Jump to content

OT: The Photography Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

The "1" is life size, i believe. So a true Macro lens is a ratio of 1:1, or even lower. But that is an all in one lens it looks like, so it may be a tad different. My 50mm Prime Lens has a ratio 1:1.7, but it doesn't list the aperture in that scheme. That is on the outer Aperture ring. AFAIK, no interchangeable lens has that kind of ratio scheme on them. Looks like that has a pretty long zoom range as well. basically 4-150mm it seems. Fish eye to telephoto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Quote Originally Posted by Acid Hazard

View Post

Thanks, but there are way better photos than mine =o]

 

Welcome!


It's very encouraging to see such photos. I'm going to try to take high quality pics of a little sound module I have and see how they come out.


I am interested in product photography [not I have anything to sell], which is why I made those video tests above [pourring liquids]. Did you notice how amazing such photos are? And since we're into synths, look at any of those high-quality photos taken by the manufacturers.


How the hell do they achieve such clarity!


Random example:


MOTIF_XF6-1c82713da03565fcc6e8a48bbb458e


Click this link then click on the picture to enlarge it:


http://cachepe.zzounds.com/media/qua...8bbb458e47.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Good morning,


How about product videography?smile.gif


Note: the audio in the video is an old recording from a different synth. The only reason why I chose to use it is because it fits the length of the video. This is a test only. But for now, just imagine the music is from the Korg, to make the commercial complete, hehehe.



Things I learned from this experiment:


1. Not as easy as I thought it would be. Very difficult actually [took me forever to do it, dozens of video tests to arrive to this one]. Patience is *required*.


2. Laying down a gazillion sheets of white paper isn't a good idea because the intersection between them [the edges] is clearly visible despite the intense light]. A huge white sheet or board is a must.


3. Unless you're shooting from a relatively long distance [zoom], shooting at an angle is required when the product has reflective surfaces such as LCDs, etc [on some tests I placed the camera facing the front panel of the item, at the same angle. The camera, and other objects, were clearly visible on the LCD as its rotation met with the front of the camera lens. A no no]


4. Manual/custom white balance is a must, otherwise product will not look realistic as far as colors, and your eBay buyer will file a fraud claim against you if he has OCD, lol


5. Product must be 100% spotless if it's going to be advertised for commercial purposes. Any dust particles, scratches, smudges, dents, stains, manufacturing flaws , etc [even the tiniest ones] *will* be visible due to the proximity to light and the high capture detail/definition of the camera.


6. Placing the camera near the product didn't produce good results. In this vid, the camera was placed about 4 to 5 feet away from the synth and the zoom was used.


7. Insufficient lighting [i need at least a third light source, facing the product directly]. This will reduce shadowing.


8. Continuous auto-focus isn't perfect [on this camera anyway]. There is a slight lag in auto-focusing continuously, causing some rapid blurs in increments on the surface of the product as it rotates [hard to notice for the average eye, but they're there]


9. Youtube has a destructive compression despite rendering the video at the highest quality permitted by the camera at the time of the recording [HD 720p]. If Vimeo is free, I will try that instead to compare the results


10. For "perfect" 360-degree product demonstrations, the rotating plate must not be visible. This is a very hard problem to solve. Even if the plate is covered in white, it will still be visible. More experimentation is needed.


11. Thank you again and again to the nice KSS gentleman who sent me this little beast as a gift. You are very kind and generous.


12. I miss composing music.


I will post some "behind the scene" shots later.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Quote Originally Posted by Mediterranean

View Post

So what is this ratio in the case of that lens?

 

 

Quote Originally Posted by Acid Hazard

View Post

The "1" is life size, i believe. So a true Macro lens is a ratio of 1:1, or even lower. But that is an all in one lens it looks like, so it may be a tad different. My 50mm Prime Lens has a ratio 1:1.7, but it doesn't list the aperture in that scheme. That is on the outer Aperture ring. AFAIK, no interchangeable lens has that kind of ratio scheme on them. Looks like that has a pretty long zoom range as well. basically 4-150mm it seems. Fish eye to telephoto.

 

The f-number is the ratio of the focal length of the lens to its entrance pupil diameter. It's fairly esoteric but in practice the f number is describing Aperature size.


The ratio is NOT magnification size. Macro ratios are something else entirely.


Aperture is the amount of light you're letting in and it also controls depth of field. The fastest lens I have is a 1.2 - you can get razor-thin DOF! smile.gif


The numbers on that lens in the photo show the max aperture from one end of its zoom range to the other. This is a common feature on all modern lenses. More expensive zooms have a constant aperture along the entire range, commonly 2.8 or 4 - once again the one and colon are usually left off as per standard convention.


Because it has a small sensor, that 4mm on the wide end translates to an equivalent of something like 16 or so for a full frame camera and is probably rectilinear, not fisheye.


Here's a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_speed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do not think that the picture of the Motif XF is a photograph. Is it possible that this is a CAD rendering? The colors are too even throughout the picture. I do not see how you can light it to get the colors that consistent. Since the product was probably designed in CAD, in wouldn't be too tough to specify a pantone for every feature- After all, they have to specify this data in order to build the product.


This is just my guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Quote Originally Posted by piaknowguy

View Post

The Prairies


I went for a walk in Beatty Sask. and took my camera with me. Quickly wrote some background music. . . added a few bird samples. . .


Hope you enjoy it!

 

Nothing to view there, Piaknowguy. It's a login page.


 

Quote Originally Posted by piano39

View Post

I do not think that the picture of the Motif XF is a photograph. Is it possible that this is a CAD rendering? The colors are too even throughout the picture. I do not see how you can light it to get the colors that consistent. Since the product was probably designed in CAD, in wouldn't be too tough to specify a pantone for every feature- After all, they have to specify this data in order to build the product.


This is just my guess.

 

That is exactly what I thought too. But if you look closely at the magnified photo, it looks too realistic to have been drawn digitally.

It's what Acid Hazard and PF mentioned: usage of cameras that we, mortals, haven't even heard about, plus those massive lights, light diffusers, umbrellas, etc.


What's amazing to me is the perfect focus across the board, because when you shoot something that wide, you'd expect to see sections that are more in focus that others. So that means the F stop is very high [very tiny aperture, like F22] and the camera is also placed relatively far from the product so that the entire width of the board is covered [zoom is used].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Last night was the first time I test this camera in darkness, outdoors. Its performance isn't that great at night, but better than what I had before.


Froze my azz off though. It was cooooooold!


aircraft1.jpg


Somebody needs to repaint the noise of this thing..


aircraft2.jpg


aircraft3.jpg


Wide-angle shot and long exposure [2.5 seconds] showing light trails [a car passing by]


aircraft4.jpg


And a little video test showing things in perspective...and how sucky the auto-focus is [the moving cars and their lights confused the camera]. But I'm sure I put the metering in the wrong setting. Perhaps spot metering would have produced a better video.


You learn something new about your camera each time you use it. Other than the metering, the lowest shutter speed in video mode for this camera being 1/30s isn't the greatest. Something like 1/10 of a second would have made the video look much better in these lighting conditions.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Quote Originally Posted by piaknowguy

View Post

Hey Med! Sorry about the link. You can view it on youtube.

 

Beautiful photo compilation, and the music is even more beautiful, especially coupled with the wildlife sounds. My favorite are the last two: the birds flying away in the distance and the clouds above that dark farm building.


The only problem with this kind of presentation is the framing of the photos when compiled in a video. Those vertical side black bars remove more viewable areas on the photos [horizontal shrinking]. I personally do the opposite: horizontal bars, one at the top, the other at the bottom, for a cinematographic look, without the vertical bars, like in this vid.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...