In another thread I mention that there are 3 factors that govern depth of field.
1- the f/stop you have your camera set for. Thats covered in other posts.
2- how you have your cameras zoom set.. wide angle or telephoto
3- how far you are from your subject.
Since the affect of f/stop has been covered let's go into the second one.
Let's say I want a picture of Bubba's place on my layout. I set up the camera, set the f/stop I want to shoot at, in this case f/8.. and then I use the zoom lens to zoom in to the way I want the picture to be cropped. Something like this..
Hmmmm.... not so good. Look at that out of focus part in the foreground, the bushes. And that embankment just beyond the house, I want that sharp too. But I don't want to change f/stops to get more depth of field, or for some reason I can't.
Maybe if I simply zoom out a bit..
and then crop the picture to the same size..
Ahhh... that's better. Not perfect, but a lot better. Now the foreground bushes are in pretty sharp and so is the embankment. I didn't change the lens opening, just the zoom setting on the camera which gave me more depth of field, then cropped the image like I wanted it.
Jarrell
So I have found out the hard way, Jarrell. I did manage to learn this on my own, more by trial and error than anything, but one thing this technique should make clear to our readers....ya gotta have some good pixel density on the receiver if you have to crop a shot very much because a heavily cropped shot will soon look grainy in images from cameras with low megapixel counts, say under 4 megapixels. If you have to place your camera well back for any reason, and zooming will spoil the shot's depth of focus as Jarrell has nicely shown us, then you are left with cropping the outer edges of the image to get to the 'nut ' you want. That nut has to have lots of resolution, meaning lots of counting pixels in it. So, I would think you would want a camera with about 5 mpix or more. My Canon Powershot, now four years old, has 7 megapixels which affords me a hefty amount of cropping before the centeral portion I want begins to look washed out and poorly defined.
Crandell
How right you are! If you have an older camera with low resolution, low pixel count.. be careful with the cropping.
Thanks Crandell.
selector So I have found out the hard way, Jarrell. I did manage to learn this on my own, more by trial and error than anything, but one thing this technique should make clear to our readers....ya gotta have some good pixel density on the receiver if you have to crop a shot very much because a heavily cropped shot will soon look grainy in images from cameras with low megapixel counts, say under 4 megapixels. If you have to place your camera well back for any reason, and zooming will spoil the shot's depth of focus as Jarrell has nicely shown us, then you are left with cropping the outer edges of the image to get to the 'nut ' you want. That nut has to have lots of resolution, meaning lots of counting pixels in it. So, I would think you would want a camera with about 5 mpix or more. My Canon Powershot, now four years old, has 7 megapixels which affords me a hefty amount of cropping before the centeral portion I want begins to look washed out and poorly defined. Crandell
Thanks Jarrell
I have a Canon Powershot A620 which allows for some cropping in Picasa3, my current choice photo tool
Jon
Sweethome Chicago is now on Facebook
Sweethome Alabama is now on Facebook
Hudson Road is now on Facebook
my videos
my Railimages
Good advise Jarrell!
That is in my bag of tricks too. With 12Mp on the DR I can do quite a bit of that. My sister (the expert) tells me that is cheating. i just nod my head and say ah huh, and your point is?
i also use cropping when I can't get the photo I want (because of space, or angle) any other way. I use Photoshop (CS2 on the main computer, CS3 on the laptop) for editing.
73
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
I went to Bob's website and downloaded the tutorial- which I heartily recommend to all.
His first tip is to read your camera manual/handbook. As I am doing so, I realize there are a number of features I had NO CLUE ABOUT, deferring to Auto Mode for picture taking.
To be frank, this aspect of our hobby could well deserve its own posting forum, as there are many things that could be discussed about scale model photography, particularly as the magazine does have a regular emphasis on photography each month in the reader's photos submitted. MR??????????????
Thankfully, we have digital cameras which makes experimentation inexpensive (remember the cost of film????) and mistakes easy to correct after reviewing them on your computer.
One thing that I would like some of the more proficient among us to address: If you take a photo and then crop it in MS Picture Manager, sometimes the result is grainy or pixellated- what is being done wrong to have such a result? (Images photographed from about 2-3 feet away, then brought in closer with zoom before taking the shot)???????
Cedarwoodron
I would like to know what file type everyone is using. I have a 10 meg camera and generally save to a JPG.
I have read that the original file should be RAW. But it is a very large file.
Please, comments pro and con.
Bob
Photobucket Albums:NPBL - 2008 The BeginningNPBL - 2009 Phase INPBL - 2010 Downtown
Speaking of cropping, this photo was done as a vertical, I cropped out the center part narrower than the original:
Taken with a 10MP Canon XTi, with a Tamron 11-18mm lens at 11mm and f/22.
Bob Boudreau
CANADA
Visit my model railroad photography website: http://sites.google.com/site/railphotog/
Jon, I've always been a big admirer of your modeling skills and don't see anything wrong with your photography either. It constantly amazes me what a lot of guys are doing with less than pro camera equipment!
jon grant Thanks Jarrell I have a Canon Powershot A620 which allows for some cropping in Picasa3, my current choice photo tool Jon
I guess a lot of people don't realize how difficult it is to get a good picture of some of the places on our layout.
I'm sure your sister is just kidding with you about it, heck.. I cheat all the time then 'cause most of my pictures are cropped!
howmus Good advise Jarrell! That is in my bag of tricks too. With 12Mp on the DR I can do quite a bit of that. My sister (the expert) tells me that is cheating. i just nod my head and say ah huh, and your point is? i also use cropping when I can't get the photo I want (because of space, or angle) any other way. I use Photoshop (CS2 on the main computer, CS3 on the laptop) for editing. 73
Cedarwood, about your question at the end of your post. When you say you zoom in from about 2 or 3 feet away, are you using the optical zoom or are you using the digital zoom feature on your camera? I would never recommend using the digital zoom on any camera. It works by simply cropping your picture in the camera, something you should avoid if at all possible. Better instead to use the optical zoom lens OR simply move the camera closer to the subject. We pay a lot of money for all the pixels we can get in our cameras, usually the higher the resolution (pixel count) the more we pay for the camera. You can take a camera that costs thousands of dollars and if you crop its images severely enough they'll look pixelated and grainy.
The best rule of thumb is to always try to get the shot as perfectly as you can IN THE CAMERA! That means getting the exposure right, cropping it.. by moving the camera or by using the zoom lens, when you shoot it.
I'm sure Bob (Railphotog) will tell you that he'd much rather bring a great shot into the image editor on his computer than one not as good. Things go SOOOO much better with less work and a better end product.
cedarwoodron I went to Bob's website and downloaded the tutorial- which I heartily recommend to all. His first tip is to read your camera manual/handbook. As I am doing so, I realize there are a number of features I had NO CLUE ABOUT, deferring to Auto Mode for picture taking. To be frank, this aspect of our hobby could well deserve its own posting forum, as there are many things that could be discussed about scale model photography, particularly as the magazine does have a regular emphasis on photography each month in the reader's photos submitted. MR?????????????? Thankfully, we have digital cameras which makes experimentation inexpensive (remember the cost of film????) and mistakes easy to correct after reviewing them on your computer. One thing that I would like some of the more proficient among us to address: If you take a photo and then crop it in MS Picture Manager, sometimes the result is grainy or pixellated- what is being done wrong to have such a result? (Images photographed from about 2-3 feet away, then brought in closer with zoom before taking the shot)??????? Cedarwoodron
Bob, you're doing it right. Raw files are great for shooting, I shoot in Raw all the time. Raw simply means that what you shoot is what you get. The camera doesn't do funny things to the image. A RAW file is exactly like the old negatives from film cameras. It used to be that not many cameras would shoot in RAW format, but now days I see it more.
Of course you then have to convert the RAW file (assuming you shot in Raw) into a jpeg for posting on the internet. I would hazard a guess that most people here shoot in jpeg format which is fine. Just check your camera to see if it let's you choose different types of jpeg, such as standard, large, fine. You should have it set on FINE for the best jpeg images.
rclanger I would like to know what file type everyone is using. I have a 10 meg camera and generally save to a JPG. I have read that the original file should be RAW. But it is a very large file. Please, comments pro and con.
Goes to show what a high end camera with a good lens in skilled hands can produce, not to mention the modeling! Dang that's a good looking locomotive!
Railphotog Speaking of cropping, this photo was done as a vertical, I cropped out the center part narrower than the original: Taken with a 10MP Canon XTi, with a Tamron 11-18mm lens at 11mm and f/22.
Jarrell:
My camera is a Kodak, digital and is just over six megapixals. I don't have the funds to invest in a new camera. It takes fairly good pictures, mainly it is the lighting that seems to make improvements.
I can zoom, I have really never studied the camera, as I should, but it does all kinds of things. Can one change the f stop and I guess I can increase the exposure time. I am certainly not a professional but I just want to take good pictures with what I have.
Thanks,
Robert Sylvester, WTRR
Robert, about 35 years ago I was a member of a fairly large Camera Club. The place literally crawled with high end equipment, the best 35 mm's and all the lenses to go with them. Several members had their own darkrooms. At one of the meetings a young guy and his wife attended as guests and he had brought with him some 11x14 and 16x20 inch prints that he had done, he'd taken the images and printed them himself. They were knockouts! Wow,, everybody crowded around the table, kinda ooohhh'ing and awwww'ing over them. Somebody asked him what camera he used. He said it was an old Practika he had gotten from his father. Practika is/was an East German made camera not really noted for their quality control. You could've heard a pin drop. I learned that night that it doesn't matter so much about the camera, to an extent. It matters more about the person using it.
This is not to say that you can't get great images from more expensive equipment. Most photographers will tell you it's just easier because they have more control over settings and have learned how to use them.
The thing is we simply have to learn our equipments limits, know what they're capable of and what they're not. That starts with the instruction book and using the camera until you're so familiar with it... well, you get the idea.
I've never owned a Kodak 6mp digital but I'll bet it can take some great pictures!
robert sylvester Jarrell: My camera is a Kodak, digital and is just over six megapixals. I don't have the funds to invest in a new camera. It takes fairly good pictures, mainly it is the lighting that seems to make improvements. I can zoom, I have really never studied the camera, as I should, but it does all kinds of things. Can one change the f stop and I guess I can increase the exposure time. I am certainly not a professional but I just want to take good pictures with what I have. Thanks, Robert Sylvester, WTRR
How many have messed around with HDR photos for layouts?
Another thing to note is if you are using a high numbered F Stop you often need to use a tripod and increased exposure time.
Also here's an on-line depth of field calculator.
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html
Springfield PA
Mntneer How many have messed around with HDR photos for layouts?
I messed around with it in Photoshop but never did much.
Here's a link for those who never heard of it.
http://www.stuckincustoms.com/hdr-photography/
I have a Nikon L20. It doesn't appear to have manually adjustable F stops. It does have settings for exposure compensation. Is this the same?
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
jeffrey-wimberly I have a Nikon L20. It doesn't appear to have manually adjustable F stops. It does have settings for exposure compensation. Is this the same?
Exposure compensation is that - you can compensate for the exposure picked by the camera, make your image lighter or darker. It is not adjusting the lens opening like we need in model photos. Checking a review of the camera shows it is mostly automatic without meaningful adjustments for model photos.
Here's a link for those who never heard of it. http://www.stuckincustoms.com/hdr-photography/
He has a discount code on his sight to get 15% off of Photomatix Pro to process the HDR images.
Use STUCKINCUSTOMS as the code.
Bob, I take it that exposure compensation is really just a delay in the shutter closing? If the camera cannot open or stop down the iris to either let in more light or to reduce it, respectively, then the only other variable is length of time the shutte remains open. In a context where lighting is invariable, or constant, then the way to get more light is to receive it longer....shutter stays open longer.
In case that seems confusing to our readers, imagine a firehose. It has a valve that is variable in terms of its diameter, so when it is fully open, you get all that firehose is capable of delivering....and hang on! Stop down the iris...er, valve so that you have half the water coming out the end of the hose, and if you need or desire the same water incident on the fire, you will need to take longer in any one spot where the water falls. Maybe not so great for fighting fires, but it can be done if you are just putting out hot spots and cooling. The analog to leaving the fall of water on one spot longer when you don't have the same pressure or the same flow, is leaving your iris open longer via the shutter. If your light is poor, or your iris can only open so wide for a given camera, then you must alter the only other variable, that being the length of time the shutter opens to allow whatever feeble light there is to accumulate on the CCD at the focal plane inside the camera body. If you just had a coffee and tend to shake a bit, shutters left open will just mean a hugely ruined photo if you hold the camera yourself. So, tripod or bean bag, or keep the shutter open time below about 1/160th second if possible for tack sharp images.
selector Bob, I take it that exposure compensation is really just a delay in the shutter closing? If the camera cannot open or stop down the iris to either let in more light or to reduce it, respectively, then the only other variable is length of time the shutte remains open. In a context where lighting is invariable, or constant, then the way to get more light is to receive it longer....shutter stays open longer. If you just had a coffee and tend to shake a bit, shutters left open will just mean a hugely ruined photo if you hold the camera yourself. So, tripod or bean bag, or keep the shutter open time below about 1/160th second if possible for tack sharp images. Crandell
If you just had a coffee and tend to shake a bit, shutters left open will just mean a hugely ruined photo if you hold the camera yourself. So, tripod or bean bag, or keep the shutter open time below about 1/160th second if possible for tack sharp images.
Exposure compensation is for over riding what the camera meter figures is the correct average exposure. If your main subject is lightly colored but is surrounded by darker items, the camera will average the exposure, making the light subject underexposed, too bright with no details. Adding one stop or so can properly expose the light subject, this is done with exposure compensation. Works the other way too, for a darker subject that may need more light than the camera suggests. Exposure compensation is not a tool to get more depth of field.
Any model railroad photo taken should be with the camera on a solid non moving surface, such as a tripod or on the layout itself. With the smallest aperture, the shutter speed will be long, but it really does not matter. I've taken shots with shutter speeds in the seconds - 1 to 8 at times when using the f/22 aperture.
Hand holding would be just for snapshots, and I do not recommend doing so unless you have no choice. I needed to hand hold some shots on a friend's layout recently, as it was during an operating session with guys all around running trains. I used my Canon SX30 IS, which has a fixed (non removable) zoom lens. The "IS" in the camera name refers to Image Stabilisation", which means the lens can compensate for some hand movements. I did lean on the layout and/or a support post to get some accceptable shots of a new station on the layout. I was able to shoot at 1/20 and 1/25 of a second, at f/4.