. IS means exactly that the minimum shutter speed rules no longer apply, and you can usually get away with at least 3 times slower shutter speeds. "Camera blur", by which I assume you mean camera shake, is caused by movement of the camera during the exposure. The entire purpose of IS, VR, OS etc. is to counteract this, and the entire purpose of the minimum shutter speed rule of thumb is to account for it. When you add IS to the equation the rule of thumb no longer holds.

The necessary shutter speeds for moving subjects are unaffected by focal length and IS, yes, but that is not what we're talking. Those still remain at around 1/60 for normal human movement, 1/200 for mobile subjects and 1/500 and up for various sporting events.

Clearly in this situation, relying on IS, or having poor technique, have resulted in a blurred image, but equally, abiding by the rule of thumb and having pushed ISO at least four stops to 6400 in order to be able to shoot a 1/80 image to be on the rule of thumb in this situation would likely have caused noise issues just as detrimental as the initial camera shake i.e. in this situation realising you have IS but not being overly reliant on it would have been best e.g. shooting at ISO 1600, 1/16 or ISO 3200, 1/32 would have been a better decision than going by the rule of the thumb, as IS allows him to handhold for reasonably steady subjects that little bit more easily.
 
Last edited:
No, IS/VR doesn't change anything. The same rules apply, you still need a shutter speed fast enough to counteract movement of the camera system.

OF course you have to balance ISo, aperture and VR/IS and that is exactly what I said in my earlier post:
3) Hand hold with ISO up to moderate levels, but before impact IQ for the scene (some scenes that e.g., will require pushing shadows then ISO should be kept low).
Click to expand...

What ISO you limit yourself at depends entirely on the camera, the scene, your intended processing and display goals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom