Still playing with M mode. ISO 400, Apt.F/4, Shutter 1/200. Is this right?
HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
beachgirl Goldmember  1,099 posts Joined Mar 2006 Location: S.F. Bay Area (south bay) More info | Apr 29, 2006 15:25 | #1 Still playing with M mode. ISO 400, Apt.F/4, Shutter 1/200. Is this right? HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jbkalla Goldmember  2,831 posts Likes: 1 Joined Feb 2006 Location: Elizabeth, Colorado, USA More info | Apr 29, 2006 15:48 | #2 Almost, though it looks a little dark to me. Maybe one more f-stop? John
LOG IN TO REPLY |
beachgirl THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,099 posts Joined Mar 2006 Location: S.F. Bay Area (south bay) More info | jbkalla wrote: Almost, though it looks a little dark to me. Maybe one more f-stop? Cute pic, BTW! Thanks for the nice comment, that is hanna bannana(my 6 yr.old)She usually is a good model for me, so patient. AND one more f-stop it will be. Thanks it's nice to get some feedback. I'm sooo curious.I want to learn this.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jbkalla Goldmember 2,831 posts Likes: 1 Joined Feb 2006 Location: Elizabeth, Colorado, USA More info | Apr 29, 2006 20:05 | #4 BG, I could be wrong. Try it and see how it turns out. As it is, it's fairly easily fixable in PS. John
LOG IN TO REPLY |
beachgirl THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,099 posts Joined Mar 2006 Location: S.F. Bay Area (south bay) More info | jbkalla wrote: BG, I could be wrong. Try it and see how it turns out. As it is, it's fairly easily fixable in PS. I'm curious: Do you use the Histogram on your RebelXT? A good histogram should be somewhere between evenly spread and a little on the right, but not so much that highlights are clipped. The higher frequency light has more data, so a slightly overexposed pic will have more details than one that's underexposed. Hey, I use the histogram on the camera, and have read a little about how to use them. And yah "even spread" is good
LOG IN TO REPLY |
mbze430 Goldmember  2,454 posts Joined Feb 2005 Location: Chino Hills More info | Apr 29, 2006 20:48 | #6 The onboard histrogram is a "Good" reference, but don't trust it. Because the histrogram is based on a JPG image, not the RAW. Any settings you have in the camera also effects the histrogram. Gear List
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jbkalla Goldmember 2,831 posts Likes: 1 Joined Feb 2006 Location: Elizabeth, Colorado, USA More info | mbze430 wrote: The onboard histrogram is a "Good" reference, but don't trust it. Because the histrogram is based on a JPG image, not the RAW. Any settings you have in the camera also effects the histrogram. I didn't know that. Good info! mbze430 wrote: And to disprove this whole idea that is good capture is a evenly distributed histrogram... A low-key shot or a high-key shot will never let you have an "evenly" distributed histrogram. I should have said, "If your histogram is evenly distributed, it will probably be a good shot for you." Anything else can be fixed in PS, and by the time she tries low- and high-key shots, she'll understand it all, I'm guessing. John
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jbkalla Goldmember 2,831 posts Likes: 1 Joined Feb 2006 Location: Elizabeth, Colorado, USA More info | Apr 29, 2006 21:58 | #8 BG, thought I'd try my hand at it. Hope you don't mind!  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size. John
LOG IN TO REPLY |
beachgirl THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,099 posts Joined Mar 2006 Location: S.F. Bay Area (south bay) More info | jbkalla wrote: BG, thought I'd try my hand at it. Hope you don't mind! I brightened it a little and increased contrast very slightly. I also clone-stamped out part of the bags under her eyes. Don't know whether it makes the child look more like herself or less. You'd have to decide... Oh, and I used NeatImage a little bit to attempt to remove some of the JPEG compression artifacts.  I know poor little thing, she has what the doc calls allergy shinners.dark circles under her eyes, me too. But jbkalla, great job she looks beautiful. I will check out that neatimage too. Thanks.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
jbkalla Goldmember 2,831 posts Likes: 1 Joined Feb 2006 Location: Elizabeth, Colorado, USA More info | beachgirl wrote: I know poor little thing, she has what the doc calls allergy shinners.dark circles under her eyes, me too. But jbkalla, great job she looks beautiful. I will check out that neatimage too. Thanks. BG BG, use clone-stamp on an area right under the circles, then set the opacity to a low number, like 30%. Then draw over the circles. It works pretty well. John
LOG IN TO REPLY |
beachgirl THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,099 posts Joined Mar 2006 Location: S.F. Bay Area (south bay) More info | jbkalla wrote: BG, use clone-stamp on an area right under the circles, then set the opacity to a low number, like 30%. Then draw over the circles. It works pretty well. NeatImage Pro on Mac and NeatImage Pro+ on PC are plugins for PS, but they do make a standalone version that is cheaper. There is a free noise reduction program called NoiseWare Community Edition, I think, if you'd rather not spend money on NeatImage or NoiseNinja. Gorgeous kid! Very cute! hey jbkalla, I use PSE3.0 will the plug in work with this?Probly not huh? I'm writing this down clone stamp ect. Thankyou. I'll try it. And thanks for the nice words on hanna, I agree she is a cutie, and she is a great kid too. But she is mine so what else would I say
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Meaty0 Goldmember  3,519 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: Brisbane, Australia More info | Hi BG,
LOG IN TO REPLY |
deedspender Senior Member  283 posts Likes: 2 Joined May 2005 Location: England More info | jbkalla wrote: BG, thought I'd try my hand at it. Hope you don't mind! I brightened it a little and increased contrast very slightly. I also clone-stamped out part of the bags under her eyes. Don't know whether it makes the child look more like herself or less. You'd have to decide... Oh, and I used NeatImage a little bit to attempt to remove some of the JPEG compression artifacts. thats better! Canon 350d, (EFS 18-35mm kit lens ok ),(EF 75-300mm shite), (new 50mm 1.4 love it!!), (Portaflash flash units undecided?), Manfrotto tripod, 4 empty pockets and a deadend job
LOG IN TO REPLY |
beachgirl THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,099 posts Joined Mar 2006 Location: S.F. Bay Area (south bay) More info | Meaty0 wrote: Hi BG, The exposure actually looks fine to me. What did the meter in the viewfinder tell you? Did you use centre weighted metering? I use standalone Neat Image Pro and it's worth every cent. Can you tell Hanna something for me? Tell her, that shade of lipstick is HER  Paul. Hey meaty0, I think the meter wasn't quite in the middle, but close. I thought it looked ok for being inside. And yes I will let hanna know to stick with that shade. She is 6 going on 40. Pure women. LOL
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ghosh Senior Member  874 posts Joined Sep 2005 Location: Edinburgh More info | Apr 30, 2006 12:27 | #15 Hey beachgirl #include <iostream>
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2432 guests, 103 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
.