traffic check, 2011

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dudley Hanks, Apr 12, 2010.

  1. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Here's a down-sized copy of the pic I'd like to submit for GDB's 2011
    calendar.

    http://www.blind-apertures.ca/images/TrafficCheck.jpg

    Just wondering if Mich is in focus, or if there are any other glaring
    problems ...

    Have fun; pick it to pieces!

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, Apr 12, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Dudley Hanks

    Irwell Guest

    Nice sharp picture, I would think that you would be wise
    to blur the telephone number on the dog's ID.
     
    Irwell, Apr 12, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Thanks for the feedback.

    Gotta remember to check for numbers on those darn tags ...

    Oh, well, it's been done so many times, the numbers pretty much in the
    public domain, now. Besides, what's a few more death threats ... :)

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, Apr 12, 2010
    #3
  4. Dudley Hanks

    NameHere Guest

    Sorry, I don't get paid enough to be someone's seeing-eye dog.
     
    NameHere, Apr 12, 2010
    #4
  5. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    You also have no sense of community ...

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, Apr 12, 2010
    #5
  6. Dudley Hanks

    Chrlz Guest

    That's actually a pretty cool image - unconventional, but it works,
    somehow. The bits that should be sharp are, and you've got the depth
    of field about right for the shot that you (might have?!)
    visualised.. ;o)

    Technically, the sky is pretty badly washed out.. Ok, it's not the
    subject of the shot, but it's a bit distracting. I'm not an expert on
    the Canon's ability to fill-flash in this way, but I'm guessing the
    problem was using ISO 800... For daylight fill-flash shots with a
    focal plane shutter, I think that's asking for trouble... :)
     
    Chrlz, Apr 12, 2010
    #6
  7. Dudley Hanks

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Oh my! Do we all need some Anger Management courses in here, or what?
    kerby <C55E9C54.1A409%>
     
    Ray Fischer, Apr 12, 2010
    #7
  8. Dudley Hanks

    Paul Furman Guest

    The horizon is quite crooked, but as long as you accept it's a quirky
    shot, it sort of works for the purpose. The composition is awkward with
    the car 'coming out of' Mitch's forehead, but like I said, that's maybe
    kinda the point here. My biggest problem is his eyes don't show. If you
    had another with his eyes, consider that one.

    I assume you're aware the rest of your web site is down.

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Apr 12, 2010
    #8
  9. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    That's actually a pretty cool image - unconventional, but it works,
    somehow. The bits that should be sharp are, and you've got the depth
    of field about right for the shot that you (might have?!)
    visualised.. ;o)

    Technically, the sky is pretty badly washed out.. Ok, it's not the
    subject of the shot, but it's a bit distracting. I'm not an expert on
    the Canon's ability to fill-flash in this way, but I'm guessing the
    problem was using ISO 800... For daylight fill-flash shots with a
    focal plane shutter, I think that's asking for trouble... :)


    Yep, you picked out the biggest problem I had in setting up the shot.

    I wanted the DOF effect more than the blue sky.

    Given the position of the sun / direction of light, I needed the fill to
    make sure Mich was in good detail. So, I tried to get the exposure of him
    as clean as possible. And, I went with the higher ISO as I'd tried it with
    lower speeds before but ended up with the in focus subject zone being too
    shallow. With Mich being only about a foot and a half or two in front of
    the camera, the aperture has to be fairly small to get a useable DOF.

    As is the way with most aspects of life, a comprimise had to be reached, and
    the sky suffered.

    But, I was thinking that, if I wanted a more colourful sky, I could always
    Photoshop it afterwards. But, I probably won't. After all, this is a shot
    of a guide dog at work. When I look at the sky, it is really washed out.

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, Apr 12, 2010
    #9
  10. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Thanks, George, for the feedback.

    For some reason, it was quite tough to get him in focus. I took a number of
    shots, over several shoots, and everything but Mich ended up crisp and
    clear.

    I think it was because the camera was quite close to him, and his coat
    seemed to mess up the autofocus system.

    But, it sounds like this shot should work.

    Once again, thanks.

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, Apr 12, 2010
    #10
  11. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest


    Hey, Paul, thanks for the feedback.

    Yeah, I'm redoing the site. It should be up in a few weeks. Want to try a
    few new things I've learnt over the winter.

    Re: composition of the pic, I was more after the image of a guide doing his
    job than a more traditional portrait. As such, the visual line between Mich
    and the car was pretty much the most important element, and the toughest
    one.

    I knew I'd have to sacrifice a good chunk of his face in order to get him
    looking back into the shot at an on-coming car, but I didn't want to settle
    for a back of the head shot either. Add to that the problem I had getting
    him in focus, I think this was the best overall image I got.

    Also, I was trying to minimize the flash fill problem. A number of shots
    came out with Mich too bright, so he really looked washed out / artificial.
    And, if non-pros were telling me that, I knew those pics were unusable.

    I'm sure this pic won't make one of the big monthly images in the calendar,
    but I'll be happy if it just gets picked as one of the smaller fill shots.

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, Apr 12, 2010
    #11
  12. Dudley Hanks

    Robert Coe Guest

    : On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 01:57:15 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
    :
    : >Here's a down-sized copy of the pic I'd like to submit for GDB's 2011
    : >calendar.
    : >
    : >http://www.blind-apertures.ca/images/TrafficCheck.jpg
    : >
    : >Just wondering if Mich is in focus, or if there are any other glaring
    : >problems ...
    : >
    : >Have fun; pick it to pieces!
    : >
    : >Take Care,
    : >Dudley
    : >
    :
    : Sorry, I don't get paid enough to be someone's seeing-eye dog.

    Why am I not surprised?

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Apr 13, 2010
    #12
  13. Dudley Hanks

    Robert Coe Guest

    : > Here's a down-sized copy of the pic I'd like to submit for GDB's 2011
    : > calendar.
    : >
    : > http://www.blind-apertures.ca/images/TrafficCheck.jpg
    : >
    : > Just wondering if Mich is in focus, or if there are any other glaring
    : > problems ...
    : >
    : > Have fun; pick it to pieces!
    : >
    : > Take Care,
    : > Dudley
    :
    : That's actually a pretty cool image - unconventional, but it works,
    : somehow. The bits that should be sharp are, and you've got the depth
    : of field about right for the shot that you (might have?!)
    : visualised.. ;o)
    :
    : Technically, the sky is pretty badly washed out.. Ok, it's not the
    : subject of the shot, but it's a bit distracting. I'm not an expert on
    : the Canon's ability to fill-flash in this way, but I'm guessing the
    : problem was using ISO 800... For daylight fill-flash shots with a
    : focal plane shutter, I think that's asking for trouble... :)

    I am an expert, sort of, having embarrassingly ruined a shoot a few years ago
    by not knowing what I was doing.

    What happens is pretty much what you indicated. If you turn on flash on a
    Canon DSLR, it will refuse to use a shutter speed that requires both curtains
    to be in motion at the same time. So if your ISO setting is so high that your
    lens can't stop down enough to compensate, you're SOL. There's probably a
    warning light to apprise you of the situation, but I either didn't see it or
    managed to ignore it. I was taking photos of my daughter's family at the
    beach, and all came out at least two stops overexposed.

    It's an easy mistake for a newbie to make. You think, "I can ignore the (fill)
    flash because its contribution to the exposure calculation is negligible."
    Which is true as far as it goes, but the camera has to ensure that the effect
    of the flash covers the whole image.

    Some Canons have a special repeating-flash mode for situations where you need
    a high shutter speed, but it isn't on by default.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Apr 19, 2010
    #13
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.