WakeWorld

WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Video and Photography (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=87667)
-   -   It's the photo game (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=487440)

antbug 08-09-2007 9:48 PM

Well the other day Joe called me up and asked me what settings I thought this pic was taken with. It got me thinking what everyone else would say. I know it's hard to just say something with out taking any readings from the camera in all, but when I'm out I kinda know where I want to start. So with all that said, what would you say your settings would be (in full stops) for this photo. <BR> <BR> <BR>Game on.... <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/487441.jpg" alt="Upload">

wakeboardertj 08-10-2007 12:37 AM

judging by the depth of field, f/16, and the blur of the water, 1/30th. that has to be a lens with really good IS or shot from the other side of the bank with a tripod.

scott_a 08-10-2007 12:44 AM

I'd say closer to 1/60th than 1/30th, but I guess it depends on the speed that they're traveling at.

Walt 08-10-2007 1:11 AM

I think the shutter speed was closer to 150/200 range.

dakid 08-10-2007 5:25 AM

i'd say not higher than 1/60th.

Walt 08-10-2007 5:48 AM

Notice how the house isn't blurred but the spray is. I think the shutter speed is faster than you might think.

garrett_cortese 08-10-2007 6:45 AM

Walt asked me for my opinion on this, so here goes: <BR> <BR>The house is blurred some, as is the shoreline, but not as much as the boat. This is because the shot was taken with a wide angle lens. There is a lot of perspective with wide angle lenses, which means it would take a while for subjects in the background to "travel through" the frame, if that makes any sense. <BR> <BR>This isn't shot from a tripod. It's either shot with a gyro/steady-cam device or just plain old handheld from another boat that is chasing the Ski Nautique at speed. If the camera is traveling at the same speed as the subject, then the subject won't be blurry (which is why the models have to hold still in shots like this --- you can see the young girl's hair is blurry because it's blowing in the wind). <BR> <BR>My best guess is somewhere around ISO 100, 1/80th @ f13. I'm judging this based on similar pictures I've taken, and the fact that some of the spray from the boat is still kind of visible (it's not all one white blur). This photo I took is 1/40th @ f9 on ISO 400 (it was cloudy out), but it gives you a sense of the blur you achieve at 1/40th. Although, a lot of that depends on the speed the boats are traveling, as well. I know we were cruising at a pretty good pace for the photo of the Malibu, but I have no idea what that Nautique is going at. That just means there's a whole lot more room for guessing camera settings...<img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/487467.jpg" alt="Upload">

richd 08-10-2007 7:09 AM

First picture is not very sharp and I'd bet it was cropped heavily. Garrett yours looks like it was shot with a fisheye or a pretty wide angle lens. <BR> <BR>Joe's got to produce with that new camera now so he's smart in finding baseline settings. I'll guess f8 at 1/60th on the original.

scott_a 08-10-2007 10:17 AM

x2 on the "cropped heavily" bit. <BR> <BR>I'm guessing that shot of Aubrey staring back at the camera through the window was taken with a Canon 15 fishy. <BR> <BR>Since we don't know the speed of the boat OR what speed that particular ski boat planes out at, I'm gonna guess that it's only going 20ish mph, and the shutter is around 1/60th @ f9, ISO whatever. Obviously this is an evening shot with soft light so I don't think that you're gonna be able to run the aperture up more than f10. And for the sake of argument, let's say that he's using a Nikon and can't run the ISO up any higher than 200 without making the shot extremely noisy and crappy-looking. (hah! kidding!) So there. Since we don't know what the final numbers are I'll leave my guess at that.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 4:30 AM.