still photography

xirokx

xirokx

xirokx

Soldato
Joined
2 Oct 2004
Posts
4,362
Location
N.W London
Hi,

We have a canon 400d at work and I use a lightbox to take images off cufflinks and other womens jewellery..

We just have the lens kit and recently my M.D. has been complaining the shots are not clear enough..

I wondered if we bought a lens which was the best to purchase for close up / still photography? I was thinking of 24 - 70mm but would that suffice?

Also what is the difference in micro processor between fuji s9600 and canon 400d? I know one is SLR and the other is not so just wondered if anyone knew how the processor inside the camera would behave with different lightings and images etc..

thanks in advance

cheers!
 
A dedicated macro lens would be your best option if you want to fill more of the frame while also increasing the image quality.
Although the 50mm f 1.8 would be much higher quality than the kit lens and barely costs anything, the only issue I can think of with this is the minimum focusing distance of 45cm.
 
Sigma 50mm 2.8 Macro is probably a good bet. Can be had for under £200 and should be ideal for this sort of product photography. Also learning some basic post processing and sharpening techniques will make a world of difference.
 
I would say a Canon nifty fifty would be your best bet, if you need to focus in closer a set of Kenko extention rings will soon solve that problem.

Will hardly cost you anything and will give you superb results :)
 
Phate said:
I would say a Canon nifty fifty would be your best bet, if you need to focus in closer a set of Kenko extention rings will soon solve that problem.

Will hardly cost you anything and will give you superb results :)
Click to expand...

Not a huge amount of difference in price (£40ish?) between a nifty + rings and the Sigma 50 macro. More flexibility I guess but also more fiddly, I'm not sure he'll need greater than 1:1 magnification for jewellery?
 
trouble i experience is reflection from some metals, sure the lightbox has a window which you can remove and then reinsert to put objects in and take objects out the lightbox but sometimes there isnt enough space to get the camera close enough....Its a small lightbox but for cufflinks , pendants, bracelets, rings and similar stuff its fine..

I never thought it would be that difficult, have been doing it for a few months on and off around my day job but its really difficult at times , like today I was taking pics of gold cufflinks with a red front, I set the aperture to F22 - F29 around those two and had a fairly slow shutter speed i.e. 1/10 , 1/8 etc and no matter how I manipulated the front, back and ground lights on the lightbox the front of the cufflinks were actually appearing red on their canon 400d...I touched it up a little and voila I got the correct color but I wish I could take more pics that required less processing...

I need to use a high aperture F22 + to avoid blurr, otherwise the DOF kicks in and part of the cufflink is blurred whilst the other is clear...

Its certainly a challenge, wish I had more time to experiment...

But at really thinking of purchasing a different lens or maybe using alternative lightsources...

thanks for your comments
 
Thats a very high aperture you are selecting there, an aperture that high should not be needed and will effect image quality. A high aperture will help create 'star burst' like effects on points of light, which may be desirable, should try Min F8 Max F15

The shutter speed you are using is very slow, more so than it needs to be in the conditions you are shooting in (have lots of light) which will result in a blurred image unless the 400D your using is on a tripod. What mode are you shooting in on the 400D?

Having said that the kit lens isn't great for the kind of close captures you are after.. As its a company and aren't too limited to funds i'd say it is not worth messing around with a 50mm 1.8 and extention tubes, the results from the combo can be great but you are prob better off going for a true macro lens, and saving the headache of manual focusing, changing rings etc. An external flash would do nicely aswell, a 430EX
 
Last edited:
thanks for your response...

I use a high aperture due to the fact I stand about half metre away from the light box and the high aperture saves the image from being blurry...if I choose lower apertures then half the image is blurred..or a at least quarter of the image..

I have tried standing closer to the lightbox and using a lower aperture but still did not notice much difference perhaps its due to the light settings I can select on the lightbox..I try and have as much front light as possible, then put the ground light to a quarter and the back light to half otherwise I get too much glow..

I shoot on "A" I have tried all settings and find this provides the best result..If I try and get a faster shutter speed then the lighting is out, its either blurry, too much light or not enough light...I have on instances got a great shot but I think that was pure fluke because as previously stated different metals reflect light in their own ways...

I need to practice more to improve lighting, exposure and clarity within the shots...as stated above using a faster shutter speed means by shot has bad lighting, but using a higher Fstop although removes blurr does not provide a true image of what I am looking at..

Any ideas of whatelse I maybe able to try without having to fork out on a lens?

Thanks for advise so far..

cheers
 
Can you post some example images, including EXIF data? It sounds like their may be some issues with your technique as well as your equipment, but I'm finding it hard to tell from your description (no offense intended!).
 
F/22 wont increase the Dof much compared to f/12 but will give you far less light.


Are you using a tripod. If not then your shutter speeds are far to low.
 
+ You need to diffuse light to photograph metal; point light create reflections.
+ Use a tripod
+ Use small aperture if you want the DoF to 'cover' the whole of the object
+ Don't worry about shutter speed once you are on the tripod

If your lights are too 'pointy' you can try to diffuse them using something opaque, like white paper. You can also replace them by a cheap 'light table' held vertically from the side and rely on that to 'spread' around by the box sides/back/top.

Here's one made in a cheap light tent with just one light table on the right; and nothing else. Obviously you will need more magnification and I second the idea of the 50mm 1.8 with tubes, or any manual lens on tubes.
This one was made with a russian 85mm (Jupiter 9)
 
If you are doing it for a job i cant see why you cant be allowed the expense of a dedicated macro. With a long enough focla length you can set it up on a triod and dont have to be right next to it.
F22 is way to small for close up work as suggested anything over f16 is a waste and the kit lens becomes very soft after this. Experiment with the DOF - the 400D has a DOF preview button near the lens mount - use this to guage if everything is going to be in focus.
 
D.P. said:
F/22 wont increase the Dof much compared to f/12 but will give you far less light.
Click to expand...
At short subject distances (~3ft) the difference is quite marked - approximately double the DoF with F/22 although you do have to worry about diffraction effects.
 
Hi

thanks for the replies..

here are some examples:-

img1264ps5.jpg


img1267lq4.jpg


img1277yx7.jpg


img1281rs1.jpg


The above shots were taken with a low aperture settings i.e. F10, F8, F5 etc etc the shutter speed was under 1/100 I think it was around 1/80 and slightly lower..

As you can see the problem I am having (probably due to lack of knowledge and lack of experience) is:-

a) although I use a lightbox, I get bad light - despite pressing the DOF button on the 400d the one near the lens, perhaps its not a DOF at all
b) I find it hard to shoot and get an image that justifies the actual look of the product, be it the pattern on the front or the type of metal used to manufacture the item..
c) Depending on aperture used I get blurred images i.e. front is clear back of the cufflink is not...

Also there are other issues which I am sure you can tell from looking at the above images..

A lightbox is square unit in which you place objects then manipulate the light - it helps to takes good shots apparently..

Its something I do at work, not my main job or something I was trained to do its just that I like photography and the well the rest is history lol..

In order to make the above images look somewhat decent I use photoshop and adjust :-

a) levels b) highlights c) sharpness and d) color --- but even then I have to be careful because if I over process the image I get color burn (i think thats the technical term)...

I wish I could just take a decent picture of jewellery that justifies the type of metal used to manufacture it, which shows the design clearly and is not blurred and finally does not require much or any processing....

My M.D. will not buy a lens although maybe required at this stage because he thinks we need to get used to the camera a lot more...I get seconds to take these images because there are so many to shoot or am I disturbed from my main job to take them...Like I said if I didnt process them they would literally look like what you see them as....If you look at other jewellers sites you can see their photography is spot on and I really would like to learn how...

Please help

Thank you for your continued support
 
can you take a pic of the lightbox and light source? Im no expert but i would say your main problem is lighting.
 
Are we talking lightbox as in a box with a light in it onto which you're placing the items?

If so that's your problem, you need to be lighting from above and the sides of the item, not from below.
 
im at home now so will take a piccie tomorrow...

Are we talking lightbox as in a box with a light in it onto which you're placing the items?
Click to expand...
- yes

lightbox we have is square (looks like a microwave), has lighting from the front, back or ground....it also has a square panel of neon looking spots lights but thats more of an accessory you can use it if you want...the box does not provide lighting from the sides..

how many lights should I have on each side?

Ideally we would like a white background to shoot the products on, what could I use to improvise with?

are you saying if I had side lighting then it would help a lot, a lot more then now and that with improved techinque I would not need to do much processing??

thanks for your help
 
The more educated guys will probably know better but....

i would say you would be better with something like a "soft box" (ebay). These allow light to enter from all angles whilst diffusing it for a more even spread.
 
What you want is something like this:

lightbox.jpg


Light20Tent.jpg


13989420P3050198.jpg


If that isn't what you're using then that'll be why they look rubbish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom