Photography

...now browsing by category

 

Gimp Layer Mask

Sunday, August 1st, 2010

Here is a way to use layer masks and the paths tool to merge parts of two photos into one composite image. We’ll start by taking two photos of a television, using a tripod to keep the position of the camera exactly the same. We won’t use a flash, so the first photo will have a slower shutter speed to get the correct exposure on everything around the TV. However, this makes the image showing on the TV way overexposed and blown out. So we’ll take a second photo with a much faster shutter speed to get the correct exposure on the screen.

Click to continue »

World Cup at Smoke & Barrell

Wednesday, June 23rd, 2010

I took my camera to Smoke & Barrel in Fayetteville to take pictures of people watching USA vs. Algeria in the World Cup. Here are some of the pictures I took.

Tanyard Creek

Monday, June 7th, 2010

Here are some pictures from Tanyard Creek in Bella Vista, Arkansas.

Photo Roundup: Elk Edition

Thursday, May 27th, 2010

I got up at 4:30 this morning and drove out to Boxley, Arkansas, to get some sunrise pictures of elk before they moved off into the woods. I got a new 75-300mm lens, and I thought it had auto-focus, but I can’t seem to get the auto-focus to work with my Nikon D3000. Manual focus is difficult. What looks well-focused in the viewfinder turns out to not be so well-focused on the LCD after taking the shot. I don’t think this is the greatest lens, but it might be me. It’s a Tamron 672D. Maybe I’m doing something wrong with the auto-focus. I’ll have to research it further. For now, enjoy this gallery of elk. Comments are appreciated.

Photo roundup

Wednesday, May 26th, 2010

I got a few good pictures today. With the airplane I tried adapting a Photoshop technique in Gimp to give it the look of a polarizing filter. I think it turned out pretty decent. I’ll try to write a tutorial for the method soon. I was impressed with the bee that had all that bright yellow pollen all over it. I might make a print of that. The monarch butterfly wouldn’t sit still for more than a few seconds. That’s the only shot I got of it. I got the picture of the rabbit while I was waiting around for airplanes to fly over. I was standing right next to it for a long time before I realized it was there. On the red flower, I just wanted to see how it would look if I cropped out part of it. The bumble bee came out pretty sharp, so I included it too. I hope you enjoy these. Please leave a comment and let me know what you think.

More about aperture

Thursday, May 20th, 2010

Editor’s note: This article was written by a special guest author, my father. Hopefully we’ll see more content from him on a regular basis. Want to be a guest author? Click on the participate tab at the top.

The numbers giving the aperture size, sometimes called stops, are smaller as the aperture size increases. This may seem strange, but there is a reason. To understand this we first need to understand focal length, which is the length from where light is first ‘bent’, i.e. the front of the lens, to where the light converges, i.e. the film plane or sensor plane. The aperture number is a ratio of the aperture diameter to the focal length. Thus with the aperture wide open, the focal length may be only 2.8 times the aperture diameter. With the aperture at its smallest size, the focal length may be 22 times the aperture diameter. These limits vary from lens to lens.

A lens is designated by its focal length and maximum aperture. Thus a lens designated as 55mm f2.8 is one with a 55 millimeter focal length which is 2.8 times longer than the maximum aperture diameter. A zoom lens has two focal length designations – the minimum and maximum. Thus a zoom lens may be designated 30-120mm which would be a 4 to 1 zoom. Note that the actual length of the lens does not increase from 30 to 120 millimeters. The front of the lens moves a minimal distance and elements inside the lens are also adjusted to give the desired focal length.  When the focal length is increased and the actual size of the aperture is unchanged, the ratio of the focal length to the aperture is changed. Thus a lens with a maximum aperture of f2.8 at 30mm may have a maximum of f 5.6 at 120mm. In that case a zoom lens would be designated 30-120mm f2.8-5.6.

How to read a histogram

Wednesday, May 19th, 2010

When you’re out there taking pictures, how can you tell if you have a well-exposed shot? One might look at their pictures on their digital camera’s display, but that’s not going to be very accurate because it’s not calibrated to display the picture as it truly appears. If you’re out in bright sunlight, and you have the brightness on the screen turned up, there’s no telling.

But there is a solution. The wonderful folks at the camera companies make it possible (on a lot of models, but not all) to view a histogram of your photo right after taking it. But what good is a histogram if you don’t know how to read it? Let’s have a look at one and figure it out. Here is the histogram that appears when you adjust curves in Gimp. The histogram on a digital camera should look very similar.

Correct exposure

A histogram is basically just a bar graph. The horizontal axis of a histogram represents the lightness of pixels. On the left is pure black, represented by the value 0. On the right is pure white, with a value of 255. Neutral gray is smack dab in the middle. The vertical axis of a histogram represents the number of pixels of a particular lightness in the photo. In this example, we see that on the left side of the histogram, there are no pixels in the photo that are absolutely black. But just a little bit to the right of it, you see the bar graph go up, meaning there are several pixels that have a lightness value that is very close to black. Then the graph dips down just a little bit and goes way up when you get into the darker part of the middle ranges. It dips back down in the higher part of the middle ranges and then swoops way back up again to the top as you get close to white, and then drops off completely right before you get to absolute white. The exposure on this photo is pretty close to correct. There is a wide range of lightness values, but they don’t go off the chart on either side. Also with this photo, because of the U-shaped dip in the middle, it makes for a higher contrast. Because we have many pixels in the darker range, and many pixels in the lighter range, and fewer pixels in the middle range, the photo has more contrast.

Overexposure

If the bar graph were to go all the way to the right edge of the histogram, it would mean that the photo is overexposed, and there would be areas that are blown out completely white, and there’s not much you can do to fix an overexposed digital photo. Here is what an overexposed photo’s histogram looks like:

You can see there are almost no pixels showing up on the left side of the histogram, meaning there are almost no pixels in the photo that are black or close to black. Over on the right hand side, you see that the graph starts curving up at the end and goes all the way to the right side of the histogram. That means it’s overexposed and you can see in the photo itself that the grass is largely blown out, along with the white birds.

Underexposure

If the bar graph is crowded over to the left side of the histogram, it generally means your photo is underexposed. Here is an example:

You can see there are almost no pixels showing up on the lighter end of the histogram, and everything in the picture is very dark. But there is still hope if you have an underexposed digital photo. Often it can be saved (using tools like curves in Gimp), especially if you’re shooting in RAW format, but we’ll go over that another time.

What to do

The best practice is to correctly expose your photo when you take it. After taking a photo, look at the histogram and figure out if you’re overexposed or underexposed. If you are, make necessary adjustments on your camera and try again. Try to get a photo where the histogram stretches from one side to the other, but comes down to the bottom on each end (like the first example above). Don’t worry about running out of film.

There also are other situations where getting correct exposure for the entire photograph is just about impossible, and I’ll touch on those later, too. What are your thoughts? Leave a comment.

Aperture

Monday, May 17th, 2010

I have two lenses for my camera. One is an 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, and the other is a 55-200mm f/4-5.6. I’d like to get a 300mm or 400mm f/2.8 lens. The f/2.8 means a wider aperture, which means I can lower the ISO, and speed up the shutter release. The softball photos from the other day were OK, but this lens would be great. It would also soften up the backgrounds some more. I’m a fan of soft backgrounds. But that lens costs a couple thousand dollars. I’ll have to do some saving to get it. Another thing I need to do is get down to the same level as my subject. The softball photos were shot from the stands and look down on the field. The sports photos I like to look at are at eye level with the players. I’m going to a baseball game Wednesday, and I think I’ll be able to get in a good spot at field level. Hopefully I’ll be able to get some better shots.

In the meantime, it stopped raining today, so here are some shots I took at the park.

SEC Softball Tournament, Part 2

Saturday, May 15th, 2010

It has been raining nonstop for a few days now, and the forecast is more rain for a few more days, so I haven’t been taking any pictures. Here are a few more from the first game of the SEC Softball Tournament on Thursday, before it started raining. Comments, criticisms, etc. are very welcome and appreciated.

SEC Softball Tournament

Thursday, May 13th, 2010

I didn’t have much time today to get many shots before it started raining, but I got a couple I was OK with. The clouds made it really dark, so I had the ISO turned up to 1600 and that made it really grainy. On top of that, my 200 mm telephoto lens does not get me very close to the subjects, so these aren’t great. But I had fun taking pictures anyway.