Photos from krispy Kreme
nice pics
hey doug, is there anyway u could post an unedited/compressed version of that pic of my car for an hour or so? im also interested in what kind of exif data your camera adds to the jpg. you can post it to my site if you want, pm me if u want the login information.
thanks again,
dave
thanks again,
dave
Dork
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 144
From: SF Bay Area
Car Info: 2005 STi, 2005 OXT
Originally posted by bdougr
The $2K in the case of DSLRs only covers the body (electronics) You still end up buying Lenses, flash units, tri-pods, monopods, etc. It is pretty expensive but I am hoping to sell more prints from photoshoots and events. [plug] If anyone is interested in portraits of their cars just drop me an email bdougr@pacbell.net [/plug]
The $2K in the case of DSLRs only covers the body (electronics) You still end up buying Lenses, flash units, tri-pods, monopods, etc. It is pretty expensive but I am hoping to sell more prints from photoshoots and events. [plug] If anyone is interested in portraits of their cars just drop me an email bdougr@pacbell.net [/plug]
I assumed you were a well seasoned photographer who is using all of his Nikkor film accessories. Yeah, if you started from scratch, I'd guess a reasonable setup with a couple lenses would add a grand or more to that initial cost...Think of my assumption as a compliment
BTW, one of my close friends works at the Sac Bee and they're just now about to fully switch to digital. She's not exactly sure she's keen on the switch, but I don't doubt using the D1 she'll be able to save herself a bit of developing and scanning time. It's amazing to me that newsprint hasn't completely switched to digital already. It makes sense that the magazines are still using slide film, but only for another year or so. Then I see them switching, too.
Joel
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 153
Car Info: BMW Z3 3.0
Dave and Joel
Dave,
I am at my paying job now so can't do much for your uncompressed image. Then I actually shot the image as RAW anyway so you wouldn't be able to do anything with it. I will put up an uncompressed image tonight and send you the link. (I will also send you the EXIF info)
Joel
Thanks for the compliments. When I responded about costs it was to make others understand that they will need more than $2K to get started with this camera.
To everyone else, You do not need an expensive camera to get good shots. The only real criteria are, Light, Lens, subject and composition. Megapixels only help once you go to print. Practice Practice Practice. Last night I was out practicing just to get more experience.
I am at my paying job now so can't do much for your uncompressed image. Then I actually shot the image as RAW anyway so you wouldn't be able to do anything with it. I will put up an uncompressed image tonight and send you the link. (I will also send you the EXIF info)
Joel
Thanks for the compliments. When I responded about costs it was to make others understand that they will need more than $2K to get started with this camera.
To everyone else, You do not need an expensive camera to get good shots. The only real criteria are, Light, Lens, subject and composition. Megapixels only help once you go to print. Practice Practice Practice. Last night I was out practicing just to get more experience.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by odyss3y
nice pictures! is there anyway i could get a copy of 0030 in full size digitally? i'd like to see the kind of quality i could expect from a 6mp if i do decide to get one...
thanks,
dave
nice pictures! is there anyway i could get a copy of 0030 in full size digitally? i'd like to see the kind of quality i could expect from a 6mp if i do decide to get one...
thanks,
dave
ya i saw that, i remembered thinking in person that from your cars side of the parking lot, your's seemed blacker, but then from the picture it looked the opposite.
MBP>WRB
MBP>WRB
Re: Dave and Joel
Originally posted by bdougr
Then I actually shot the image as RAW anyway so you wouldn't be able to do anything with it. I will put up an uncompressed image tonight and send you the link. (I will also send you the EXIF info)
Then I actually shot the image as RAW anyway so you wouldn't be able to do anything with it. I will put up an uncompressed image tonight and send you the link. (I will also send you the EXIF info)
Dave
Friendly Neighborhood Ogre
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,930
From: www.gunatics.com
Car Info: GUNATICS.COM
Whoa, really awesome photographs doug!
That a lot for taking them! My car looks better in the picture than it does in real life! haha
Nice camera too, btw.
That a lot for taking them! My car looks better in the picture than it does in real life! haha
Nice camera too, btw.
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,912
From: Bahay area, CA
Car Info: RIP: 2000 2.5RS Sedan, BRP Now: 08 WRB WRX Hatch
wow nice 
i guess i'm not the only one running around in the uckk meets with a tripod haha. too bad i came late and didn't get to see the camera. i need to get me one of those... this automatic 2.1mp camera is not cutting it anymore.
Daios (Day-ohhss)
i guess i'm not the only one running around in the uckk meets with a tripod haha. too bad i came late and didn't get to see the camera. i need to get me one of those... this automatic 2.1mp camera is not cutting it anymore.Daios (Day-ohhss)
Guest
Posts: n/a
It has nothing to do with megapixels!
Originally posted by AdoboUaReX
That's what a 6 megapixel camera looks like?!! Gotta get me one of those someday. For now i have to settle for my 1.3.
It takes good pics during the day. Not so great at night. Oh well. At least i got it for a good price.
That's what a 6 megapixel camera looks like?!! Gotta get me one of those someday. For now i have to settle for my 1.3.
It takes good pics during the day. Not so great at night. Oh well. At least i got it for a good price.
There are several issues that come into play. The biggest thing you get with a DSLR is MUCH BETTER LENSES (it's the equivalent of putting REALLY good tires on your car). You also get better control over depth of field or DOF. Prosumer cameras suffer from having a large depth of field even at their most wide open apeture (or f stop). A wide apeture will have a narrow depth of field meaning that there is a narrow depth around the focal point that will be in focus. A smaller apeture will have a larger depth of field, etc.
Second is sensor noise. Look at the black in this picture. With a prosumer camera you probably would have had a lot more noise with a night shot like that which would have manifested itself as an overall "grainy" appearance to the picture. The dark areas in this picture however are nice and clean. The sensors in DSLR's are larger and don't have nearly the amount of problems with noise that are encountered on a prosumer camera where the sensors are tiny. On my Canon G1 I always shot at ISO 50, ISOs faster than that were just unusable due to noise. With my D30 the lowest setting is ISO 100 and it goes up to 1600. At ISO 1600 the noise is visible but you can still get a shot that is of high enough quality that it can be cleaned up in post processing with various noise reduction algorithms.
Megapixels come into play when you want to enlarge or do a tight crop on a picture, or print an image out. In theory the minimum resolution you want for printing is 150 pixels per inch. On a standard 2048x1536 pixel image this means you can print up to a 13.65" x 10.24" image. In practice however this isn't always true. This is where the lens comes into play. On a 3 megapixel prosumer camera you can easily print high quality images out at 8.5"x11". In some instances you can go to 13x19 but that's stretching the limit. With a 3 megapixel DSLR you can easily go to 13"x19". Although the pixel count is the same the DSLR images "res up" better due to the better optics, and the lower noise sensors. Having more megapixels come into play when you want to print really large images. You can do 20x30 with a 3 megapixel DSLR like the D30 but you really have to get the shot and the post processing right. With a Nikon D100 or a Canon D60 this is much easier.
If you really want pixel count check out the Canon 1Ds at 11 megapixels (real, not interpolated). Kodak is trying to release the 14n at 14 megapixels but they've been having huge problems with image quality and the sensor overheating. It keeps getting delayed "another 2 weeks".
The "gotcha" with DSLRs is that you're buying into a lens system more than anything else. The cost of the camera body (easily $1800 and up) is nothing compared to well outfitted lens kit. Fortunately good glass seems to be like gold bars, they don't depreciate that much. A lot of the high quality used lenses (Canon and Nikon lenses) on eBay are selling for 90% of what they cost new. Stuff like Tamron and Tokina however depreciates a lot faster as the optics and quality control aren't very good for the most part.
So there you have it! Cheers, Joe
Last edited by veloLexus; Jan 23, 2003 at 04:14 AM.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 153
Car Info: BMW Z3 3.0
Re: Re: Dave and Joel
Originally posted by odyss3y
I can actually open RAW files with PS 7, although I'm not so sure we are talking about the same "Raw" file. *shrug* So if that is easier for you...
Dave
I can actually open RAW files with PS 7, although I'm not so sure we are talking about the same "Raw" file. *shrug* So if that is easier for you...
Dave
Doug
Dork
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 144
From: SF Bay Area
Car Info: 2005 STi, 2005 OXT
Hello,
Amen Joe! And picking between Canon and Nikon seems to be like picking between domestic and imports (well, except for that whole 'domestics suck' thing :P). But some people absolutely swear by Canon and can't stand Nikon and some people are the opposite. Personally, I kind of like Nikons just because I'm so used to them, but some of the top shelf EOS AF systems are so incredible these days... especially for action stuff... I dunno what I would get if I was to splurge today.
But once you buy one body and you start getting lenses (which, for a pro can be tens of thousands of dollars), you're done switching bodies across brands.
Like Joe mentiond, that's one of the biggest differences as you go up in Camera cost: the noise on the sensor. That's one of the major upgrades as you move to the D1x (since D1H is not 6 mp). Similar resolution, far more useful ISO range and far less noise, while allowing slightly faster repeat shots and for longer stretches before you have to pause to let the camera finish writing. Aside from that, as the D100 has about a million options that a more P&S style camera doesn't have, the D1 gives you a whole new range of options, including a better focus-lock to let you take multiple pictures that all require the same focus (like action happening at a fixed distance from you). Of course, the D1s run about $4k for just the body...
Meanwhile, I'm thinking my next purchase will be a Canon G3. Probably gives you more SLR-style control than any other non-interchangeable-lens camera, for about $700, and still gives wicked-nice pictures (it'll be my skill, not my camera, that makes my pictures suck!). But the nice thing, which any aspiring photog should pay attention to, is that it gives you complete access to aperture, ISO, exposure, etc., in a way that few other digital consumer cameras do. And it's small and convenient and you won't feel as bad dropping it as you would a more professional setup like Doug's.
BTW, Doug, closer to the season start, would you be up for taking a few shots of the racecar that we can then send off to sponsors and the such? Our on-track photos are all professionally done, but our close-up stuff is all me and the other monkey snapping away with a low-end pocket-sized camera in a poorly lit garage
Joel
Amen Joe! And picking between Canon and Nikon seems to be like picking between domestic and imports (well, except for that whole 'domestics suck' thing :P). But some people absolutely swear by Canon and can't stand Nikon and some people are the opposite. Personally, I kind of like Nikons just because I'm so used to them, but some of the top shelf EOS AF systems are so incredible these days... especially for action stuff... I dunno what I would get if I was to splurge today.
But once you buy one body and you start getting lenses (which, for a pro can be tens of thousands of dollars), you're done switching bodies across brands.
Like Joe mentiond, that's one of the biggest differences as you go up in Camera cost: the noise on the sensor. That's one of the major upgrades as you move to the D1x (since D1H is not 6 mp). Similar resolution, far more useful ISO range and far less noise, while allowing slightly faster repeat shots and for longer stretches before you have to pause to let the camera finish writing. Aside from that, as the D100 has about a million options that a more P&S style camera doesn't have, the D1 gives you a whole new range of options, including a better focus-lock to let you take multiple pictures that all require the same focus (like action happening at a fixed distance from you). Of course, the D1s run about $4k for just the body...
Meanwhile, I'm thinking my next purchase will be a Canon G3. Probably gives you more SLR-style control than any other non-interchangeable-lens camera, for about $700, and still gives wicked-nice pictures (it'll be my skill, not my camera, that makes my pictures suck!). But the nice thing, which any aspiring photog should pay attention to, is that it gives you complete access to aperture, ISO, exposure, etc., in a way that few other digital consumer cameras do. And it's small and convenient and you won't feel as bad dropping it as you would a more professional setup like Doug's.
BTW, Doug, closer to the season start, would you be up for taking a few shots of the racecar that we can then send off to sponsors and the such? Our on-track photos are all professionally done, but our close-up stuff is all me and the other monkey snapping away with a low-end pocket-sized camera in a poorly lit garage
Joel
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 153
Car Info: BMW Z3 3.0
Originally posted by Joel Gat
BTW, Doug, closer to the season start, would you be up for taking a few shots of the racecar that we can then send off to sponsors and the such? Our on-track photos are all professionally done, but our close-up stuff is all me and the other monkey snapping away with a low-end pocket-sized camera in a poorly lit garage
Joel
BTW, Doug, closer to the season start, would you be up for taking a few shots of the racecar that we can then send off to sponsors and the such? Our on-track photos are all professionally done, but our close-up stuff is all me and the other monkey snapping away with a low-end pocket-sized camera in a poorly lit garage
Joel
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Joel Gat
Hello,
Amen Joe! And picking between Canon and Nikon seems to be like picking between domestic and imports (well, except for that whole 'domestics suck' thing :P). But some people absolutely swear by Canon and can't stand Nikon and some people are the opposite. Personally, I kind of like Nikons just because I'm so used to them, but some of the top shelf EOS AF systems are so incredible these days... especially for action stuff... I dunno what I would get if I was to splurge today.
Hello,
Amen Joe! And picking between Canon and Nikon seems to be like picking between domestic and imports (well, except for that whole 'domestics suck' thing :P). But some people absolutely swear by Canon and can't stand Nikon and some people are the opposite. Personally, I kind of like Nikons just because I'm so used to them, but some of the top shelf EOS AF systems are so incredible these days... especially for action stuff... I dunno what I would get if I was to splurge today.
But once you buy one body and you start getting lenses (which, for a pro can be tens of thousands of dollars), you're done switching bodies across brands.
Like Joe mentiond, that's one of the biggest differences as you go up in Camera cost: the noise on the sensor. That's one of the major upgrades as you move to the D1x (since D1H is not 6 mp). Similar resolution, far more useful ISO range and far less noise, while allowing slightly faster repeat shots and for longer stretches before you have to pause to let the camera finish writing. Aside from that, as the D100 has about a million options that a more P&S style camera doesn't have, the D1 gives you a whole new range of options, including a better focus-lock to let you take multiple pictures that all require the same focus (like action happening at a fixed distance from you). Of course, the D1s run about $4k for just the body...
Meanwhile, I'm thinking my next purchase will be a Canon G3. Probably gives you more SLR-style control than any other non-interchangeable-lens camera, for about $700, and still gives wicked-nice pictures (it'll be my skill, not my camera, that makes my pictures suck!). But the nice thing, which any aspiring photog should pay attention to, is that it gives you complete access to aperture, ISO, exposure, etc., in a way that few other digital consumer cameras do. And it's small and convenient and you won't feel as bad dropping it as you would a more professional setup like Doug's.
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/tdriedger...cia/Barn_2.jpg
and this with a G2:
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/tdriedger...etPortrait.jpg
and this with a D30 (screwed up the DOF on this shot though):
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/tdriedger...0/IMG_7836.jpg
Cheers, Joe
