by _Mayday_
Tags: photography
 PF Gold P: 5,450 This is the place where my oldest daughter works I shot this pic for the front page of her thesis, which is due next week. She supervises a group of mentally retarded 'clients', who produce things like these ceramic objects on the right in front, attached to these metal strips. Production is going well, customers have to wait some weeks before their orders are ready. To get everything sharp, front and back, I used a extreme wide angle shot, 12mm with the Tokina SD 12-24mm at F/11 aperture. Unfortunatly I did not consider shooting in RAW, which would have enabled lens fault correxions, while post processing. Ah well, I can always take another shot.
PF Gold
P: 521
 Quote by Andre This is the place where my oldest daughter works I shot this pic for the front page of her thesis, which is due next week. She supervises a group of mentally retarded 'clients', who produce things like these ceramic objects on the right in front, attached to these metal strips. Production is going well, customers have to wait some weeks before their orders are ready...
Interesting! Don't you think it would look more consistent if you only focus on the ceramic objects without showing the bulding's entrance? I think it's just distracting from the main theme... Unless, you meant to show the place where she works. Wish her the best of luck.
 PF Gold P: 5,450 You're quite right, Drizzle, if the subject was the ceramics. However her thesis is about processes going on in that building, hence the building is the main subject in the picture, however I thought that it would be nice to include those things in front, showing some of what is made inside.
PF Gold
P: 521
 Quote by Andre You're quite right, Drizzle, if the subject was the ceramics. However her thesis is about processes going on in that building, hence the building is the main subject in the picture, however I thought that it would be nice to include those things in front, showing some of what is made inside.
Sure, let us know how it goes!
 PF Gold P: 637 I got an unexpected bonus this year! Since the wife and I have been wanting a new camera for quite awhile now, we started doing some research on beginner DSLR cameras. I've always owned <$200 point-and-shoot cameras, so, needless to say, I haven't really been inspired to take very many pictures outside of family events, major vacations, etc. Since the bonus gave us a significant amount of financial freedom this season, we decided that it was a good time to buy a real camera. After quite a bit of research, we decided to go with the Canon EOS Rebel T2i (EOS 550D in Europe and Asia). We bought it yesterday, and I've been fiddling around with this amazing camera (on full-auto mode) for a few hours; I'm thoroughly impressed. It has inspired me to add a photography class to my schedule next semester so that I can learn to use it to its full potential. I'd like to get to the point where I can do everything manually and have no need for the preset modes. I'd also like to get a telephoto lens and a tripod so that I can start taking pictures of wildlife and my siblings' games/performances, but I think we're going to let the dust settle before spending any more money. I'm looking forward to participating in the photo contests!  PF Gold P: 7,368 Congrats, Dembadon! Canon has a very nice selection of lenses, and reasonable upgrade-paths. Their best lenses are , but there are some nice L-series zooms that will cover a lot of territory. I have a 100-400 IS USM and it delivers really crisp contrasty images. I was doing film photography back when zooms started getting popular, and avoided them like the plague. The 100-400 performs almost as well as my old dedicated Olympus and Bronica primes, and performs really well as a macro, too.  PF Gold P: 5,450 Nice Dembadon, got the same camera, but maybe if I had to buy one today, I would also have considered the brand new Canon 60D, which is bridging the gap between the 550D and the 7D, all with the same sensor but with different sets of gadgets. Sure Turbo's 100-400mmL is good glass but budgetting and judging price versus quality, you may also have a look at the 55-250mm IS. But the most important part of all camera's starts at about one inch behind the camera. PF Gold P: 5,450  Quote by drizzle Sure, let us know how it goes! Oh dang, I forgot about that, but she made it all the way and I got a thanks for my support. PF Gold P: 7,368  Quote by Andre Sure Turbo's 100-400mmL is good glass but budgetting and judging price versus quality, you may also have a look at the 55-250mm IS. I wanted to get a long, fast prime, but those are horrendously expensive. The 100-400 covered a lot of the range I wanted without all the $ and extra lenses. I have to put up with the relatively slow f:ratio, but with digital cameras, that's a lot easier to accommodate than with film.
 PF Gold P: 5,450 ...especially when your DSLR is very good at high iso's like the Canon 550D/7D/60D, but also the Pentax K-x and probably the successors (k-r and K-5) and the Nikon D3S and successors.
 Sci Advisor P: 5,446 Just to completely change the subject... I've got nothing for this week's contest (snow&ice) since snow season starts in another month or so, but I would appreciate any hints/tips regarding winter photography, for example- 1) how do you deal with thermal issues- does the camera need to equalize when going out, and how do you prevent/minimize condensation when coming back in? 2) How can I set my exposure stop to allow good contrast (for example, the texture of a snow-covered hillside), while still getting a good 'white' tone? Similarly, any ideas for getting a good 'white-on-white' (say a snowdrift)? 3) The overall lighting here is very 'grey'- heavy overcast skies. How can I make any spots of color really pop out? I'm hoping to get some good macro shots of snowflakes this year- One thing I miss about the South are those ice storms where everything- every leaf, individual pine needles... gets coated in a 1/8" sheath of crystal clear ice- it's as gorgeous to look at as treacherous to drive on.
 Admin P: 22,375 I don't care too much when I go out, but I don't open the bag/remove camera after getting inside till it gets warm. As for 2&3 - in my experience when there is no light, there is no pictures, no matter how you try. But I am eager to learn something new.
PF Gold
P: 5,450
 Quote by Andy Resnick 1) how do you deal with thermal issues- does the camera need to equalize when going out, and how do you prevent/minimize condensation when coming back in?
Going out is no problem, except that the batteries may die in extreme cold weather. But before that you get to take the most noise free shots you get, thanks to the increased sensitivity of the cooled sensor. Also consider taking out the battery and carry it in a warm pocket, if it takes a while to get to the shooting location in the cold.

Going in is definitely a problem. Best is to store it in something air tight, a heavy duty plastic bag or something before going in.

 2) How can I set my exposure stop to allow good contrast (for example, the texture of a snow-covered hillside), while still getting a good 'white' tone? Similarly, any ideas for getting a good 'white-on-white' (say a snowdrift)?
Use a tripod and make multiple shots with different exposures one stop apart, to select the best one at home, or use HDR. Also modern Canon EOS camera's have an enhanced high tone sensitivity setting.

 3) The overall lighting here is very 'grey'- heavy overcast skies. How can I make any spots of color really pop out?
Use RAW and play with color saturation and other settings in post processing.

Succes
 PF Gold P: 5,450 Anyway, after posting the previous I made this picture during a short hike with my point&shoot (Panasonic DMC TZ7). This is what the original jpg looks like: and this with some enhancing contrast, and color using Canons DPP (Digital Photo Profesional) software
 Sci Advisor P: 5,446 Andre- Thanks! I understand what you mean. Was the original shot with in-camera HDR? I like how you can make the distant snowy trees 'pop'.
 PF Gold P: 5,450 No in camera HDR, I just did exactly what it said, point and shoot to get something like this (in another direction): Then I loaded the jpg into DPP and played with the colors as follows: Notice that I also fooled around with the blue and red 'curve tone', adding some red in the (low) foreground and removing some more blue in the background (high) And this is the result (all pics are reduced to 18%):
PF Gold
P: 637
 Quote by turbo-1 Congrats, Dembadon! Canon has a very nice selection of lenses, and reasonable upgrade-paths. Their best lenses are , but there are some nice L-series zooms that will cover a lot of territory. I have a 100-400 IS USM and it delivers really crisp contrasty images. I was doing film photography back when zooms started getting popular, and avoided them like the plague. The 100-400 performs almost as well as my old dedicated Olympus and Bronica primes, and performs really well as a macro, too.
 Quote by Andre Nice Dembadon, got the same camera, but maybe if I had to buy one today, I would also have considered the brand new Canon 60D, which is bridging the gap between the 550D and the 7D, all with the same sensor but with different sets of gadgets. Sure Turbo's 100-400mmL is good glass but budgetting and judging price versus quality, you may also have a look at the 55-250mm IS. But the most important part of all camera's starts at about one inch behind the camera.
Is there a significant AF speed difference between a non-USM lens and a lens that uses micro-USM? I've read reviews claiming that the focusing speed difference between the 70-300 IS USM and the 55-250 IS is negligible due to the USM in the 70-300 being "micro-USM" instead of "ring USM," whatever that means.

I'm inclined to save up the extra \$300 for the 70-300 if the AF speed is significantly faster.
 PF Gold P: 7,368 I don't know about the autofocus speed or accuracy, but one factor that should be considered is the difference between the construction of the rear element of the lens types. The 55-250 is an EFS lens and the 70-300 is an EF. If you should decide to get a full-frame DSLR later, the EFS won't work with it because the rear element of the lens would protrude too deeply into the mirror-box and interfere with the operation of the mirror. EF lenses will fit full-frame cameras and 1.6x cameras (smaller sensor, smaller mirror box). You might not be considering a body upgrade in the near term, but if you find that you really like your lens and want to keep it, it would be best to have chosen an EF to avoid compatibility problems if you want to buy another body with a full-frame sensor. Here's a review. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/r...ns-review.aspx

 Related Discussions General Discussion 10 Introductory Physics Homework 1 Academic Guidance 5 General Discussion 6