d70 and double exposures

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Ken Palmateer, Jan 23, 2005.

  1. Just a thought, but while I was looking at some old slides I
    came upon a few double exposure shots taken with my old F3, and it
    occurs to me that that might not be a possibility with the d70. I
    suppose Photoshop (or such-like) is the alternative. I guess
    in-camera special effects have now migrated to "in-computer". Ken
     
    Ken Palmateer, Jan 23, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ken Palmateer

    George Guest

    "Ken Palmateer" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Just a thought, but while I was looking at some old slides I
    > came upon a few double exposure shots taken with my old F3, and it
    > occurs to me that that might not be a possibility with the d70. I
    > suppose Photoshop (or such-like) is the alternative. I guess
    > in-camera special effects have now migrated to "in-computer". Ken


    The same thought had occurred to me. A shot I've never taken (though
    I intend to sometime) is a triple exposure, involving running water (river,
    waterfall, etc) with each exposure having a different filter (R,G, and B).
    Everything in the same place comes out neutral, the differences (splashes
    and drops of water) come out colored. I think to do digitally, you'd have
    to take three different photos, filter them, and overlay them...a situation
    where digital is less convenient and less precise than the "old" film
    method.

    George
     
    George, Jan 23, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ken Palmateer

    Guest

    In message <9DEId.12985$>,
    "George" <> wrote:

    >"Ken Palmateer" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Just a thought, but while I was looking at some old slides I
    >> came upon a few double exposure shots taken with my old F3, and it
    >> occurs to me that that might not be a possibility with the d70. I
    >> suppose Photoshop (or such-like) is the alternative. I guess
    >> in-camera special effects have now migrated to "in-computer". Ken

    >
    >The same thought had occurred to me. A shot I've never taken (though
    >I intend to sometime) is a triple exposure, involving running water (river,
    >waterfall, etc) with each exposure having a different filter (R,G, and B).
    >Everything in the same place comes out neutral, the differences (splashes
    >and drops of water) come out colored. I think to do digitally, you'd have
    >to take three different photos, filter them, and overlay them...a situation
    >where digital is less convenient and less precise than the "old" film
    >method.


    You wouldn't do that with filters with digital. The digital is already
    filtered. You're only going to blacken two of the channels, and darken
    your filter channel by using a filter. Just take 3 digital images, and
    try using any 3 channels to make a final RGB.

    I did this once with a fan blowing my hair while my skin was still.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Jan 23, 2005
    #3
  4. Ken Palmateer

    Guest

    In message <>,
    wrote:

    >You wouldn't do that with filters with digital. The digital is already
    >filtered. You're only going to blacken two of the channels, and darken
    >your filter channel by using a filter. Just take 3 digital images, and
    >try using any 3 channels to make a final RGB.


    Oh, and you can make each full image greyscale and use that as a color
    channel, as well.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Jan 23, 2005
    #4
  5. Ken Palmateer

    [BnH] Guest

    Not if you use Fuji S2 / S3 Pro =)

    =bob=

    "Ken Palmateer" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Just a thought, but while I was looking at some old slides I
    > came upon a few double exposure shots taken with my old F3, and it
    > occurs to me that that might not be a possibility with the d70. I
    > suppose Photoshop (or such-like) is the alternative. I guess
    > in-camera special effects have now migrated to "in-computer". Ken
     
    [BnH], Jan 23, 2005
    #5
  6. Ken Palmateer

    Owamanga Guest

    On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:08:10 -0500, "George" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Ken Palmateer" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Just a thought, but while I was looking at some old slides I
    >> came upon a few double exposure shots taken with my old F3, and it
    >> occurs to me that that might not be a possibility with the d70. I
    >> suppose Photoshop (or such-like) is the alternative. I guess
    >> in-camera special effects have now migrated to "in-computer". Ken

    >
    >The same thought had occurred to me. A shot I've never taken (though
    >I intend to sometime) is a triple exposure, involving running water (river,
    >waterfall, etc) with each exposure having a different filter (R,G, and B).
    >Everything in the same place comes out neutral, the differences (splashes
    >and drops of water) come out colored. I think to do digitally, you'd have
    >to take three different photos, filter them, and overlay them...a situation
    >where digital is less convenient and less precise than the "old" film
    >method.


    I would consider a system (the Photoshop way) that gives you blending
    control, and has no requirement for filter use is far more convenient
    and powerful than your old method.

    It's an interesting idea though.

    --
    Owamanga!
     
    Owamanga, Jan 24, 2005
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Tom Accuosti
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    539
    Travis Evans
    Sep 27, 2004
  2. MNP

    D70 Raw Number of Exposures

    MNP, Apr 18, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    599
    Tomas Daniska
    Jun 15, 2004
  3. The Man With No Name
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    873
  4. Jeff M
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    637
  5. Jeff M
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    484
    greensteak
    Nov 9, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page