|
Join Date: May 2002
07-21-2009, 6:35 AM
|
Reply
|
I shot a bunch of pictures this weekend right at Sunset in much lower light than I normally shoot in. Usually, I shoot in aperature priority and adjust it so the shutter speed is around 1/1500 to 1/2500 and go with it. I am usually around f4 to 6.3 In the lower light even at f2.8, my shutter speed wasn't fast enough to stop motion and get clear shots. After reviewing the pictures I think I know what I have should have done... Go to shutter priority and set it to 1/1500 and then crank the ISO up until I get a properly exposed picture... probably around 1600. Is that right? Any other suggestions for low light wakeboarding? I guess I could have used my 580EX but didn't have it along and am not real skilled with using it yet.
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
07-21-2009, 9:17 AM
|
Reply
|
Yes, that's the only thing you can do. You are going to introduce noise at 1600... depending on your camera. A flash won't work for two reasons. The rider is going to be too far away to have any great effect. But more importantly is your flash sync speed. Cameras have a flash sync speed of 1/200 - 1/500. Too slow of a shutter speed for you if you are trying to freeze it at 1/1500.
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
07-21-2009, 7:09 PM
|
Reply
|
It's hard to freeze action without a flash. This is about as low a light level as I've ever shot. 1/1000th, ISO2500, pushed 2/3rds of a stop. I like the mood of these type shots which is tough to get with a flash.
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
07-21-2009, 7:11 PM
|
Reply
|
Actually, you can use flash to stop action, and it can be a great tool. But there is a large learning curve. Also, on camera flash will not work(in this situation) without a flash extender(the name escapes me right now, but it's what wildlife shooters use)
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
07-22-2009, 6:55 AM
|
Reply
|
I believe the flash extender is called a tube-n-pocketwizarderorlator
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
07-22-2009, 7:06 AM
|
Reply
|
The one Arthur Morris is always touting is the Better Beamer.
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
07-22-2009, 8:22 AM
|
Reply
|
Better Beamer - I just googled it. What an interesting contraption. With the lens and teleconverters on this camera, I would say he is shooting very far away. I'm thinking it may work.
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
07-22-2009, 1:10 PM
|
Reply
|
This was pretty much taken at night it was a lot darker than the picture looks no flash you can take good shots but they start to get a little grainy at higher ISO's. Wouldn't ever run in a mag because of how grainy it is, but you can get some enjoyable shots for yourself.
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
07-22-2009, 6:10 PM
|
Reply
|
the better beamer looks like a normal snoot, just a narrow beam of light on what looks like a canon 580ex flash
|
Join Date: May 2002
07-23-2009, 10:13 AM
|
Reply
|
Why would you need that with a 580EX? I have that flash and I think it has a range of like 100' or something. I'd think it would put out plenty of light for a rider 80' back.
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
07-23-2009, 8:41 PM
|
Reply
|
If you have a chance check out the bird photography of Arthur Morris, he is a wizard with that thing. I got one a while back but have never used it. In that shot above I doubt the guy is more then 40 or 50 feet from the bird. Not sure if it would be very good on a wakeboarder.
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
07-23-2009, 9:28 PM
|
Reply
|
Riley - with the D700 you can shoot iso 3600 at midnight and it looks like the middle of the day with no grain.. ;-) Do you have http://www.neatimage.com/ If not, shoot me the original of Bordie's pic and lets see what it can do..
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
07-24-2009, 11:00 AM
|
Reply
|
I like the grain in this shot
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
07-26-2009, 1:18 PM
|
Reply
|
Hey Rob, By no means am I an expert in flash, but it doesn't work that way. The 580EX has a GN unit of 190 I think. You divide that by the f stop being used and that gives you the distance it can reach the subject and fully cover them. So GN of 190 shooting at f/4 will be 47.5 feet.
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
07-27-2009, 8:20 AM
|
Reply
|
Ho I use Photoshop CS4. Like I said I like the noise in that shot
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
07-27-2009, 7:14 PM
|
Reply
|
I'm glad you finally said "noise" instead of "grain", I was going to call you out with "it ain't film dude!" I'm a big noise ninja fan, I'm sure I probably ran that shot of chris above through it. Between the high ISO capabilities and software we won't need flashes much longer!
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
07-27-2009, 8:26 PM
|
Reply
|
I cam sleep tonight now that I have your approval.
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
07-27-2009, 8:37 PM
|
Reply
|
wow...i've never heard of anyone being a fan of noise. i "ninja'd" the same pic above in a previous thread.
|
Join Date: Jun 2003
07-27-2009, 9:42 PM
|
Reply
|
If you were to go b&w with it I totally would be fine with the noise in the picture but when it is in color then it just seems too "digital" Just my opinion.
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
07-27-2009, 10:06 PM
|
Reply
|
But even still, you're gonna need to kill some of that noise. There's just too much of it.
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
07-27-2009, 11:50 PM
|
Reply
|
same through noiseware
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
07-27-2009, 11:58 PM
|
Reply
|
i applied like 1% effort. knowing you, you busted your ass on that fix.
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
07-28-2009, 1:20 AM
|
Reply
|
joe - did you watch those tutorials yet?
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
07-28-2009, 1:40 AM
|
Reply
|
Come to think of Riley.. I don't like the crop, grain, noise, or the colors, so I made a few changes. (I hope you don't mind..?) I like to think of this in the same light as what AMG does for Mercedes, Ruf for Porsche, Dinan for BMW, etc.. Just tak'n it to the next level. }
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
07-28-2009, 7:17 AM
|
Reply
|
Hahahahhahahaha! Punks!
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
07-28-2009, 7:19 AM
|
Reply
|
I bet David's edit would totally run in a mag!
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
07-28-2009, 8:25 AM
|
Reply
|
I don't know RT looks a little "Grainy" to me in B&W
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
07-28-2009, 8:31 AM
|
Reply
|
I am surprised none of you have said this, but this may just be my film photog teacher shining through. You cannot rely on post processing to fix a photo that isn't shot well in the 1st place. If it has a lot of noise you may be able to massage it but it will never be as good as taking a better picture. Here is my version done in CS4
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
07-28-2009, 9:10 AM
|
Reply
|
I don't think anyone here was trying to say that was shot well in the first place.
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
08-04-2009, 1:18 PM
|
Reply
|
HAHAHAhahaha. I actually laughed out loud a little bit at scott a's post. To me, it looks like Brodie's legs are shaved which is a far bigger deal than the noise issue.
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
08-04-2009, 1:34 PM
|
Reply
|
Scott knows what it's like to take a bad picture!
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
08-04-2009, 2:08 PM
|
Reply
|
I also know when to hit the delete button instead of posting them on wakeworld.
|
Join Date: Jun 2001
08-04-2009, 3:02 PM
|
Reply
|
Ouch.
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
08-04-2009, 3:24 PM
|
Reply
|
really? because posting on WW means sooo much! (Message edited by steezyshots on August 04, 2009)
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
08-06-2009, 8:37 AM
|
Reply
|
I think the SW needs to be renamed Noisewar!
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
08-07-2009, 12:05 AM
|
Reply
|
This place is becoming worse than craig's list...!
|
Join Date: May 2002
08-11-2009, 3:35 PM
|
Reply
|
I agree with big B on this one... leave the noise -take it out..... but for the sake of all that is Man - keep your leg hair growing my friends.
|
|