Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Shiney_McShine

CALLING ALL PHOTOGRAPHERS!!!

Recommended Posts

k-train's given some good advice. Another piece of advice is YouTube. TONS of tutorials out there. I've got a folder bookmarked in Mozilla with about 30 different ones that I've found.

Yep, the internet is full of helpful tools. There are a number of awesome tutorials on Youtube as well as reviews of cameras, lenses, filters, flashes, etc. Also, reading through forums like DPreview can be helpful. Just remember that almost all of the info you are pulling from these things will be opinion based, so it is best to check a number of resources on one thing & compare them. Then, you can take those common elements and apply them to your own situation.

For example, let's say you are interested in a particular lens, so you look at Youtube & DPreview for info. If most everybody agrees that it is a great lens for landscapes but is prone to flare, you can apply that info to your planned use for the lens. However, if one or two people out of 20 complain about it not being sharp enough in the corners, or the AF being slow, or whatever, take it with a grain of salt. Maybe they just got a bad copy of that lens... it happens. Maybe they are just overly picky & critical people. Also, what is their standard for comparison? Is it not sharp in general, or are they comparing it to a lens that is obviously of a higher class? Do they make that clear when expressing these issues?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest F_A_1_C_O_N

30tnxxf.jpg

n2irfn.jpg

rhpo4z.jpg

2upzhhv.jpg

So I got to work on sharpening. this last picture I am upset because I did not get it focus correctly, so I did the best with what I had to work with.

so how is my sharpening?

thoughts on what I did with the first tree with bringing the green out more? and any other critic thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest F_A_1_C_O_N

2valiir.jpg

Almost thought of going black and white. but I decided to take just the saturation out. I kind of like this better then black and white, but I forgot how to take out everything but me and make it black and white. (maybe I've been working on pictures to much and it's getting past my bed time)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest F_A_1_C_O_N

So I just found out something very helpful to me today

When I got my camera I saw it would not allow me to go over 1/250 when I had the flash on. So I thought you had to buy a SB flash. So I got the SB-700 for christmas. and.............. it still freaking did it, but I loved the flash on other occasions, so I kept it. Well this morning I went searching rampid like king kong on google and youtube and kept seeing people talk about high synch flash speed, but no one said how to do it. and now I finally found it.

I am sure some of y'all already know this. but if anyone does not, then here you go.

now could someone explain the difference in the auto FP 1/250 and the auto FP 1/320?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30tnxxf.jpg

n2irfn.jpg

rhpo4z.jpg

2upzhhv.jpg

So I got to work on sharpening. this last picture I am upset because I did not get it focus correctly, so I did the best with what I had to work with.

so how is my sharpening?

thoughts on what I did with the first tree with bringing the green out more? and any other critic thoughts?

I'm not a huge fan of pixel peeping... zooming in a ton and getting nit picky over the fine details... so I will just tell you how these photos speak to me & if I notice anything good or bad that stands out to me.

#1. I really like this one. Your composition is solid, and there is just enough contrasting color in the exposed rocks & the bit of green showing in the trees in the background to make it more lively & add some depth. I'm fine with the freezing of motion from this having been shot with a fast shutter, but it does make me wonder what this shot could've been like mounted on a tripod & having used a remote, and shot with a longer shutter speed to get some gorgeous motion blur from the moving water in the creek on those tiny waterfalls.

#2. Not the most interesting shot ever, but many, many times while out hiking in nature, I see something like this that strikes me as interesting in that moment (maybe a leaf pattern or the layout of the roots of a tree, whatever). When I go back & look at my shots, often these things just are not as cool as I remembered them being. Certain times, post processing can help you pull something useful out of these shots. I feel like that is what you did a good job of here. Punching up the colors helps it stand out & adds some excitement. The details in trees & other things like this can be fascinating, so it's good to have a nice, sharp image like this. My only real critique would be to slow down & take time to think about how you could capture the same idea, but in a more interesting way. For example, to many this will be nothing more than a mossy tree in the snow. That's because it was shot almost exactly the way they would see it themselves walking through those woods. Now, if you were to frame the shot so you were just getting a close & super detailed section of the brownish bark covered by the green moss & with a hint of that white snow that is on the tree, you would be offering up a perspective that the average person would never have. This could lead more viewers in by way of intrigue. The image would not immediately recognizable for them, so they would be drawn to examining it closer to find out what exactly the subject is.

#3. Her smile is contagious, and generates an air of life & energy into what is usually a bland, dreary setting (the snow). I like the detail in the fur on the hood, and in her hair. I would love to see some slight adjustments to the purple of her hat to help it pop just a tiny bit more. Right now, the hue & luminance have it coming off a bit too subtle, as it is getting a bit lost in the shadows from her hood. Being it is a mostly black and white & neutral toned shot, that little bit of color should really be helping to draw attention to the subject. Speaking of the subject being the focal point, I do find the think branch in the foreground to be really distracting. My mind wants to see a lovely woman beaming with happiness, but my eyes are seeing that woman hiding behind a large tree limb. I do like the concept, but I think a smaller branch (or just a bit of this one more in the lower corner) would've been more effective. Looking at the trees behind here, I almost wonder if you had been able to move to your left a few steps (and maybe shot from a lower perspective), if you could've gotten a shot where she was mostly or completely unobstructed from the foreground branch & also used those branches in the background to almost form a subtle, natural sorta square "frame" behind her.

#4. This one is a bit hard to figure out. I take a lot of shots like this myself, so I can dig it, but I'm not sure if they speak to most people... often it's just about what you saw in that moment you took the shot, a kind of "you had to be there" type thing. So, I often try to take these kind of shots and experiment with them a bit more to see if I can make them a little more interesting. I'd be curious to see what happens with this one of you were to set the sharpness pretty high (+120 ish) & give it a bunch of contrast. At the same time, going into the hsl/color/b&w menu & setting the saturation sliders to zero for everything but the green. Play with the hue and luminance of that green until it seems good. Then under the basic menu, drop the overall saturation a bunch until it begins to have a cool antique vibe. You can also do a lot by experimenting with the split toning menu. Next to "highlight", click that box & pick a color. Adjust the slider & see how it effects the photo. Experiment with different colors. Do the same with the shadows, and adjust the balance between the two if needed, or just to see what different looks you can pull from this tool.

All in all, I think these are looking pretty solid, and I look forward to seeing what comes next! You seem to be taking in a lot of info like a sponge & being open to criticism can only make you better! I applaud your drive & your awesome, selfless attitude!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I just found out something very helpful to me today

When I got my camera I saw it would not allow me to go over 1/250 when I had the flash on. So I thought you had to buy a SB flash. So I got the SB-700 for christmas. and.............. it still freaking did it, but I loved the flash on other occasions, so I kept it. Well this morning I went searching rampid like king kong on google and youtube and kept seeing people talk about high synch flash speed, but no one said how to do it. and now I finally found it.

I am sure some of y'all already know this. but if anyone does not, then here you go.

now could someone explain the difference in the auto FP 1/250 and the auto FP 1/320?

I watch a ton of Matt Granger's vids. Obviously a Nikon bias, but he seems to give pretty honest, straightforward reviews.

Jared Polin (froknowsphoto.com) is another guy with a ton of really quirky but informative vids. A total oddball & pretty opinionated, but he is a real deal pro with a ton of experience and he doesn't B.S. about stuff. He has a ton of vids, so check out a bunch & then watch the one where he talks about why he does what he does. If it doesn't put tears in your eyes, you are not a human being.

Digital Rev is ok, but something about that guy makes me not put a ton of stock into the vids. He seems too worried about portraying this kind of pretentious slacker attitude with constant jokes than reviewing the gear.

For more artistic & experimental tutorials, Photo Extremist is great. He's a really young guy who doesn't seem too professional or prepared with shooting his vids (meaning he seems to be just going for it rather than reading from a script he prepared), but the kid really, really, really knows his sh!t when it comes to this style of shooting & edits. He does some insane looking stuff, and will help you think outside the box.

For more straight up, traditional tutorials with a solid wealth of info, I like watching vids by Karl Taylor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I made the jump! Bought a lens the other day to force me to do it, and then bid on a D600 via Ebay & won.

Full frame here I come!

Got the body for $1450 (which is a steal for what should be a $2k body)

It is a US model with warranty, original box, etc.

only has 5,500 actuations on the shutter (rated for 150,000)

It is in perfect condition, and if any problems arise (or even if they don't & I just want to be safe), I can send this body to Nikon who will replace the shutter & clean the sensor or send me a brand new D610... plus Nikon covers the shipping both ways.

Dual SD card slots

25.6MP CMOS sensor

Same image processing as the D800 & D4

Etc., etc,. etc.

I am so pumped!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nikon_16-35vr.jpg

Here is the lens I got to go with the D600

Nikon Nikkor 16-35mm f/4 VR

This is the world's sharpest ultrawide zoom.

Per Ken Rockwell:

"As the world's sharpest ultrawide zoom, it's the best Nikon wide-angle lens ever for most shooting.

For subjects that hold still, shooting this 16-35mm at f/4 with VR hand-held gives much sharper images than shooting a faster lens at a wider aperture, because more is in focus at f/4 than at f/2.8 or f/1.4.

I have no problem shooting this lens hand-held in the darkest light outdoors on digital, and therefore prefer it over the

24mm f/1.4 AF-S G, whose larger apertures get less in focus. With digital, no one really needs f/1.4 except for action, making this 16-35mm perfect for almost everything."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest F_A_1_C_O_N

I'm not a huge fan of pixel peeping... zooming in a ton and getting nit picky over the fine details... so I will just tell you how these photos speak to me & if I notice anything good or bad that stands out to me.

#1. I really like this one. Your composition is solid, and there is just enough contrasting color in the exposed rocks & the bit of green showing in the trees in the background to make it more lively & add some depth. I'm fine with the freezing of motion from this having been shot with a fast shutter, but it does make me wonder what this shot could've been like mounted on a tripod & having used a remote, and shot with a longer shutter speed to get some gorgeous motion blur from the moving water in the creek on those tiny waterfalls.

#2. Not the most interesting shot ever, but many, many times while out hiking in nature, I see something like this that strikes me as interesting in that moment (maybe a leaf pattern or the layout of the roots of a tree, whatever). When I go back & look at my shots, often these things just are not as cool as I remembered them being. Certain times, post processing can help you pull something useful out of these shots. I feel like that is what you did a good job of here. Punching up the colors helps it stand out & adds some excitement. The details in trees & other things like this can be fascinating, so it's good to have a nice, sharp image like this. My only real critique would be to slow down & take time to think about how you could capture the same idea, but in a more interesting way. For example, to many this will be nothing more than a mossy tree in the snow. That's because it was shot almost exactly the way they would see it themselves walking through those woods. Now, if you were to frame the shot so you were just getting a close & super detailed section of the brownish bark covered by the green moss & with a hint of that white snow that is on the tree, you would be offering up a perspective that the average person would never have. This could lead more viewers in by way of intrigue. The image would not immediately recognizable for them, so they would be drawn to examining it closer to find out what exactly the subject is.

#3. Her smile is contagious, and generates an air of life & energy into what is usually a bland, dreary setting (the snow). I like the detail in the fur on the hood, and in her hair. I would love to see some slight adjustments to the purple of her hat to help it pop just a tiny bit more. Right now, the hue & luminance have it coming off a bit too subtle, as it is getting a bit lost in the shadows from her hood. Being it is a mostly black and white & neutral toned shot, that little bit of color should really be helping to draw attention to the subject. Speaking of the subject being the focal point, I do find the think branch in the foreground to be really distracting. My mind wants to see a lovely woman beaming with happiness, but my eyes are seeing that woman hiding behind a large tree limb. I do like the concept, but I think a smaller branch (or just a bit of this one more in the lower corner) would've been more effective. Looking at the trees behind here, I almost wonder if you had been able to move to your left a few steps (and maybe shot from a lower perspective), if you could've gotten a shot where she was mostly or completely unobstructed from the foreground branch & also used those branches in the background to almost form a subtle, natural sorta square "frame" behind her.

#4. This one is a bit hard to figure out. I take a lot of shots like this myself, so I can dig it, but I'm not sure if they speak to most people... often it's just about what you saw in that moment you took the shot, a kind of "you had to be there" type thing. So, I often try to take these kind of shots and experiment with them a bit more to see if I can make them a little more interesting. I'd be curious to see what happens with this one of you were to set the sharpness pretty high (+120 ish) & give it a bunch of contrast. At the same time, going into the hsl/color/b&w menu & setting the saturation sliders to zero for everything but the green. Play with the hue and luminance of that green until it seems good. Then under the basic menu, drop the overall saturation a bunch until it begins to have a cool antique vibe. You can also do a lot by experimenting with the split toning menu. Next to "highlight", click that box & pick a color. Adjust the slider & see how it effects the photo. Experiment with different colors. Do the same with the shadows, and adjust the balance between the two if needed, or just to see what different looks you can pull from this tool.

All in all, I think these are looking pretty solid, and I look forward to seeing what comes next! You seem to be taking in a lot of info like a sponge & being open to criticism can only make you better! I applaud your drive & your awesome, selfless attitude!!

Thanks. I love hearing negative because it is the only way to get better. But I would be lying if i said i didn't like hearing positive. Because positive helps tell me that I'm doing some things right. But I do great with negative from other photographers. Thanks

#4 I'll play with it soon and see how it is. But I do agree it was an, "in the moment and cool to me and you had to be there". I really questioned messing with it, and then really really questioned putting it here.

#3 that jacket with the fur is mine. And it's huge. So if i took anymore of her body in it, she would look fat and then I'm in the dog house. I need to find her a fur jacket like this but that forms too her body.

#2 yeah i need too figure out when to slow down and think of taking the shot. I sit there a lot and say, "take it and see what you think when you get home". So then next time I think, "hey, there is a cool twisty tree......"then I'll slow down and adjust it right. hopefully.

#1. I need to honestly slow down and think sometimes. Because I know how to do this.

It would have been a little hard because it was about 11AM. so the sun was exposing a lot. Which means i couldn't have had a great slow shutter speed. I'm thinking it would have ended up being iso 100, F22, and the slowest I could have done was 1/30. (maybe I could have tried HDR, but I haven't done that and very unfamiliar with it)

When i do my water shots that are slow. It's at dusk/dawn/night. I just haven't figured out how to do it great at day.

a side note: I couldn't get to the park early because of how bad the roads were. And I thought of coming back at night, but quickly realized the snow was melting.

But I'll be going back.....just there will be no snow of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest F_A_1_C_O_N

Well, I made the jump! Bought a lens the other day to force me to do it, and then bid on a D600 via Ebay & won.

Full frame here I come!

Got the body for $1450 (which is a steal for what should be a $2k body)

It is a US model with warranty, original box, etc.

only has 5,500 actuations on the shutter (rated for 150,000)

It is in perfect condition, and if any problems arise (or even if they don't & I just want to be safe), I can send this body to Nikon who will replace the shutter & clean the sensor or send me a brand new D610... plus Nikon covers the shipping both ways.

Dual SD card slots

25.6MP CMOS sensor

Same image processing as the D800 & D4

Etc., etc,. etc.

I am so pumped!

I forgot all about actuations. I wonder how many mine are now. Probably a good ten thousand + in the last two years. Because I went on some huge road trips. One being from Georgia to Kentucky to Cleveland to Niagara falls too Boston, Washington, new York, etc etc and back to Georgia. And that was almost three weeks.

Have you ever had dual slots before? I love it. Another reason i love Nikon. Many times it's extra space. But some times if I'm at parties or just something like Christmas events, Easter, I end up having one set to jpeg fine and the other to raw. And have it go to both. And if i end up seeing something i really want to edit, then I pull out the raw.

Or you can have one to do video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest F_A_1_C_O_N

nikon_16-35vr.jpg

Here is the lens I got to go with the D600

Nikon Nikkor 16-35mm f/4 VR

This is the world's sharpest ultrawide zoom.

Per Ken Rockwell:

"As the world's sharpest ultrawide zoom, it's the best Nikon wide-angle lens ever for most shooting.

For subjects that hold still, shooting this 16-35mm at f/4 with VR hand-held gives much sharper images than shooting a faster lens at a wider aperture, because more is in focus at f/4 than at f/2.8 or f/1.4.

I have no problem shooting this lens hand-held in the darkest light outdoors on digital, and therefore prefer it over the

24mm f/1.4 AF-S G, whose larger apertures get less in focus. With digital, no one really needs f/1.4 except for action, making this 16-35mm perfect for almost everything."

love my tokina.....but i should have got this. Just cause mine is to ultra wide. And i can only move 11-16, and that stinks.

And I thought when I got it, "man f2.8 will be great with a subject in it". But i failed at realizing I need the subject back really far, so it does not distort their body, face,etc. And 2.8 is never ever needed. (rarely do I put a subject in it)

So the lense you got there would have perfect for me.

Congratulations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

love my tokina.....but i should have got this. Just cause mine is to ultra wide. And i can only move 11-16, and that stinks.

And I thought when I got it, "man f2.8 will be great with a subject in it". But i failed at realizing I need the subject back really far, so it does not distort their body, face,etc. And 2.8 is never ever needed. (rarely do I put a subject in it)

So the lense you got there would have perfect for me.

Congratulations.

Thanks!

As this lens is essentially meant for use with FX cameras, I'm not sure this is the lens you'd want on a DX body like your D7000 though. As Ken mentions later in the review I quoted earlier:

"Don't even think about this lens for use on DX. Yes, it works great, but you're throwing away most of the performance for which you paid and carrying way too much weight for what you're getting on DX. For use on DX, use a DX lens like the 18-55mm VR, 16-85mm VR, 17-55mm f/2.8 or 10-24mm are much better ideas."

Check out this website where you can see image samples for people of all different skill levels. You can select a lens & it will show you all the shots taken with that lens... showing the camera that was used, aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focal length, etc. You can even choose a lens & then choose to see what it looks like with a specific camera. Or you can choose the specific camera, and then look at the pics to see which lenses were used for different things.

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/

That Nikon 17-55 2.8 with a D7000 looks like a great combo. You can find used copies of that lens for $700-$800.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot all about actuations. I wonder how many mine are now. Probably a good ten thousand + in the last two years. Because I went on some huge road trips. One being from Georgia to Kentucky to Cleveland to Niagara falls too Boston, Washington, new York, etc etc and back to Georgia. And that was almost three weeks.

Have you ever had dual slots before? I love it. Another reason i love Nikon. Many times it's extra space. But some times if I'm at parties or just something like Christmas events, Easter, I end up having one set to jpeg fine and the other to raw. And have it go to both. And if i end up seeing something i really want to edit, then I pull out the raw.

Or you can have one to do video.

You can go here: http://www.myshuttercount.com/ & upload a photo (jpeg or raw) from your camera. It will tell you how many clicks are on the shutter for the camera.

As for the double slots, I have not yet had a camera with them, but it was one of a number of things that pushed me to get a D600 rather than a D700. Dual slots seems like a no brainer, especially for people shooting weddings, concerts, sports, etc... things where you will need to shoot a ton. It also seems great for travel. I'm getting married in May & we are going to Turkey for our honeymoon. I lived there when I was a kid & it has a very special place in my heart. I have not been back since the late 1980's, so this trip is extremely meaningful to me in a number of ways. I'm not sure how soon after this we will make it back over there, so I really don't want to miss any shots due to having to change out a battery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I love hearing negative because it is the only way to get better. But I would be lying if i said i didn't like hearing positive. Because positive helps tell me that I'm doing some things right. But I do great with negative from other photographers. Thanks

#4 I'll play with it soon and see how it is. But I do agree it was an, "in the moment and cool to me and you had to be there". I really questioned messing with it, and then really really questioned putting it here.

#3 that jacket with the fur is mine. And it's huge. So if i took anymore of her body in it, she would look fat and then I'm in the dog house. I need to find her a fur jacket like this but that forms too her body.

#2 yeah i need too figure out when to slow down and think of taking the shot. I sit there a lot and say, "take it and see what you think when you get home". So then next time I think, "hey, there is a cool twisty tree......"then I'll slow down and adjust it right. hopefully.

#1. I need to honestly slow down and think sometimes. Because I know how to do this.

It would have been a little hard because it was about 11AM. so the sun was exposing a lot. Which means i couldn't have had a great slow shutter speed. I'm thinking it would have ended up being iso 100, F22, and the slowest I could have done was 1/30. (maybe I could have tried HDR, but I haven't done that and very unfamiliar with it)

When i do my water shots that are slow. It's at dusk/dawn/night. I just haven't figured out how to do it great at day.

a side note: I couldn't get to the park early because of how bad the roads were. And I thought of coming back at night, but quickly realized the snow was melting.

But I'll be going back.....just there will be no snow of course.

In order to shoot at super slow shutter speeds when there is a lot of light (daytime), you need to make the camera think it is dark. You can do this by using a ND filter (Neutral Density). These are pretty much essential tools for landscape photography. Getting the steps down for shooting with one can be a little tricky at first though, and I always seem to forget one small step like covering the viewfinder to keep extra ight from getting into the camera.

Here's an article about using ND filters:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/neutral-density-filters.htm

Here's another one that I like a lot. Very informative:

http://www.redbubble.com/people/peterh111/journal/4421304-the-ultimate-easy-guide-to-neutral-density-filters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FINALLY got around to playing with my 9 stop ND filter yesterday at Little River Canyon in Alabama. First time using it in actual daylight. I used it the night that I got it for a sunset, but haven't gotten around to using it during the day. I think I'm going to love this thing!

13022726673_8b5a9922e0_b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a couple of new eagle shots from yesterday. I've gotten to where the eagle can be in focus, but if the eye isn't tack sharp, I don't even bother with it. Picky, picky!

Lift off from the branch.

13026626424_b46f9797df_b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FINALLY got around to playing with my 9 stop ND filter yesterday at Little River Canyon in Alabama. First time using it in actual daylight. I used it the night that I got it for a sunset, but haven't gotten around to using it during the day. I think I'm going to love this thing!

13022726673_8b5a9922e0_b.jpg

That looks like a Bob Ross painting. Great picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks like a Bob Ross painting. Great picture.

Thanks. As talented as Bob Ross is, he's always creeped me out, but I'll take the compliment.

Mookie, I saw those waterfall pics on your Flickr page yesterday. Fantastic job!!!!

Thanks. It was nice to force myself to try something different. Not a single HDR shot taken! I can't remember the last time I went shooting and didn't take any HDR's. I forced myself to try out a 9 stop ND filter and really enjoyed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest F_A_1_C_O_N

I have no idea how to do HDR. I seen some things on YouTube, but I'm sure y'all know the good way to start and the best way to do it.

I have Photoshop and lightroom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea how to do HDR. I seen some things on YouTube, but I'm sure y'all know the good way to start and the best way to do it.

I have Photoshop and lightroom.

Most of the newer cameras have a built in HDR function, but you can do it by taking the exact same shot at a few different exposures (one for the sky, one for the foreground, etc.), and layering in Photoshop to make one image. You absolutely must use a tripod and shutter release for this though, because you want all the exposures to be of the exact same image, so they will line up properly.

You can also crank the "clarity" & "vibrance" a good deal in Lightroom in order to get an HDR type feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest F_A_1_C_O_N

is this basically right? and then I move it into photoshop, right? or do you recomend using photomatix? I do not have photomatix. but I'll get it if it makes it better and/or easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the interval timer is used for things like shooting star trails... You set it to shoot a 30 second exposure, then it will fire another, then another, etc. You let that continue for several hours. Then you use a program to stack literally hundreds of exposures & create the star trail. Basically, you want your foreground to stay the same & are making a several hour long exposure to show the movement of the stats.

With HDR you would take a shot, let's say a lighthouse at the beach, where you set the exposure for the lighthouse. Then you take the exact same shot but this time set the exposure for the water. Then you take one more exactly the same with the exposure set for the sky. The only thing you change at all is the exposure for a certain area. Then combine the images into one and create the HDR image with the exposure set for the entire frame

No, the interval timer is used for things like shooting star trails... You set it to shoot a 30 second exposure, then it will fire another, then another, etc. You let that continue for several hours. Then you use a program to stack literally hundreds of exposures & create the star trail. Basically, you want your foreground to stay the same & are making a several hour long exposure to show the movement of the stats.

With HDR you would take a shot, let's say a lighthouse at the beach, where you set the exposure for the lighthouse. Then you take the exact same shot but this time set the exposure for the water. Then you take one more exactly the same with the exposure set for the sky. The only thing you change at all is the exposure for a certain area. Then combine the images into one and create the HDR image with the exposure set for the entire frame

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
  • Create New...