Neowin Digital Gallery

[remus_lupin]

I could do that. No problem. It is a nice picture.

It looks fake to me... idk, I mean obviously a huge aperture was used... but just the plane of focus looks off?... like photoshop was used to make the wording unnaturally stand out... or whoever took the photo did so at the perfect angle with a large aperture

... idk I'm a bit tripped out though haha dunno what I am looking at exactly... inside of car? two people outside with jackets on?

[TAZMINATOR]

I understand your point, remus, someone, who took it, was probably focusing on the text through seat hole. If it is all about the focusing through the hole to the text, then it is easy. But too much blur around it, which it ruin the picture for just text.. whoopiee dee dooooo

[Quick Shot]

Not sure how he did it but it's there. haha.

At first I was a little confused myself as to where to look but when I concentrated on the photo, i realized where the point of interest is.

[remus_lupin]

Alright yeah now I see it perfectly... but yeah, not that hard to do... just need large aperture

[Argote]

As others have said, I find the fact that the main subject (what's in focus) is so small in relation to the rest of the photo that I don't think it's a good shot.

[crazzy88ss]

As others have said, I find the fact that the main subject (what's in focus) is so small in relation to the rest of the photo that I don't think it's a good shot.

+1. I dunno why it was even discussed as if it was some "trick" or something.

[richardsim7]

Well it's been a while, unfortunately I don't have many to show for it :\

[remus_lupin]

Well it's been a while, unfortunately I don't have many to show for it :\

Well, the ones you do have to show are pretty great!

Also, where was the second pic taken?

[richardsim7]

Thanks :)

That's Lancing College - I took it from a hill in Shoreham, about one mile away :p

[Argote]

The college and redhead photos are very nice.

[richardsim7]

Thanks, and what, you don't like cats? :p

[Dane]

Bored while waiting for my partner to get out of the ER.

Droid X takes some decent pictures.

[remus_lupin]

Nothing special... was just bored at night and had my camera :p

nice shots Dane

[Dane]

Nothing special... was just bored at night and had my camera :p

nice shots Dane

Thanks!

[yes i'm here]

This six leg bug will glow in the dark when it wants to, the yellow/brown area of the tail glows green.I found it while out on a walk last night. It will not glow after it is in the light. This is the third time that I have found one in over the last twelve years. It is not at all an isolated area. The first time was on the coast range of Oregon and this one was in the cascades. I say that to eliminate the thought of some sort of industrial spill. It took me at least a hundred shots to get a few that had enough detail to clearly see this little thing, and these two are some of the best.

I have two questions.

1. What type of lens do you use for photos that are under 18" from the subject?

2. Assuming that I can find one of these again and somehow make it glow again after the camera setup, any suggestions for capturing a dim green glowing creature that will not hold still? Thank you for your reply.

I have a Nikon D-50

50 mm 1:1.4g I think that these were at f 7.4 give or take for brackets

The last shot was of "dippy" the cat. She was getting upset with me for talking to the Tupperware container (bug holding cell between shoots) and neglecting her. I was trying to convince her that she was not cut out for the stress of modeling and this was the final proof. She was not impressed... At all.

[remus_lupin]

I have two questions.

1. What type of lens do you use for photos that are under 18" from the subject?

2. Assuming that I can find one of these again and somehow make it glow again after the camera setup, any suggestions for capturing a dim green glowing creature that will not hold still? Thank you for your reply.

I have a Nikon D-50

50 mm 1:1.4g I think that these were at f 7.4 give or take for brackets

1. Macro lens eh. (although a cheap but much lower quality solution would be to use a reversing ring with your 50mm)

2. how fast does it move? the only thing I can think of is just getting a fast enough shutter speed so you don't get blur from its movement by bumping up ISO... at the macro level though your gonna need a small aperture for detail... which will not work well in the dark (which you need for it to glow)... that will be quite tough to do... I dunno if you could use the flash while it's glowing, I mean it won't look the same, but maybe you'll at least get the green color...

only other thing I can think of is be cruel and block it in somehow so it doesn't move and take a half second exposure or whatever you'd need.

Here's an example of how limited your DOF is at macro level (f 7.1)

PS: lol @ cat, and I have the same black dvd/cd case that's in the background

[yes i'm here]

1. Macro lens eh. (although a cheap but much lower quality solution would be to use a reversing ring with your 50mm)

2. how fast does it move? the only thing I can think of is just getting a fast enough shutter speed so you don't get blur from its movement by bumping up ISO... at the macro level though your gonna need a small aperture for detail... which will not work well in the dark (which you need for it to glow)... that will be quite tough to do... I dunno if you could use the flash while it's glowing, I mean it won't look the same, but maybe you'll at least get the green color...

only other thing I can think of is be cruel and block it in somehow so it doesn't move and take a half second exposure or whatever you'd need.

Here's an example of how limited your DOF is at macro level (f 7.1)

PS: lol @ cat

It moves at about the speed of a centipede. There seem to be only two speeds. Curled in a ball and centipede. Strange little thing. I let this one go after I took these pictures, so some day I will get it. Thanks for the reply.

[remus_lupin]

It moves at about the speed of a centipede. There seem to be only two speeds. Curled in a ball and centipede. Strange little thing. I let this one go after I took these pictures, so some day I will get it. Thanks for the reply.

No problem, just remember to post a shot of it here, if you ever get one! and whatever else you'd like to post until then (and after) of course

[yes i'm here]

It moves at about the speed of a centipede. There seem to be only two speeds. Curled in a ball and centipede. Strange little thing. I let this one go after I took these pictures, so some day I will get it. Thanks for the reply.

I am cooking dinner and reread the post. The depth of field was what I was fighting in most of the shots. I felt like i wanted a large aperture, but the constant movement was blurring the detail. When I shot from above it was not as bad because the plane of focus was less dramatic across the page. It sacrificed the detail that was on the side and under the bug. I finally split the f stops to arrive at 7.4 and lowered the tripod angle and came up with a few shots that were ok. I think that if I can get closer I will be very happy even with some blur, if I can see at least some detail of the bug. I am not sure what the bug is, and whenever I have told anyone that I found a bug here that glows in the dark I get "that" look. I just need to have a shot of the dull green glow.

Nice picture of the fly by the way.

thanks

[Argote]

Thanks, and what, you don't like cats? :p

I do, it's just that the two shots I mentioned stood out.

This six leg bug will glow in the dark when it wants to, the yellow/brown area of the tail glows green.I found it while out on a walk last night. It will not glow after it is in the light. This is the third time that I have found one in over the last twelve years. It is not at all an isolated area. The first time was on the coast range of Oregon and this one was in the cascades. I say that to eliminate the thought of some sort of industrial spill. It took me at least a hundred shots to get a few that had enough detail to clearly see this little thing, and these two are some of the best.

I have two questions.

1. What type of lens do you use for photos that are under 18" from the subject?

2. Assuming that I can find one of these again and somehow make it glow again after the camera setup, any suggestions for capturing a dim green glowing creature that will not hold still? Thank you for your reply.

I have a Nikon D-50

50 mm 1:1.4g I think that these were at f 7.4 give or take for brackets

The last shot was of "dippy" the cat. She was getting upset with me for talking to the Tupperware container (bug holding cell between shoots) and neglecting her. I was trying to convince her that she was not cut out for the stress of modeling and this was the final proof. She was not impressed... At all.

1. A Macro lens, I'm not familiar with the Nikon lineup of macro lenses but the Sigma 50/2.8 macro is around $299 for all mounts http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-50mm-Macro-Nikon-Cameras/dp/B0002P19Q2/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1289967790&sr=8-7 though for insects people usually go for longer focal ranges to have more "working space".

2. Well, a higher ISO, at the speed of a centipede you may need about a 1/20 shutter speed at least

What size was that bug?

[remus_lupin]

Thanks (that was one of my first shots with my macro lens)

And yeah Argote, I also suggested a higher ISO... but I am thinking to get it up to 1/20th of a second it will be pushing it... with the D50 and NO other light source but the bug... I mean you can manually underexpose it a bit and lighten it in post... idk though, never tried to take shots of bio-luminescent bugs haha it's new to me.

I personally have the Nikon 105mm 2.8 Macro (VR) it's a beauty of a lens, but much more expensive than that sigma

[TAZMINATOR]

Thanks (that was one of my first shots with my macro lens)

And yeah Argote, I also suggested a higher ISO... but I am thinking to get it up to 1/20th of a second it will be pushing it... with the D50 and NO other light source but the bug... I mean you can manually underexpose it a bit and lighten it in post... idk though, never tried to take shots of bio-luminescent bugs haha it's new to me.

I personally have the Nikon 105mm 2.8 Macro (VR) it's a beauty of a lens, but much more expensive than that sigma

Yes. it is nice lens. I have used it with mine. I also have used big lens such as Nikon 600mm f/4 AF-S VR.. woo! expensive lens but friggin heavy to carry around!

[yes i'm here]

I do, it's just that the two shots I mentioned stood out.

1. A Macro lens, I'm not familiar with the Nikon lineup of macro lenses but the Sigma 50/2.8 macro is around $299 for all mounts http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-50mm-Macro-Nikon-Cameras/dp/B0002P19Q2/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1289967790&sr=8-7 though for insects people usually go for longer focal ranges to have more "working space".

2. Well, a higher ISO, at the speed of a centipede you may need about a 1/20 shutter speed at least

What size was that bug?

The bug was a little under and inch.

The higher ISO would be for dark capture of the glow?

This is out of a photo book that I have. Photography eighth edition by Barbra London "To darken a picture decrease the film speed, for example from 400 to 200 increaces exposure by one stop.

I looked at the camera and it says 40 at f6.3 with ISO 200. That was the last shot fired. So would I wove down with an equivalent for each ISO that I adjusted from 200?

Here is my guess if that is true. I move the camera to 1600 ISO and move adjust the aperture to 4.5 (3 stops) from 6.3? Is this correct logic or am I not with it at all?

And finally does ISO work the same in the dark to eliminate blur?

This is an anecdotal tale of my great inexperience.

I have attempted to shoot a few eclipses and found that to be quite difficult. Tried it once and it came out poorly. Read some online and found that I needed to expose for focal length and f 8 or something like that. That may not be right, but the point was to expose for sunlight to see detail on the face of the moon. That was not what I had expected. By the third eclipse I was able to get the camera acclimated properly, keep batteries in pocket until shoot, use remote, and make a few shots until fog rolled over me. My biggest obstacle is just simple lack of practice for the past couple of years. So this is thanks in advance for

[yes i'm here]

Thanks (that was one of my first shots with my macro lens)

And yeah Argote, I also suggested a higher ISO... but I am thinking to get it up to 1/20th of a second it will be pushing it... with the D50 and NO other light source but the bug... I mean you can manually underexpose it a bit and lighten it in post... idk though, never tried to take shots of bio-luminescent bugs haha it's new to me.

I personally have the Nikon 105mm 2.8 Macro (VR) it's a beauty of a lens, but much more expensive than that sigma

where did you by it? Would you recommend that place?

I bought most of my stuff at Cameta Camera thru E-Bay, so far.

[Argote]

BH Photo and Video

Adorama

Amazon.com (directly from them)

Those are 3 great and reliable sources of camera gear.

And to answer your question:

MORE LIGHT<<<<--------------------->>>>LESS LIGHT

... f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16, f/22, f/32 ...

... ISO3200, ISO1600, ISO800, ISO400, ISO200, ISO100 ...

... 2, 1, .5, 1/4, 1/8, 1/15, 1/30, 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500, 1/1000, 1/2000 ...

Exposure is a combination of those 3 factors (Aperture, ISO and Exposure Time), the steps I posted here represent 1 stop increments/decrements from the adjacent values so if you moved from ISO200 to ISO1600 you would get 3 additional stops of light, in order to maintain the same overall exposure you would need to reduce 3 stops from any (or both, by combining) of the other variables so a 3 stop decrement using the aperture would be something from f/6.3 to f/18 (approximately).

What you calculated (f/6.3 to f/4.5) is actually about 1 stop INCREMENT, so that coupled with the increased ISO would mean that your exposure at (40, f/4.5, ISO1600) would be about 4 stops brighter than your original exposure at (40, f/6.3, ISO200)