Photography tips

[codykrr]

oh yeah thats my L.P. by the way....hows the pic?....i used the paper over the flash thing

 

[_tots_]

I think its a little noisy. Did you have the iso to high?
The best thing you can do is PRACTICE try different setting, mess with the iso, shutter speed, lighting and etc.

heres some old pic with my nikon D70s using some close up filter.

 

[Kris-wIth-a-K]

I also have a Fujifilm and personally love it but it is a battery eater only because it is also digital.... I think there is a big difference in details and how close a macro can get between an expensive Fuji to a regular digital..

 

[Talkenlate04]

I have a DSLR canon XSI that takes absolutely stunning pics but when I crop them or resize them the quality is drastically deminished.

You are doing something wrong then.

 

[biomarine2000]

You are doing something wrong then.

I resize the image to 1024 x 800 or so as arachnoboards states. I save the image at around 250 kb or less. It seems when I crop the image that it takes the quality away. If you can explain what I'm doing wrong please let me know. If you go to my picture thread you will be able to tell which images I cropped. If you can explain to me how to fix it I would be eternally greatful.

 

[WARPIG]

Inexpensive Cannon SE IS around $200 or so.

This has served me well till I upgrade.

Put on macro, point and shoot.
PIG-

 

[matthias]

I loved my FujiFilm, best Non-SLR out there. I would still be using it if the CCD hadn't died. My advise is to go as manual as your camera will allow. Play with the F-stop, Aperture, and ISO. It's digital if you take a bad pic just delete it, but learn why it didn't come out.

You can take really GOOD pictures with a non-SLR (or "SLR like" as FujiFilm says). But to take great shots you need to move up to DSLR. I bought my Olympus 410 for ~$500 with a basic lens and another $400 for a macro lens
I would love to drop another grand or two on a ring flash, macro extention tube, telephoto ect. but this setup does just fine right now.

This isn't the greatest pic but it's what I have with me

 

[aracnophiliac]

I also have a Fujifilm and personally love it but it is a battery eater only because it is also digital.... I think there is a big difference in details and how close a macro can get between an expensive Fuji to a regular digital..

The Thing at the top of the page...True spider?

 

[testdasi]

Can't help but chip in.
Close up pics of my A. genic. Very few (if any) would have thought these come from a video camcorder!
Original resolution around 5MP. No cropping, just resize to 640x480 so that it won't destroy formatting of the forum.

 

[Hamburglar]

It is difficult to explain how to resize sometimes because everyone is using different software. If you are using photoshop you can just resample the image and put 650-750 one the longest side. Save as a jpeg and put the quality on one of the "high" settings. It doesn't even need to be on the best quality. If you are cropping a great deal of the image away and then trying to make that image a great deal larger, you might have some quality issues. You are essentially stretching the pixels which isnt the best. Every time you open and save a jpeg file you are losing a bit of the quality because jpegs compress the files to make them smaller. This shouldn't be noticeable unless you are making larger prints. tiff files are really the way to go but they are too large to use on the web most of the time. If you have a choice of color profile to save in, the sRGB color space is generally better for web viewing. You can edit in whatever you want. I shoot and edit with adobe RGB but convert to sRGB for web photos or emails. Just like anything else.. you have to fiddle with the knobs until you find a setting you like.

 

[biomarine2000]

sRGB

I was told this by Talknlate04 and dont quite understand where to find out if it is saved in this way or aRGB. Could someone tell me where to find it? I am using adobe photoshop cs3

 

[Hamburglar]

I am using CS2.. but on mine with your image open you go to "edit" (at the top left in the grey bar) then at the bottom of the selection box you will see "convert to profile". You will then have window with a "source space" which is what color space you are in currently and then the "destination space" which is where you would change it to sRGB. You can check the preview box to see what it will look like. It shouldnt really change noticeably. If you havent changed the color space settings it probably wont be in sRGB. I dont think it saves in sRGB by default. I have changed all of my default settings long ago so I could be wrong about that.

 

[testdasi]

Why does it have to be so complicated? You can upload to photobucket and it automatically resizes to 640x480 (there are other size choices as well). I keep the original resolution on my hard drive and all pics in my photobucket are 640x480 - automatically, no need to do anything!

 

[Talkenlate04]

Why does it have to be so complicated? You can upload to photobucket and it automatically resizes to 640x480 (there are other size choices as well). I keep the original resolution on my hard drive and all pics in my photobucket are 640x480 - automatically, no need to do anything!

That is not true for the higher end cameras. Yes photobucket will resize the photo but that has nothing to do with the loss of quality in the image he is talking about.
If the image is being saved in aRGB it will look like a big steaming pile of poo when it is uploaded onto a site like photobucket because aRGB is not really a compatible online format. I had this happen to me recently when I did not know photoshop was opening my NEF RAW photos in aRGB even thought they were taken in sRGB. There is a drastic difference in the image online between formats so it is important to be sure it is being saved in sRGB and not aRGB.

 

[biomarine2000]

This image was resized to 1024 X 621, cropped a little, and saved a little over 200 kb. sRGB

 

[Talkenlate04]

What were your settings on the camera when you took that picture? That image looks over sharpened like you used a high Fstop. I would look at the exif data myself but I don't have firefox at work.

 

[biomarine2000]

I used the macro setting and high light. I did tweek it a little in photoshop to bring out the contrast.

 

[Talkenlate04]

I used the macro setting and high light. I did tweek it a little in photoshop to bring out the contrast.

I thought you said you were using an DSLR?:?

 

[biomarine2000]

What were your settings on the camera when you took that picture? That image looks over sharpened like you used a high Fstop. I would look at the exif data myself but I don't have firefox at work.

This is the pic without touchup at all. Just cropped a hair. This little guy is only about the size of a dime.

 

[Talkenlate04]

That looks MUCH better then the one you messed with in photoshop. MUCH, MUCH better. The photoshop one looks horrible and over saturated imo. (no offense)