How do you all take such beautiful photos of you guitars?

[asdfjkl semi]

Judging by some of the pics in this thread, not everyone here is qualified to be giving advice.

 

Composition rules are the main thing I'm seeing violated here. Don't shoot some useless weird angle of 2 of your tuners or half of your bridge just because it's different. Have a reason for what you're doing and an end-product in mind when you got to shoot.

 

Simple backgrounds that don't detract from your subject are important. Carpet almost universally looks bad because it has too much texture and it's distracting. It also just plain doesn't photograph well.

 

Outdoor photos can be cool, but shooting in the harsh light of noon is often no better than the harsh light of a flash. The shadows and reflections will be too strong. Choose early morning or early evening when the light is more diffuse and there is a wider range of color in the natural light.

 

Learn to crop your images effectively. Trim out things that aren't important and frame the subject in a visually appealing way.

[samuraiBSD]

Judging by some of the pics in this thread, not everyone here is qualified to be giving advice. Composition rules are the main thing I'm seeing violated here. Don't shoot some useless weird angle of 2 of your tuners or half of your bridge just because it's different. Have a reason for what you're doing and an end-product in mind when you got to shoot. Simple backgrounds that don't detract from your subject are important. Carpet almost universally looks bad because it has too much texture and it's distracting. It also just plain doesn't photograph well. Outdoor photos can be cool, but shooting in the harsh light of noon is often no better than the harsh light of a flash. The shadows and reflections will be too strong. Choose early morning or early evening when the light is more diffuse and there is a wider range of color in the natural light. Learn to crop your images effectively. Trim out things that aren't important and frame the subject in a visually appealing way.

 

Mr Photographer Man, can you give me some advice directly on my LP (on the hardwood floor, not the one on the bed)?

[odo]

[Sean_Casto]

These are probably my favorite shots I have of my old geetar. It was my US Hwy 1 Strat.

 

[Steadfastly]

Here are some suggestions:

1: Lighting is the most important
2: Background is likely second
3: A good camera, especially a good lens
4: Take a number of shots from different angles/settings of each item you want to shoot. Even pros take hundreds of shots and only keep a few and now a lot easier with digital photography.
5: If you have a manual setting on your camera, use this a lot. It will help you understand, your camera and photography better.
6: Don't take pics of junk. Junk is junk no matter who takes the picture.

Regards.

[rparchen]

This was me last year getting a little bored at home one day. I thought it looked kind of cool and it was fun to play with some limited depth of field and editing.

 

[asdfjkl semi]

 

I like that one. It's sharp, well focussed, has good reflections that show the depth, and a nice background. The only thing I would check is your white balance. If the binding really is that yellow of a creme color, you're good to go, but I'm thinking it's a little bit more white than that. Color adjustment and/or a slightly longer exposure might be needed to reproduce the colors more accurately.

[Jesse G]

You pussies ALL have your action set WAY too low

[rparchen]

a slightly longer exposure might be needed to reproduce the colors more accurately.

A longer exposure really has nothing to do with color temperature. The metering system (which determines exposure) will only determine how light or dark the picture will turn out. To get accurate color, you will need to either set a custom white balance or fix the yellow color cast in processing.

[asdfjkl semi]

 

A longer exposure really has nothing to do with color temperature. The metering system (which determines exposure) will only determine how light or dark the picture will turn out. To get accurate color, you will need to either set a custom white balance or fix the yellow color cast in processing.

 

 

Yes, but the binding is both a little dark and a little on the yellow side. When images are underexposed in incandescent light, it tends to exaggerate the color cast.

 

 

 

By the way, cool shot rparchen.

[Bassopotamus]

Good camera, good lens, good light, tripod, no flash. Flash is a disaster with guitars because it gives hot spots on the hardware and finish that look bad. Cool thing is, guitars don't move, so you can use long exposures.

I took that shot of my dearly departed heritage with a DSLR, but if it has the right controls, a compact can work too. you need

1. A tripod that can hold it solidly including against the push of the shutter release.
2. The ability to control ISO, and preferably an aperture priority mode.
3. The ability to pick a white balance and some software to perhaps further color correct.

Set the camera to the lowest ISO. If possible, pick an aperture that makes you happy and let the camera pick the corresponding shutter speed (pick a small number of you want to blur parts of the guitar out, a bigger number if you want more of it in focus). Pick either incandescent or fluorescent White balance depending on the light. You may need to further correct the color in photoshop or something else (I find that long exposures under incandscent tend to pull red, even using the incandescent preset).

[LARRY L]

Get a digital SLR, it'll really make a difference in your shots.. These were done with a Rebel XT.

 

Nice shot! My Nikon D70s works great also now they have the new d40 that is less money and only $500 (low for a digital SLR)

How do you get the photos attached to the post w/o using the thumbnail attachment option. I like the big screen look.

[LARRY L]

Good camera, good lens, good light, tripod, no flash. Flash is a disaster with guitars because it gives hot spots on the hardware and finish that look bad. Cool thing is, guitars don't move, so you can use long exposures. I took that shot of my dearly departed heritage with a DSLR, but if it has the right controls, a compact can work too. you need 1. A tripod that can hold it solidly including against the push of the shutter release. 2. The ability to control ISO, and preferably an aperture priority mode. 3. The ability to pick a white balance and some software to perhaps further color correct. Set the camera to the lowest ISO. If possible, pick an aperture that makes you happy and let the camera pick the corresponding shutter speed (pick a small number of you want to blur parts of the guitar out, a bigger number if you want more of it in focus). Pick either incandescent or fluorescent White balance depending on the light. You may need to further correct the color in photoshop or something else (I find that long exposures under incandscent tend to pull red, even using the incandescent preset).

 

For closeups I must add to use the smallest f stop you have and slow down the shutter speed, this will give a better depth of field (more in the focus area for a sharper image)

[Bassopotamus]

For closeups I must add to use the smallest f stop you have and slow down the shutter speed, this will give a better depth of field (more in the focus area for a sharper image)

 

 

I Agree, to a point.

 

With a compact camera, it doesn't much matter because they have so much depth of field anyway.

 

I also wouldn't go for the biggest, because eventually, you lose sharpness overall due to diffraction effects (I have a pinhole lens that is around f/185, which has infinite DOF, but it is more that it is equally unsharp throughout). It's worth experimenting to see what works for the look you are going for.

[LARRY L]

 

I Agree, to a point. With a compact camera, it doesn't much matter because they have so much depth of field anyway. I also wouldn't go for the biggest, because eventually, you lose sharpness overall due to diffraction effects (I have a pinhole lens that is around f/185, which has infinite DOF, but it is more that it is equally unsharp throughout). It's worth experimenting to see what works for the look you are going for.

 

 

Logic would say the less of the lens you use the sharper the image, but I have read otherwise, On my old OM1 SLRs they were very sharp at f 22 using a 28mm. The DOF was great too. I have not own a compact camera. The whole thing is downsize to get that DOF you are talking about yet you do not get the amount of unit of light/pixel so the overall quality suffers.

[samuraiBSD]

I can't tell if that reply is a little tongue-in-cheek, but I'll assume it's meant in earnest. I like that one. It's sharp, well focussed, has good reflections that show the depth, and a nice background. The only thing I would check is your white balance. If the binding really is that yellow of a creme color, you're good to go, but I'm thinking it's a little bit more white than that. Color adjustment and/or a slightly longer exposure might be needed to reproduce the colors more accurately.

no, it was real. You should've seen the photo before I ran it through photoshop; it was really orange. I wanted to retain a warm glow but get rid of some of the orange. i ended up tweaking the levels a bit and taking some of the magenta out while increasing the cyan. Worked rather well but I'll take your advice on the binding.

[asdfjkl semi]

See if your camera has an in-camera white balance setting. If you can get it looking pretty close from the camera, you can minimize the work you'll have to do in Photoshop. This applies to most aspects of photography.

[samuraiBSD]

See if your camera has an in-camera white balance setting. If you can get it looking pretty close from the camera, you can minimize the work you'll have to do in Photoshop. This applies to most aspects of photography.

 

 

'Course it does. I just don't use it because I usually shoot in RAW, and my computer has a much better screen than my D40

[ievans]

Ok, I've got a digitel rebel XT, how the hell do you take such a close up. whenever I try to take a close shot, I go as close to the subject as I can, I press the capture button half way so it will focus, but it won't focus or take the pic, I have to back away from the subject for this to work. what am I doing wrong??

 

 

I know this post is super old, but I don't think anyone answered rainvalorx's question here.

 

You have to use your camera's "macro" setting in order to properly compose and focus on extremely close objects. On Canon's, the setting is indicated by a flower icon. The autofocus can't figure out what to focus on if the object is too close to the lens (say, closer than 1 foot) unless you put it in macro mode.

[asdfjkl semi]

 

In that case, you're going to be tweaking the pictures no matter what.

I used to play with my raw images for hours at a time. Great results, though!

[asdfjkl semi]

 

I know this post is super old, but I don't think anyone answered rainvalorx's question here. You have to use your camera's "macro" setting in order to properly compose and focus on extremely close objects. On Canon's, the setting is indicated by a flower icon. The autofocus can't figure out what to focus on if the object is too close to the lens (say, closer than 1 foot) unless you put it in macro mode.

 

 

On the stock lenses on many SLRs, there is a minimum focus distance. For the 18-55mm lens that comes stock on the Canon Rebel XT, this is 0.9ft*. Thus, you cannot shoot images with the camera lens any closer than this distance to the subject.

You would need a dedicated macro lens for this purpose.

 

*Source: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/351554-USA/Canon_9475A002_18_55mm_f_3_5_5_6_EF_S_USM.html

[samuraiBSD]

On the stock lenses on many SLRs, there is a minimum focus distance. For the 18-55mm lens that comes stock on the Canon Rebel XT, this is 0.9ft*. Thus, you cannot shoot images with the camera lens any closer than this distance to the subject. You would need a dedicated macro lens for this purpose. *Source: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/351554-USA/Canon_9475A002_18_55mm_f_3_5_5_6_EF_S_USM.html

 

 

very true, however, you can get a relatively good lens for cheap if you look used. I got a really nice telephoto for my Cannon AV-1 for about $50 in a pawn shop. Hasn't failed me yet

[LARRY L]

I was hoping that someone could help me out with attaching a photo to the post. The only way that worked for me was using the thumbnails attachment. see below

[samuraiBSD]

I was hoping that someone could help me out with attaching a photo to the post. The only way that worked for me was using the thumbnails attachment. see below

[ievans]

On the stock lenses on many SLRs, there is a minimum focus distance. For the 18-55mm lens that comes stock on the Canon Rebel XT, this is 0.9ft*. Thus, you cannot shoot images with the camera lens any closer than this distance to the subject. You would need a dedicated macro lens for this purpose. *Source: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/351554-USA/Canon_9475A002_18_55mm_f_3_5_5_6_EF_S_USM.html

 

 

Good point. This is one area where P&S cameras are generally better than SLRs. For example, the Canon SD750's minimum focus length is 1.2 inches, as opposed to around a foot for the Rebel XT. You still need to use the macro setting, though.

 

In any case, though, cropping is your friend. You have a lot of canvas to work with with modern digicams. Crop and resize your shots to eliminate distracting elements from your compositions.