I still have a few more pictures of the polygraph to put up but realised that that I’ve only posted bits of machinery and technology in the last couple of days so thought it was time for a change.
I don’t know about anyone else but I find it much easier to both conceptualise and shoot inanimate objects than I do people. This is probably more to do with the obvious fact that something that doesn’t move is just inherently easier to photograph, but I think it’s probably also a question of preference. With objects I can often ‘see’ the finished result as I take the picture, but struggle to do so with people.
All that said, I think that one of the benefits of digital photography is that it really doesn’t matter how many bad shots you take. I have a 1GB microdrive in my G5 (which will hold around 219 RAW images) so have totally stopped worrying about taking multiple shots of the same scene. For this shot I had 19 originals, but for the various shots of the polygraph I took around 60 or 70 shots. I know, by pro standards, that that’s still very few, but as an amateur it’s not all that easy to justify using a whole roll of film on one subject ;-)
camera
capture date
aperture
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
ISO
focal length
image quality
white balance
optical filter
Canon G5
11.35am on 8/2/04
f5.6
1/320
aperture priority
+0.0
evaluative
50
7.2mm
RAW
auto
B+W UV 010
comment byfredrik at 08:44 PM (GMT) on 12 February, 2004
strange that this shot hasn't recieved any comments. it's really a great one. the diagonal composition opens up the scence for the light ... like it a lot!
comment byJasmin at 02:24 AM (GMT) on 14 February, 2004
I've always enjoyed photos that play with long shadows. This is an excellent one, and it's simple yet effective.
comment bydjn1 at 04:50 AM (GMT) on 15 February, 2004
fredrik and Jasmin: thanks. On the whole I do like this image but I think that it's probably overly contrived. I'm also not all that happy with the glass - it's reasonably sharp, but not as detailed as the original; i.e. my skills in reducing images to this scale still need some work ;-)
comment by Carl at 11:22 PM (GMT) on 28 January, 2005
What sometimes hidden yet far reaching effects a small drink has.
I still have a few more pictures of the polygraph to put up but realised that that I’ve only posted bits of machinery and technology in the last couple of days so thought it was time for a change.
I don’t know about anyone else but I find it much easier to both conceptualise and shoot inanimate objects than I do people. This is probably more to do with the obvious fact that something that doesn’t move is just inherently easier to photograph, but I think it’s probably also a question of preference. With objects I can often ‘see’ the finished result as I take the picture, but struggle to do so with people.
All that said, I think that one of the benefits of digital photography is that it really doesn’t matter how many bad shots you take. I have a 1GB microdrive in my G5 (which will hold around 219 RAW images) so have totally stopped worrying about taking multiple shots of the same scene. For this shot I had 19 originals, but for the various shots of the polygraph I took around 60 or 70 shots. I know, by pro standards, that that’s still very few, but as an amateur it’s not all that easy to justify using a whole roll of film on one subject ;-)
capture date
aperture
shutter speed
shooting mode
exposure bias
metering mode
ISO
focal length
image quality
white balance
optical filter
11.35am on 8/2/04
f5.6
1/320
aperture priority
+0.0
evaluative
50
7.2mm
RAW
auto
B+W UV 010
strange that this shot hasn't recieved any comments. it's really a great one. the diagonal composition opens up the scence for the light ... like it a lot!
I've always enjoyed photos that play with long shadows. This is an excellent one, and it's simple yet effective.
fredrik and Jasmin: thanks. On the whole I do like this image but I think that it's probably overly contrived. I'm also not all that happy with the glass - it's reasonably sharp, but not as detailed as the original; i.e. my skills in reducing images to this scale still need some work ;-)
What sometimes hidden yet far reaching effects a small drink has.