Shooting in Manual Mode

[Goofygrl]

Originally Posted by jpc1073

Can't imagine being a photographer before digital came around! I would be broke with thousands of useless pictures!!!

You never dreamed of taking as many pictures as you do with digital. Or you would at least have started doing your own developing.

[carolina_yankee]

Originally Posted by jpc1073

I am intrigued with the idea of cropping in post. Coincidentally, Jared Polin recently discussed why he prefers to NOT crop in post. Not that I am making any comparisons to Jared...

If I zoom out, the aperture should be more wide open. I can increase ISO to get the proper shutter speed and eventually the correct exposure. What concerns me is, when cropping in post, will the picture then be noisy since I am "zooming in"? If I crop a picture by 25%, aren't I reducing the number of pixels in the picture by 25%?

As was previously mentioned, I would love to get a sample picture on here with EXIF data and hear some suggestions. But I am elbow deep in softball season right now and haven't had much chance to sit down and get photos on my computer.

Can't imagine being a photographer before digital came around! I would be broke with thousands of useless pictures!!!

There's cropping for aesthetic reasons and cropping to zoom. I've never seen much improvement with cropping to zoom, but I can see how that might work if you plan for it and want to control the background compression that happens in telephoto shots.

Then again, I shoot differently than a sports shooter would so our techniques would be different.

That said, depending on your final use for the photo, if you don't plan on going beyond a certain resolution for screen display or printing, cropping to zoom could isolate your target and enlarge it. After a certain point, it will become more pixilated, though.

Dirk

[PSULion22]

Originally Posted by carolina_yankee

It actually annoys me how satisfied I can be with my iPhone XS pics. This last trip, they even did a decent job in lower light settings.

Still, when I compare against my a6500 shots, I still prefer larger sense and RAW over iPhone (but it's getting very competitive for just a random day in the park).

I got some absolutely incredible shots of the dog playing in the pool today with my iPhone XS max. Crystal clear freeze frame shots with incredible lighting and the shutter speed to stop water droplets in mid air. I'd imagine they're better than I could have gotten with my a6000.

Originally Posted by jpc1073

I am intrigued with the idea of cropping in post. Coincidentally, Jared Polin recently discussed why he prefers to NOT crop in post. Not that I am making any comparisons to Jared...

If I zoom out, the aperture should be more wide open. I can increase ISO to get the proper shutter speed and eventually the correct exposure. What concerns me is, when cropping in post, will the picture then be noisy since I am "zooming in"? If I crop a picture by 25%, aren't I reducing the number of pixels in the picture by 25%?

As was previously mentioned, I would love to get a sample picture on here with EXIF data and hear some suggestions. But I am elbow deep in softball season right now and haven't had much chance to sit down and get photos on my computer.

Can't imagine being a photographer before digital came around! I would be broke with thousands of useless pictures!!!

Originally Posted by carolina_yankee

There's cropping for aesthetic reasons and cropping to zoom. I've never seen much improvement with cropping to zoom, but I can see how that might work if you plan for it and want to control the background compression that happens in telephoto shots.

Then again, I shoot differently than a sports shooter would so our techniques would be different.

That said, depending on your final use for the photo, if you don't plan on going beyond a certain resolution for screen display or printing, cropping to zoom could isolate your target and enlarge it. After a certain point, it will become more pixilated, though.

Dirk

I'm not a fan of cropping in post. My last trip, I had to take the same shot of the France pavilion in Epcot at sunset over and over because I didn't want to have to crop out the people on the edges. I just wanted them out. But that being said, sometimes the situation calls for it. In this case, you could probably get 25% without degrading the sharpness, as long as you aren't making 8x10" prints or posting it on huge screens. It's not ideal, but certainly an option to try before spending $1000 on a lens.

[carolina_yankee]

Originally Posted by PSULion22

I got some absolutely incredible shots of the dog playing in the pool today with my iPhone XS max. Crystal clear freeze frame shots with incredible lighting and the shutter speed to stop water droplets in mid air. I'd imagine they're better than I could have gotten with my a6000.



I'm not a fan of cropping in post. My last trip, I had to take the same shot of the France pavilion in Epcot at sunset over and over because I didn't want to have to crop out the people on the edges. I just wanted them out. But that being said, sometimes the situation calls for it. In this case, you could probably get 25% without degrading the sharpness, as long as you aren't making 8x10" prints or posting it on huge screens. It's not ideal, but certainly an option to try before spending $1000 on a lens.

Have you ever tried an ND filter to delete people through long exposures? Or just a long exposure at night time?

Of course, it requires everyone to be moving. One person standing still and Oops!

There's also a photoshop trick I tried once that involves stacking and blending multiple images. I can't remember the details, but I was able to get a pretty clean shot of the Atlantic City boardwalk and Convention Hall that way. It wasn't perfect, but it was fun.

Disney really needs to introduce a photography tour for hobbyist photographers. All they should need would be for us to sign forms promising we won't use the photos for monetary purposes.

Dirk

[PSULion22]

Originally Posted by carolina_yankee

Have you ever tried an ND filter to delete people through long exposures? Or just a long exposure at night time?

Of course, it requires everyone to be moving. One person standing still and Oops!

There's also a photoshop trick I tried once that involves stacking and blending multiple images. I can't remember the details, but I was able to get a pretty clean shot of the Atlantic City boardwalk and Convention Hall that way. It wasn't perfect, but it was fun.

Disney really needs to introduce a photography tour for hobbyist photographers. All they should need would be for us to sign forms promising we won't use the photos for monetary purposes.

Dirk

. It was with my iPhone. And in all honesty, I don't do much post processing of my photos. Maybe something to adjust the light levels or clean them up. And even then, I don't use anything more than PS Express on the phone. But I'm a huge fan of not retouching them if I can.

I forget the name of that technique. The second photographer I posted before uses it a lot. It's called like super file or something like that. Definitely super *something*. They use it several different ways. I've seen them do it with different exposure levels so that an image has consistent lighting throughout. For example, we had a shot that was in a domed cupola. The table with the seating place cards was on it. Because the dome and walls were glass, I couldn't get a shot of both the table and the scene outside the glass. One of the two was over/under exposed. He was able to take multiple shots of the room using different lighting levels, and then blend them into one pic. I also just saw them light up each section of a long room for a wedding ceremony. They then combined all the shots of each small lit area into one big well lit image, without the shadows and dark areas. Pretty cool stuff.

I would certainly pay for that tour. I wonder if there's a third party photographer in the area that does that?

[Goofygrl]

Originally Posted by carolina_yankee

Have you ever tried an ND filter to delete people through long exposures? Or just a long exposure at night time?

Of course, it requires everyone to be moving. One person standing still and Oops!

There's also a photoshop trick I tried once that involves stacking and blending multiple images. I can't remember the details, but I was able to get a pretty clean shot of the Atlantic City boardwalk and Convention Hall that way. It wasn't perfect, but it was fun.

Disney really needs to introduce a photography tour for hobbyist photographers. All they should need would be for us to sign forms promising we won't use the photos for monetary purposes.

Dirk

I’ve done long night exposures at Disney and quite like how the people disappear. But I haven’t been trying to include anyone in the photo. As you say, usually the issue is if someone does suddenly decide to stop and stand in your photo for most of your exposure and become ghosts in the shot! Then you start again. It’s been awhile since I took a tripod in but if I did use a ND filter it was rare. I might have while getting a long fireworks shot but I have not ever gone for long daytime exposures.

[carolina_yankee]

Originally Posted by PSULion22

.

I would certainly pay for that tour. I wonder if there's a third party photographer in the area that does that?

Now there's a business model waiting to take off . . .

Dirk

[carolina_yankee]

Originally Posted by Goofygrl

I’ve done long night exposures at Disney and quite like how the people disappear. But I haven’t been trying to include anyone in the photo. As you say, usually the issue is if someone does suddenly decide to stop and stand in your photo for most of your exposure and become ghosts in the shot! Then you start again. It’s been awhile since I took a tripod in but if I did use a ND filter it was rare. I might have while getting a long fireworks shot but I have not ever gone for long daytime exposures.

I don't have it anymore though a computer error, but on our second visit to Disneyland, I had a great shot of Main Street at close from in front of Sleeping Beauty's Castle. I don't how I found it, but there was a random trash can or railing in just the right place for a table-top tripod. I did a long-exposure, which turned everybody into ghosts except for one child who just stopped and stared at the Castle. It was a great shot with the lone kid in pretty good focus surrounded by ghost guests!

The only reason I would use an ND in daytime would be get good fountain shots or a fun monorail blur in Epcot. One of these visits, I need to designate a day or two half-days as "photography days" so I don't mind carrying gear and moving at my pace. I've gotten a pretty light photography kit for travel, including tripod, but I hate dealing with camera gear and power touring.

The difficulty of getting FP's is making that scenario more and more likely.

I've seen a recommendation of a 3 stop ND for fireworks to capture the multiple series of shots for Illuminations or on the castle. Again, I need to be willing to focus on photography rather than enjoying the show in order to nail the techniques down. That's one of the challenges of visiting ever 12-15 months, instead of more frequently.

Dirk