Page 106 - 37. MRH13-03-Mar2013-L
Basic HTML Version
below. Attached are six more test images, all of which were
re-sized to 2,000 x 1,333 using Microsoft Office Picture
manager. I also set the image quality to Fine (compression
ratio 1:4).
The two photos of the existing bridge were shot at f/22,
shutter speed 1.6, white balance set to fluorescent- cool
white and DSC_0023 was shot with manual focus and
DSC_0026 was shot with auto focus. I can't see the differ-
ence in the two, but perhaps you can. These files are slightly
in excess of 1.0M, but I assume that's o.k.- correct?
The four close-up shots were taken at f/16, shutter speed
of 1/13 and 1/10, and manual focus with the white bal-
ance set to incandescent. I'm using two reflective spot lights
with 150 watt bulbs with a sheet of white styrene as the
backdrop.
I was surprised how far from the recommended shutter
speed I had to go to make the background appear white.
The photos started to wash out at any shutter speed slower
than 1/8.
Please let me know your thoughts on the photos. If the pic-
tures of the existing bridge are good enough, I'll get started
on construction. If there are some changes needed to the
close-ups (I'll use a new #17 blade for the construction pho-
tos), let me know.
Thanks again for your help.
Tom
The photos that I submitted are shown in Photos 1, 2, and 3. I
wanted to include photos of the bridge in place on the layout
so that I could make sure the depth of field was good enough.
I also included several close-up photos in order to make sure
Writing for MRH - 5
that I had the right settings for these shots as there were
going to be a number of them included with the article.
Shortly after submitting these photos I received the e-mail
below from Charlie.
Tom,
That's a pretty decent job on the photos.
The only thing I'd do for the 'finished' bridge
photos would be to shoot a train on the bridge
for use as a lead photo for the article.
The construction photos look pretty decent. The white bal-
ance appears OK. On the shot with the X-Acto chisel blade
you might consider stopping down a bit further to increase
depth of field since the bridge is oriented running away
from the camera.
However, with the chisel in decent focus and it being the main
point of interest of the photo f/32 might not be required. In
fact, having all the bridge in focus (even f/32 probably wouldn't
do that) might detract from the point of interest. If you want
to give it a try (f/22 if you don't have f/32) you might go ahead
just to see the difference in depth of field between f/16 and
f/32 and how you react.
The existing bridge photos are pretty nice too. I'd suggest
maybe seeing how badly depth of field decreases if you shoot
at f/16 and f/11 – the camera may be far enough away from
the scene so depth of field would be maintained. One thing I
would suggest is the camera is a bit tipped side to side. This is
most evident in the vertical truss members of the bridge which
aren't perfectly vertical in the photo. This is NOT a big deal as
it is easily corrected in Photoshop, but with the composition,
exposure and white balance of these shots being pretty good,
MRH-Mar 2013
