Some great pictures get posted on the forum, :thumbsup: so just curious to what cameras are being used to take them?
I think the photographer is more important than the camera
(assuming they're not using box brownies), for model rail
photography lighting, composition and method of focus
are important for good results. Most cameras can give acceptable
photos though DSLRs are the most practical.
I have a Nikon D7000 which I hardly use and am thinking about off loading it and buying plenty of N Gauge stock, I also have an Olympus PL3 which is small and ideal, I am trying to do Videos with it at the moment but yes Lighting is important with photography also depth of field.
QuoteDSLRs are the most practical.
I beg to differ when it comes to photographing models, I would suggest a decent bridge camera is far better, the much shorter focal length gives a far greater depth of field, with a DSLR a head on or 3/4 view of a loco will have the chimney in focus and the cab just a blur, in a 3/4 view if you focus on the centre driver, you would get that sharp but the chimney and cab somewhat blurred; you may get a bit better result shooting from further away but you can't only the image too much else you start to lose detail.
Having said that there will be times when a DSLR can be used to good effect, mainly for close up detail of part of a loco using a Macro lens (some bridge cams also have a macro setting)
If you use very short focal length lenses on a DSLR then you start to get distortions where straight lines become curved, sometimes likened to a "fish eye" view
People that do macro photography of insects etc will take a number of shots starting at the head each being foccussed a bit further back, they then use photo editing software to combine the images.
A DSLR can be used for photographing layouts, but for close up detail shots again a bridge camera will do a better job.
Camera manufacturers often quote the focal length of bridge camera lenses as 35mm camera equivalents which can be misleading in some respects, it's based on the size of the sensor when compared to a 35mm (or full frame) camera.
Regarding bridge cameras Mike which brand / model would you choose?
Quote from: Dorsetmike on July 13, 2015, 02:50:02 PM
QuoteDSLRs are the most practical.
A DSLR can be used for photographing layouts, but for close up detail shots again a bridge camera will do a better job.
I beg to differ I also have a bridge camera I gave to my son and to be honest no contest with a DSLR that wins hands down.
but we all have our own opinions.
I have a Canon Power Shot SX510HS bridge camera that I'm still learning about :dunce:
Quote from: Dorsetmike on July 13, 2015, 02:50:02 PM
QuoteDSLRs are the most practical.
I beg to differ when it comes to photographing models, I would suggest a decent bridge camera is far better, the much shorter focal length gives a far greater depth of field,
That is a massive sweeping generalisation! If you don't know that depth of field is important (and how to maximise it on a camera) then I agree that a bridge camera on auto might give you better results, but I would still much rather have a DSLR and a little knowledge in how to use it!
Cheers, Mike
Just about anything can be made to work given skill, imagination and creativity so I don't think there's a right or wrong answer - just use what works for you. If you're buying, get your hands on a few and see what suits you best. It's very subjective. If you're already using a camera, push its envelope and see what it can do. And challenge yourself too, technically and creatively.
If you admire others' work though, I think equipment is largely irrelevant - it's impossible to argue for or against the formats / brands favoured by Don McCullin / Tim Hetherington (RIP) / Simon Norfolk / Robert Capa (RIP) / James Nachtwey (google them if you don't know): all outstanding but all different in their own way/s. Is it important what sort of chisels Henry Moore used or what sort of brushes JMW Turner used?
Look at what they do, not what they do it with - if you admire Henry Moore but wouldn't give houseroom to an Alberto Giacometti, then investigate as much as you like but don't concentrate on the tools of the trade. It's what you do with them that counts... and don't risk becoming someone with all the gear and no idea.
For the record, I've owned and used many formats and brands including Mamiya, Sinar, Fuji, Olympus, Canon, Nikon, Hasselblad and Kodak and they all produce the goods if you know what you're doing. Popular convention states you wouldn't necessarily use a 10x8 studio camera at Silverstone, and you wouldn't necessarily use a 1930's folding camera on a modern press shoot but both can be done, and if you know what you're doing you'll stand out from the crowd.
Quote from: newportnobby on July 13, 2015, 03:52:09 PM
I have a Canon Power Shot SX510HS bridge camera that I'm still learning about :dunce:
The bridge camera seems to be favoured but as far as Im concerened if it takes a
reasonable shot then its all I ask of it.
My hobby is :ngauge: not photography so in a way `cheap and cheerful` will allow me more more to spend actually on :ngauge:
I just use the camera built into my phone. But as with all digital cameras, if you're taking close photos of your models and want to capture all those little details, use the Macro focus mode (usually indicated by a flower symbol) or it'll just come out all blurry...
PS I'm making a pinhole attachment for my dslr so I can
soft fuzzy pix....
Quote from: Agrippa on July 13, 2015, 04:34:48 PM
PS I'm making a pinhole attachment for my dslr so I can
soft fuzzy pix....
Good luck, I did that with mine... interesting! Good fun.
All the pictures in my Snoozebury thread were taken with a Canon EOS 7000 DSLR
Mine is a cheap, end of line, Samsung PL10 compact but it suits my purpose!
Peter.
Quote from: newportnobby on July 13, 2015, 03:52:09 PM
I have a Canon Power Shot SX510HS bridge camera that I'm still learning about :dunce:
I hear where your coming from there, I've just bought a Lumix FZ200 and spent about 3 hours reading the user manual yesterday! :confused1:
Quote from: Mr Sprue on July 13, 2015, 08:21:02 PM
I hear where your coming from there, I've just bought a Lumix FZ200 and spent about 3 hours reading the user manual yesterday! :confused1:
I thought you guys NEVER read the manual, showing your feminine side then. ;)
Quote from: Caz on July 13, 2015, 08:46:41 PM
Quote from: Mr Sprue on July 13, 2015, 08:21:02 PM
I hear where your coming from there, I've just bought a Lumix FZ200 and spent about 3 hours reading the user manual yesterday! :confused1:
I thought you guys NEVER read the manual, showing your feminine side then. ;)
I did say I was learning about the camera but I didn't say I read the manual, Caz.
What self respecting bloke would do that? :P
They come with manuals? :goggleeyes:
Quote from: GroupC on July 13, 2015, 04:07:50 PM
Just about anything can be made to work given skill, imagination and creativity so I don't think there's a right or wrong answer - just use what works for you. If you're buying, get your hands on a few and see what suits you best. It's very subjective. If you're already using a camera, push its envelope and see what it can do. And challenge yourself too, technically and creatively.
If you admire others' work though, I think equipment is largely irrelevant - it's impossible to argue for or against the formats / brands favoured by Don McCullin / Tim Hetherington (RIP) / Simon Norfolk / Robert Capa (RIP) / James Nachtwey (google them if you don't know): all outstanding but all different in their own way/s. Is it important what sort of chisels Henry Moore used or what sort of brushes JMW Turner used?
Look at what they do, not what they do it with - if you admire Henry Moore but wouldn't give houseroom to an Alberto Giacometti, then investigate as much as you like but don't concentrate on the tools of the trade. It's what you do with them that counts... and don't risk becoming someone with all the gear and no idea.
For the record, I've owned and used many formats and brands including Mamiya, Sinar, Fuji, Olympus, Canon, Nikon, Hasselblad and Kodak and they all produce the goods if you know what you're doing. Popular convention states you wouldn't necessarily use a 10x8 studio camera at Silverstone, and you wouldn't necessarily use a 1930's folding camera on a modern press shoot but both can be done, and if you know what you're doing you'll stand out from the crowd.
I'd say you've pretty much summed it up there group C. I love that comment "don't risk becoming someone with all the gear and no idea."
By the way, apart from Turner, who are all those people you mention? I haven't got the foggiest. Blokes from the pub? :D
Manual, that's boring just take pics till you find the right settings for you!
Only took me 3 months to get the wanted results :laugh: :'(
Ha ha not sure where I stand in the context of all the gear no idea I spent 3 months learning how to use my camera after a 2 month course on how to take good long range pics and well maybe just maybe one day I will have the pic that's perfect for me!
Deserthound may agree but what camera people choose can totally vary on what they are using it for, I have seen some amazing pics from a £100 Fuji argos deal, just as some amazing ones done from the high end cameras (one of which work kindly gifted to me because they don't fix cameras although Canon did for a nice £75 for a £700 camera!) :claphappy:
Quote from: Caz on July 13, 2015, 08:46:41 PM
Quote from: Mr Sprue on July 13, 2015, 08:21:02 PM
I hear where your coming from there, I've just bought a Lumix FZ200 and spent about 3 hours reading the user manual yesterday! :confused1:
I thought you guys NEVER read the manual, showing your feminine side then. ;)
After experiencing the odd expensive 'male chicken' (changed by forum) up in life by NOT reading what should have been read, then yes call me girl I don't care! :P
Pentax A20...
However, I think that the secret to a good crisp picture is to use a tripod and ALWAYS try to make use of the delay timer on the camera. That way there isn't even a chance of the camera moving while pressing the shutter button.
I use the Nikon D60 that my wife bought me as a wedding present 6 years ago. I have a nice new 16-85mm lens for it. Trouble with the lens is the min aperture is f5.6, so it's not great in low light. But for close-up model photos, I use a tripod and at least f8 for depth of field, so the 2 second exposure doesn't matter.
I spent a long time reading the manual AND a couple of jolly useful books on how to use my camera. So, apparently I'm very comfortable with my feminine side.
Nikon D40x DSLR. Macro shots are with a Tamron 90mm F2.8. Most other shots are with the standard 18-55mm lens although I do have a 70-200mm in my kit as well.
The other half has a Nikon D70 that I want to try out some time. Damn thing is heavy though!
I use a Nikon D40, which I find very good although it has been superseded
by quite a few models since I bought it, also have a few Nikon film cameras
like F and F2, easy to use, only three controls, shutter, aperture, focus.
I like older cameras because you can check depth of field easily, don't think
that's possible on most digital cameras apart from viewing the shot on the
the display.
When I'm not being lazy and using the iPhone I use my Sony Alpha 350 (DSLR). Brilliant camera once you can afford to upgrade to a better lens than the standard one. I went a little mad and bought a 500mm mirrored lens......which I've used on only two occasions in 5 years! :no:
I also use my Sony High Definition camcorder for my video's, and sometimes for photographs in areas of good light - as it can take them in 12MP. The model number is HDR-X550E. It's great for filming in N, and I've also filmed two friends weddings with it as well, who were very happy.
Quote from: Zogbert Splod on July 14, 2015, 01:11:37 AM
Pentax A20...
However, I think that the secret to a good crisp picture is to use a tripod and ALWAYS try to make use of the delay timer on the camera. That way there isn't even a chance of the camera moving while pressing the shutter button.
Or a cable release.
I usually use me phone for layout pics, simply for the convenience. I do own a Canon DSLR but on my last Tasmanian trip it stayed in the bag! Took all the pics on my phone as I couldn't be bothered lugging it around, plus it shouts "tourist" to the locals.
However I'm planning on writing an article soon, so I'll be using the SLR.
Quote from: acko22 on July 13, 2015, 11:00:29 PM
Manual, that's boring just take pics till you find the right settings for you!
Only took me 3 months to get the wanted results :laugh: :'(
Ha ha not sure where I stand in the context of all the gear no idea I spent 3 months learning how to use my camera after a 2 month course on how to take good long range pics and well maybe just maybe one day I will have the pic that's perfect for me!
Deserthound may agree but what camera people choose can totally vary on what they are using it for, I have seen some amazing pics from a £100 Fuji argos deal, just as some amazing ones done from the high end cameras (one of which work kindly gifted to me because they don't fix cameras although Canon did for a nice £75 for a £700 camera!) :claphappy:
Ah, that's perseverance Acko! Yup, doesn't really matter how you get there, whether it's trial and error, reading the manuals, using the internet, reading magazines, or a combination of all, so long as you learn how your camera works and what it's capable of, and most importantly have fun, then that's all that matters I think.
I'd agree with you re the 100 pound camera, and I think that's what group c was getting at - it's how you use the camera that's important. Also can see there's a desire for different cameras for different needs. I'm tempted by a bridge camera but can quite justify it given what I forked out for my DSLR, which I'm also very happy with.
Dan
Quote from: Bealman on July 14, 2015, 08:09:59 AM
Quote from: Zogbert Splod on July 14, 2015, 01:11:37 AM
Pentax A20...
However, I think that the secret to a good crisp picture is to use a tripod and ALWAYS try to make use of the delay timer on the camera. That way there isn't even a chance of the camera moving while pressing the shutter button.
Or a cable release.
I usually use me phone for layout pics, simply for the convenience. I do own a Canon DSLR but on my last Tasmanian trip it stayed in the bag! Took all the pics onmr phone as I couldn't be bothered lugging it around, plus it shouts "tourist" to the locals.
However I'm planning on writing an article soon, so I'll be using the SLR.
If you think that shouting "tourist" is bad George, my other half was gifted a selfie stick and took that on our most recent holiday. I was forever looking for caves, crevices and pubs to go run and hide in!
Quote from: Bealman on July 14, 2015, 08:09:59 AM
Quote from: Zogbert Splod on July 14, 2015, 01:11:37 AM
Pentax A20...
However, I think that the secret to a good crisp picture is to use a tripod and ALWAYS try to make use of the delay timer on the camera. That way there isn't even a chance of the camera moving while pressing the shutter button.
Or a cable release. ...
Forgot that option! My digital camera doesn't have that available and I don't even own a film camera any more. Yeah, that would be more convenient if you can do that.....
My Canon has a socket which accepts a genuine Canon accessory cable release, or remote actuator as they call it.
Dan: Selfie stick.... I don't blame you!! :sick2:
It's not perfect, but for lighting I use my ikea floor standing reading lamp that usually stands over my desk. I adjust the direction of the light, or the distance of the lamp, for different lighting effects. As I said, not perfect, but it's better than no light at all. I don't think you can beat natural day light though (ok ok, I know someone's going to say you can, but pics taken of layouts outdoors can look amazing).
How do those get on that have lighting as part of their layout, e.g. exhibition layouts. Is that sufficient light for your photography?
Dan
Well I've yet to try it out and see the results as one of the main points why I bought this camera, was the Lumix FZ200 aperture remains at f/2.8 at all focal lengths which should in theory give sharper images no matter how much you zoom in or out.
Along with all the other features it has I'm keen to try out its panoramic feature, I have some good locations in mind for a few back scenes!
Still lots of reading up to do! ::)
Quote from: Zogbert Splod on July 14, 2015, 01:11:37 AM
Pentax A20...
However, I think that the secret to a good crisp picture is to use a tripod and ALWAYS try to make use of the delay timer on the camera. That way there isn't even a chance of the camera moving while pressing the shutter button.
The only problem occurs if the subject is moving, though :doh:
Quote from: Bealman on July 14, 2015, 08:09:59 AM
However I'm planning on writing an article soon, so I'll be using the SLR.
When did you learn to write, George? :o :P
Talking to Steve Flint at Wigan show last year :P
Quote from: Mr Sprue on July 14, 2015, 10:01:12 AM
Well I've yet to try it out and see the results as one of the main points why I bought this camera, was the Lumix FZ200 aperture remains at f/2.8 at all focal lengths no matter how much you zoom in or out, which should in theory give sharper images no matter how much you zoom in or out.
Along with all the other features it has I'm keen to try out its panoramic feature, I have some good locations in mind for a few back scenes!
Still lots of reading up to do! ::)
I've had one of these for a couple of years and also bought it because of the f/2.8 aperture - great for sports when the light is bad. It is so light - particularly when compared to an equivalent set up with my Nikon kit. Prefer the Nikon for serious work though.
Quote from: newportnobby on July 14, 2015, 10:38:09 AM
Quote from: Zogbert Splod on July 14, 2015, 01:11:37 AM
Pentax A20...
However, I think that the secret to a good crisp picture is to use a tripod and ALWAYS try to make use of the delay timer on the camera. That way there isn't even a chance of the camera moving while pressing the shutter button.
The only problem occurs if the subject is moving, though :doh:
Why would you be taking pictures of moving models on a layout with a stills camera? (sorry, I forgot who I was talking to here :wave:) That's why we have switches on the electrickery side of things you see. Anything else I can help you with?
;D
Maybe to get a sense of movement, and if the layout is DC then the only way you are going to get the lights on at the front of a loco is for it to be moving.
Quote from: Zogbert Splod on July 14, 2015, 10:53:46 AM
Quote from: newportnobby on July 14, 2015, 10:38:09 AM
Quote from: Zogbert Splod on July 14, 2015, 01:11:37 AM
Pentax A20...
However, I think that the secret to a good crisp picture is to use a tripod and ALWAYS try to make use of the delay timer on the camera. That way there isn't even a chance of the camera moving while pressing the shutter button.
The only problem occurs if the subject is moving, though :doh:
Why would you be taking pictures of moving models on a layout with a stills camera? (sorry, I forgot who I was talking to here :wave:) That's why we have switches on the electrickery side of things you see. Anything else I can help you with?
;D
I frequently take pics of moving models with a stills camera, especially at model railways shows as it's not always convenient to ask the operator to stop the subject. That's where panning comes in.
If you were to try and take a stills pic at a show using tripod and cable release you'd probably end up being barged onto the floor along with all equipment. For home use, I would like to think this wouldn't occur :worried:
Of course, if I want a video of something moving I just use the 'movie' facility on my camera.
Good points, both of you. Perhaps I need to come awake before I post! :-[ I guess I was only considering diorama style pics. I have the 'joys' of railway model pics ahead of me. I used to do lots of AD&D photography when I was younger and foolisher (just invented that word). Those models didn't move much.....
I currently use a Pentax K50 DSLR and have regularly used Pentax since my first Spotmatic back in 1971 .I also carry a Nikon compact as in some situations it is more convenient .The short delay in compacts and some bridge cameras from pressing the shutter to the shutter activating however I find inconvenient with moving object and where a model railway operator may stop to let you take nyour picture a train driver or aircraft pilot cannot.
Just out of interest does anyone own a Canon EOS 100D ? If so I have the EOS 100 35mm SLR and wondered if the lenses would fit the 100D. :hmmm:
Do you mean EOS 1000D? I have one and my daughter has a much more recent and up-market one, but the lenses are interchangeable. I would have thought that Canon would be standardised across their range.
Quote from: Bealman on July 14, 2015, 12:42:59 PM
Do you mean EOS 1000D? I have one and my daughter has a much more recent and up-market one, but the lenses are interchangeable. I would have thought that Canon would be standardised across their range.
No definitely this one :http://www.canon.co.uk/for_home/product_finder/cameras/digital_slr/eos_100d/ (http://www.canon.co.uk/for_home/product_finder/cameras/digital_slr/eos_100d/)
Thing is one of the lenses in my EOS 100 bag is a Sigma 28/200 auto focus which seems a shame to be packed away doing nothing, so I'm thinking I should walk into a good shop to see if they work on the 100D, if so I may buy one.
Quote from: Mr Sprue on July 14, 2015, 12:35:54 PM
Just out of interest does anyone own a Canon EOS 100D ? If so I have the EOS 100 35mm SLR and wondered if the lenses would fit the 100D. :hmmm:
If I uderstand the Canon philosophy correctly it should fit but if you go to the canon web site you should be able to find the answer
If it is an EF mount lens then it should be compatible, but you *might* find some compatibility problems eg AF on 3rd party lenses.
You lose nothing by trying!
Cheers, Mike
(A very happy user of Canon 70D)
Quote from: Mr Sprue on July 14, 2015, 12:35:54 PM
Just out of interest does anyone own a Canon EOS 100D ? If so I have the EOS 100 35mm SLR and wondered if the lenses would fit the 100D. :hmmm:
Don't know the exact answer but I do know that you can get adaptors to make them fit and they just clip on between the lens and camera, I can't for the sake of me remember where but I will have a look and try to fresh my memory!
Quote from: Mr Sprue on July 14, 2015, 12:35:54 PM
Just out of interest does anyone own a Canon EOS 100D ? If so I have the EOS 100 35mm SLR and wondered if the lenses would fit the 100D. :hmmm:
Your EOS 100 35mm Film SLR will only take EF Canon EOS lenses.
The 100D will take EF and EF-S Canon EOS lenses, but the EF-S lenses which may come with the 100D will not go on the EOS 100 35mm film SLR. If you fitted an EF-S lens to the 35mm film SLR (assuming it fit), it would extend too far into the mirror box and the mirror would clout it, possibly breaking the mirror.
Old third party EOS lenses will probably work on the EOS 100D but there's an outside chance they may not talk with one another. Also, your mileage may vary but cheap, old third party stuff may not perform well optically or in terms of autofocus speed on a modern SLR.
With regards to what camera I use to photograph my model trains, it's usually a Canon 7D and 17-40 L series lens zoomed in to 40mm. The 100L macro is too long and doesn't offer enough depth of field; for this same reason, I do not use my full frame work cameras. A compact camera will have greater depth of field with it's smaller sensor but might lack the range of control you can have with other cameras.
I sit the camera on anything that's to hand to get it in the right position, put it in Aperture priority with an aperture of about f/16 and an ISO of 100, focus in live view and start the camera off on a 2 second delayed shutter. The exposure is usually anywhere between 5 and 60 seconds which gives me time to fire a few blips of flashgun light in the shaded areas (although the flash isn't 'talking' to the camera in any way via cable or wireless.) I'll repeat this until I've got an evenly lit model.
If I've got time, I'll lightly process the RAW file in Lightroom, giving it a nice little crop and altering the white balance until it looks right.
[smg id=13374]
[smg id=26923]
[smg id=25109]
Any chance of repeating those pics with a compact or bridge camera on similar settings, to see if there is an improvement in the sharpness of the parts of the locos further from he camera, to me the cab numbers and BR logos etc are not in sharp focus; on the Duchess the point of focus looks to be around the cylinder and front end of the motion, the cab number is just readable, the BR logo is quite fuzzy, on the diesel the focus looks to be on the front cab , the front number is readable, the nameplate and rear cabside number are not readable even when magnified.
If I get time tomorrow I'll try some similar shots with a bridge and a compact, try and prove my point.
Quote from: Dorsetmike on July 14, 2015, 11:15:05 PM
If I get time tomorrow I'll try some similar shots with a bridge and a compact, try and prove my point.
yep, agree :)
and above and beyond dslr/bridge/compact
you mentioned earlier focus stacking.
CombineZ freeware stacker in various versions can sort out the difference between a pic of a model, and a pic of a model simulating the real thing. (like some do with sepia tones in their B&W pics :) ! isnt that what we are all trying to do - make models the real world ? )
With CombineZ ( similar are available which may cost more, or are more complex ) you dont need to worry about depth of field in an individual shot
With a DSLR you have control on the focus point for your several frames at various depths,
with a bridge you can control the manual focus point by subterfuge, (rotate cam, 1/2 press shutter to fix focus, then rotate cam back to original frame align then complete the shutter actuation )
compacts ? ?5th amendment :)
So, in summary, with combineZ you can simulate a train in focus from front bufferbeam to the brake van at the end ( in a bright summer sky at f22 or summat !)
or, simulate a model of somewhere on the West Somerset (from front buffer beam to somewhere along the first carriage ! on a dreary wet overcast day) at f errr well summat less than f22 :)
or ofcourse you can also use it to just do, in focus, those regions of interest and 'silk screen' those which are not :)
Simplest is to get a Lytro camera which records everything in focus,
costs a bit though.
Quote from: Dorsetmike on July 14, 2015, 11:15:05 PM
Any chance of repeating those pics with a compact or bridge camera on similar settings, to see if there is an improvement in the sharpness of the parts of the locos further from he camera, to me the cab numbers and BR logos etc are not in sharp focus; on the Duchess the point of focus looks to be around the cylinder and front end of the motion, the cab number is just readable, the BR logo is quite fuzzy, on the diesel the focus looks to be on the front cab , the front number is readable, the nameplate and rear cabside number are not readable even when magnified.
If I get time tomorrow I'll try some similar shots with a bridge and a compact, try and prove my point.
I'll give it a go later with the only non-DSLR digital camera I have - an old (2006) Fuji bridge camera and report on my findings. I agree that there are issues with the images above in terms of the drop off in focus due to the depth of field. Despite using a crop sensor camera at a small aperture, it is still very hard to escape focus drop off and the focus stacking technique is the only solution (although one which I wouldn't spend the time doing!) I expect to find that the bridge camera will deliver a greater DOF but will probably suffer in terms of image quality, colour and general usability. I expect a focus-recompose technique will also be order of the day too!
The image compression used when uploading images to the forum also acts as a good leveller and might show that for forum purposes, you don't need all that much camera to get a decent image, just decent technique.
Generally speaking a small sensor compact type digital will have far more depth of field than a DSLR of any sensor size. I once did some charts for this which showed that the average compact/bridge digital had more DOF at maximum aperture than a DSLR could produce even when stopped down to f32/45. It gets particularly problematic at close focus distance because DOF reduces as focus distance does, and is minimal at macro levels even with minimum aperture.
Focus stacking doesn't really help much because there is so much image degradation that increased DOF is usually offset by overall lack of sharpness. I found that a single shot at optimum aperture - F8/F11 - produced a better result than stacking. With high sensor count DSLR's these days using a minimum aperture often isn't of help due to Lens diffraction now becoming an issue.
A modern compact is probably for most modellers by far the best/easiest camera to have for shots, and particularly in N.
Izzy
Correct me if I am wrong but another factor which can affect the quality of images is 'Noise', so choosing a camera with large amounts of megapixels doesn't always mean the best pictures!
I got to disagree with statements that bridge type cameras take better photos than DSLR's. But I would say that they do different things -if you don't want to post process much then yes, a bridge camera or other maybe "keen snapper" camera (not the right wording but can't think what else) will most likely produce better shots straight out of the memory card. The amount of "in-camera" post processing is pretty huge now, but compare to the likes of my D2x I was really disappointing initially but have had to learn it's not doing much processing itself, you need to do it afterwards.
QuoteCorrect me if I am wrong but another factor which can affect the quality of images is 'Noise', so choosing a camera with large amounts of megapixels doesn't always mean the best pictures!
Absoflippinglutely, really winds me up to see folk comparing phones or cameras and boasting the megapix count. IMO past a certain amount of pix it doesn't mean that much really. My old 5megapixel Nikon D50 takes superb pics and print-outs up to A3 without much post processing. I stepped up through Fuji S3 then Nikon D2x and have had to learn a whole new way of taking photos (which is what I wanted).
I hadn't dug out my D2x for any railway stuff so had a quick play this morning on the tripod. Light's terrible though as didn't use any extra. I thought I'd try 3 apertures (wide open, middle and fully closed) still in "program mode". Used the timer as couldn't get my remote release to work for some reason. Sigma 24-135mm and when I check the exif info I set it to 56mm, f21, f9.5 and f3.8. I must have had "pattern mode" and auto white balance already set, and set to ISO100. The angle of the objects were quite sharp to the camera (maybe 45deg) and I was quite close which doesn't help.
In Corel Photo XI I went "sharpen", "high pass sharpen" and "sharpen more". I don't think I would have to do this in my other cameras as it's done in-camera instead. I'm pretty convinced if I kept repeating the shots with different settings on the camera and corel then I would get something ALLOT sharper and greater depth, but I wasn't
that unimpressed with the one at smallest f'stop. That said, my old Fuji S9500 bridge was a great camera and I could maybe dig it out and try as a comparison if I find any spare AA batteries.
I would be keen on some comments / feedback on what's good settings to use for a DSLR though! I think I should have changed the metering and focus modes.
(http://i629.photobucket.com/albums/uu17/RSTA/_DSC0434.jpg) (http://s629.photobucket.com/user/RSTA/media/_DSC0434.jpg.html)
(http://i629.photobucket.com/albums/uu17/RSTA/_DSC0435.jpg) (http://s629.photobucket.com/user/RSTA/media/_DSC0435.jpg.html)
(http://i629.photobucket.com/albums/uu17/RSTA/_DSC0436.jpg) (http://s629.photobucket.com/user/RSTA/media/_DSC0436.jpg.html)
As a comparison I took a very general shot of my layout from a few feet back at 21mmnd f21 and thought the detail was quite acceptable for the very quick shot it was.
(http://i629.photobucket.com/albums/uu17/RSTA/_DSC0437.jpg) (http://s629.photobucket.com/user/RSTA/media/_DSC0437.jpg.html)
Quote from: Izzy on July 15, 2015, 11:09:41 AM
Focus stacking doesn't really help much because there is so much image degradation that increased DOF is usually offset by overall lack of sharpness. I found that a single shot at optimum aperture - F8/F11 - produced a better result than stacking.
If it's done with equally well exposed RAWs, layered up with the correct software, you shouldn't see any image degradation. I'm thinking maybe your single shot could've been at the hyperfocal distance...
Just set my Fuji S5700 up to make this monstrosity.
[smg id=27156]
The shutter wouldn't allow me below 4 seconds and the smallest aperture was f/13.6 although this one was at f/6.8 because of the lack of shutter ability. Using a focus-recompose technique helped to keep the front in focus but as you can see, the focus is dropping off by the tender. This greater depth of field marginally beats the crop sensor DSLR but that's where the victory ends.
This was shot at 100 ISO and I can already see signs of chroma noise.
The colour rendered is poor and the lack of control over white balance only hinders proper colour management.
The lens just isn't very sharp.
I think I'll stick to my 7D, L series lenses and the ability to shoot models in RAW over this Fisher Price toy camera for the sake of a little softness further back when focusing at the minimum focus distance.
One solution is to use a tilt/shift lens, however unless you were photographing
models and small objects professionally the cost would be prohibitive for the
odd shot of a loco on the forum, though they can be hired if you wanted to
record a large number of images over a few days. (about £50 for 3 days).
Thanks to this thread I now know what a bridge camera is and that I have owned one (Canon SX1) for the last 6 years. It seems to me that my bridge can do most things that a DSLR can although setting aperture, speed, and focus point is not quite so direct and may involve some subterfuge.
However, my thing is more towards cinema rather than stills and my particular Canon does excellent HD movies. Another great feature of the SX1 is the viewfinder that swivels and tilts through 270 degrees. This is great for getting track level movies or snaps. I don't think most DSLRs have such a feature.
Webbo
The Arax range includes tilt and shift for most DSLRs and Sony NEX, at better prices -- scroll down, f2.835mm and f2.8 80mm or f2 50mm for NEX and Micro 4/3
http://araxfoto.com/lenses/ (http://araxfoto.com/lenses/)
Gosh ! $$ and we must be talking microns of movement / tilt ?
Wasnt so bad with bellows and a quarto plate :) !
Cheaper and quicker to do it in CombinZ ?? and prob 3 or 4 clicks would do without all those 60sec exposure fiddlins.
Bit of daylight with a fill-in/reduced power/ &or/bounced flash works wonders
Any 'prize' model pics should be embeded in post for convinience of the reader but up with compression we should not put (for the best ones) so a link to your treasure in Dropbox or similar cloud can/should be included ? no ? Wherein you can choose suitable size and little compression to suit. ( over 50Mb may need a elfinsafety warning lol! )
Thanks Mike
However, I don't think that what I mean by tilt and swivel is the same as what you mean. I can set my camera down on a surface, tilt the viewfinder screen up and focus etc. without having to grind my chin into the scenery. Does this make sense?
Webbo
Webbo that has been common on quite a few DSLRs for some time. I have the option of a normal viewfinder or an electronic viewfinder using the swivel display screen.
Cheers Mike
Yup, understand that, Mike
But then what is the difference between what my bridge camera provides as an electronic version of what comes through the lens on its viewfinder and what a DSLR with an electronic viewfinder dishes up? Not a trick question, as I would honestly like to know.
Webbo
Quote from: Webbo on July 16, 2015, 11:41:27 AM
Yup, understand that, Mike
But then what is the difference between what my bridge camera provides as an electronic version of what comes through the lens on its viewfinder and what a DSLR with an electronic viewfinder dishes up? Not a trick question, as I would honestly like to know.
Webbo
Do you mean an optical viewfinder (OVF) on a DSLR vs an electronic viewfinder (EVF)?
I dislike EVFs, they aren't instant like an OVF and have lag; also, when the scene is too bright, or too dark they struggle to show things or by the time they've shown it, the moment has passed. I like that the OVF goes dark when a photo is taken, it's a useful failsafe in letting you know the shutter speed has dropped too low. Plus, it's just one more thing which could go wrong!
Quote from: Agrippa on July 16, 2015, 01:10:42 AM
One solution is to use a tilt/shift lens, however unless you were photographing
models and small objects professionally the cost would be prohibitive for the
odd shot of a loco on the forum, though they can be hired if you wanted to
record a large number of images over a few days. (about £50 for 3 days).
I completely forgot about Tilt-shift lenses - in all my time as a professional photographer though, I've never needed to use one and never lusted after one. I reckon they'd be quite formidable combined with an extension tube. They most certainly aren't to be confused with a tilting display though!
Just had a quick play with a few settings and took this picture on a white back ground using the cameras 'intelligent auto' mode.
(http://i1347.photobucket.com/albums/p713/MrSprue/NGF%20Miscellaneous/P1000056_zps4wyiz40s.jpg)
Quote from: d-a-n on July 16, 2015, 06:38:06 PM
ompletely forgot about Tilt-shift lenses - in all my time as a professional photographer though, I've never needed to use one and never lusted after one. I reckon they'd be quite formidable combined with an extension tube. They most certainly aren't to be confused with a tilting display though!
Absolutely not, I've got a Vivitar thing from Argos , about £18 has a tilting screen
which I didn't discover until I tried to change the battery and pulled the wrong tab.
Tilt shifts good for architectural shots, better to capture the image the way you want
it than trying to do digital manipulation. Must hit the ground with my Nikon F2
and a roll of Tri-X !
Quote from: Agrippa on July 16, 2015, 11:28:05 PM
and a roll of Tri-X !
So I thought to type "You'll be lucky",
but before I did I googled and Lo! Amazon have it for £6/36,
well I nevver, push me over wivafevver :)
now where did I put my
d SLRs,
hmmmm,
£5 at Calumet ! PS not a lot of people know this but years ago
Boots Chemists sold their own B&W 125 asa film which was rumoured
to be FP4 at half the price.
Quote from: Agrippa on July 16, 2015, 11:55:53 PM
not a lot of people know this but years ago
Boots Chemists sold their own B&W 125 asa film which was rumoured
to be FP4 at half the price.
You're right ! not a lot of peeps knew that and worse (from Boots point of view) not many of them believed it, so it didnt sell well, like a lot of their other stuff that they made out believe that was the beesknees, damn good stuf, clones, but they didnt leak enough to make peeps believe it :(
So shhhh dont tell anyone but here is a pic of my cloneSLR - Edixa Prismat TTL c1969 ex Boots Plymouth branch just before I took it off to Brazil and the rest of the world,, till 1995 when its shutter blind gave up the ghost ! :(
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81786082/NG/50703Edixa.jpg)
Taken from out of my special memorabilia toy cupboard just a few mo. ago 'specially for you and photo by a vintage (7y old !) Panasonic FZ18 ;D
(^bridge, cant be ar*%$eD to carry bagfulls of lenses about no more :( )
EDIT :
Oh, ps, if you wonder why I still have it ? I intended to convert it into a pinhole camera , , ,
but roundtuits , , , :(
Quote from: d-a-n on July 16, 2015, 06:38:06 PM
Do you mean an optical viewfinder (OVF) on a DSLR vs an electronic viewfinder (EVF)?
I dislike EVFs, they aren't instant like an OVF and have lag; also, when the scene is too bright, or too dark they struggle to show things or by the time they've shown it, the moment has passed. I like that the OVF goes dark when a photo is taken, it's a useful failsafe in letting you know the shutter speed has dropped too low. Plus, it's just one more thing which could go wrong!
I completely forgot about Tilt-shift lenses - in all my time as a professional photographer though, I've never needed to use one and never lusted after one. I reckon they'd be quite formidable combined with an extension tube. They most certainly aren't to be confused with a tilting display though!
I totally agree that OVFs are superior particularly if one is using manual focus. My only experience with SLRs was with my old Olympus OM-1 and OM-2 from decades ago. You could to check on the depth of field directly by pressing a button on the lens side which would stop down the lens to what it would be when the shutter was activated. The OM-1 was totally manual and I'd like to have one still if it were digital imaging instead of film.
Eye level photography is easy along the sides of a layout, but not easy to compose and focus away from the edge where getting your eyeball right behind the camera is just about impossible. This is where the tilting/swivelling electronic viewfinders come in handy.
Webbo
Quote from: Agrippa on July 16, 2015, 11:28:05 PM
Tilt shifts good for architectural shots, better to capture the image the way you want
it than trying to do digital manipulation. Must hit the ground with my Nikon F2
and a roll of Tri-X !
I know of another wedding photographer who occasionally breaks out the tilt shift at weddings for this purpose although I could never get on with the time it takes to set a shot up the way I work though! You should break out the F2 - they are a lovely machine and film isn't that expensive. It's summertime and the light is right!!
Quote from: Agrippa on July 16, 2015, 11:55:53 PM
£5 at Calumet ! PS not a lot of people know this but years ago
Boots Chemists sold their own B&W 125 asa film which was rumoured
to be FP4 at half the price.
If it were the case, it was probably edge cut film, much like the film sold under the Lomography film brand today.
Quote from: MalcolmAL on July 17, 2015, 12:42:43 AM
Quote from: Agrippa on July 16, 2015, 11:55:53 PM
not a lot of people know this but years ago
Boots Chemists sold their own B&W 125 asa film which was rumoured
to be FP4 at half the price.
here is a pic of my cloneSLR - Edixa Prismat TTL c1969 ex Boots Plymouth branch just before I took it off to Brazil and the rest of the world,, till 1995 when its shutter blind gave up the ghost ! :(
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81786082/NG/50703Edixa.jpg)
Taken from out of my special memorabilia toy cupboard just a few mo. ago 'specially for you and photo by a vintage (7y old !) Panasonic FZ18 ;D
(^bridge, cant be ar*%$eD to carry bagfulls of lenses about no more :( )
Thanks for sharing this beauty!
Quote from: Webbo on July 17, 2015, 01:38:00 AM
I totally agree that OVFs are superior particularly if one is using manual focus. My only experience with SLRs was with my old Olympus OM-1 and OM-2 from decades ago. You could to check on the depth of field directly by pressing a button on the lens side which would stop down the lens to what it would be when the shutter was activated. The OM-1 was totally manual and I'd like to have one still if it were digital imaging instead of film.
OMs are great machines, I like the build, lightness and the quirk of having both shutter speed and aperture control on the lens barrel :)
As you can tell, I love film and shoot all my serious personal stuff on it. I currently circulate between three cameras in particular:
Olympus Trip 35
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/21/thumb_27197.jpg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=27197)
Canon F-1 and an EOS 1-N - the 1-N has it's own non-work prime lens set but I can drag it out for weddings where I can then use it with the more substantial L-series lenses.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/21/thumb_27195.jpg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=27195)
My girlfriend is ace as she lets me have part of the fridge just for film!
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/21/thumb_27196.jpg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=27196)
If you pick your battles, and aren't bothered about convenience, film beats digital every time.
http://danbarlowphotography.co.uk/index.php/why-i-still-shoot-film/ (http://danbarlowphotography.co.uk/index.php/why-i-still-shoot-film/)
Quote from: d-a-n on July 15, 2015, 10:59:28 PM
Just set my Fuji S5700 up to make this monstrosity.
[smg id=27156]
The shutter wouldn't allow me below 4 seconds and the smallest aperture was f/13.6 although this one was at f/6.8 because of the lack of shutter ability. Using a focus-recompose technique helped to keep the front in focus but as you can see, the focus is dropping off by the tender. This greater depth of field marginally beats the crop sensor DSLR but that's where the victory ends.
This was shot at 100 ISO and I can already see signs of chroma noise.
The colour rendered is poor and the lack of control over white balance only hinders proper colour management.
The lens just isn't very sharp.
I think I'll stick to my 7D, L series lenses and the ability to shoot models in RAW over this Fisher Price toy camera for the sake of a little softness further back when focusing at the minimum focus distance.
Nowt wrong with that pic on my screen at all :thumbsup:
Some canny gear in these posts ! Must get some film !
BTW in a charity shop a few weeks ago i got a Mamiya DSX 500 ,
a bit like a Pentax Spotmatic, looks like it was hardly used,
50mm lens pristine, a bargain at £12.
Quote from: d-a-n on July 17, 2015, 06:54:29 PM
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/21/thumb_27196.jpg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=27196)
If you pick your battles, and aren't bothered about convenience, film beats digital every time.
http://danbarlowphotography.co.uk/index.php/why-i-still-shoot-film/ (http://danbarlowphotography.co.uk/index.php/why-i-still-shoot-film/)
What a beautiful sight!
Some of my absolute favourites in there!
HP5, FP4! In the 50 and more years of my photographic endeavours I cannot possibly bring to mind the thousands of feet of FP4 that have been through my hands!
Cheers Peter.
Quote from: petercharlesfagg on July 18, 2015, 10:19:03 AM
Quote from: d-a-n on July 17, 2015, 06:54:29 PM
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/21/thumb_27196.jpg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=27196)
If you pick your battles, and aren't bothered about convenience, film beats digital every time.
http://danbarlowphotography.co.uk/index.php/why-i-still-shoot-film/ (http://danbarlowphotography.co.uk/index.php/why-i-still-shoot-film/)
What a beautiful sight!
Some of my absolute favourites in there!
HP5, FP4! In the 50 and more years of my photographic endeavours I cannot possibly bring to mind the thousands of feet of FP4 that have been through my hands!
Cheers Peter.
You know what I was going to give my old EOS 100 away but after seeing those films I'm tempted to buy a film and give it another go!
Just one thing though, do shops still sell 35mm? :hmmm:
Some do, depends where you live, if you're after anything
other than colour print film you might have to get it by post.
Good luck trying to find any hypo locally,
probably set off a security alert asking for amidol :(
Ah, those were the days :)
mind u acetic acid for your stop bath is still common in your local fish&chiper !
Nova darkroom products aka The Imaging Warehuse sell all the usual dev, stop bath,
fixer etc plus Kodak , ilford films all the old favourites.
PS to previous post, Calumet have about 5-6 stores across the country with the
usual films and developers.
A note on their website says orders of £50 and over shipped FOC.
Quote from: Agrippa on July 19, 2015, 12:30:47 AM
PS to previous post, Calumet have about 5-6 stores across the country
Well well, there is one in Bristol ! which these days almost counts as "local" !!
I wonder if they have amidol ? that other lot dont :(
In the words of the prophet - "get thee behind me Satan, stop all this temptation " at this rate you'll have me spending more time in the dark room than on the layout !!
EDIT " amidol? Did you mean: widow? Your search for "amidol" returned 0 results."
Wot !
Nothing beats devving a film in the kitchen and getting
some splashes of fixer onto your food..... :food:
Quote from: Agrippa on July 19, 2015, 01:12:37 AM
devving a film in the kitchen
I usually used a spiral tank for mine :) :)
Universal ? Johnsons ??
As for splashes, that usually arose from droping the tongs in the dish when fiddlin with the papers ;)
Calumet : ha ! in Bristol but a mere hyperfocal stone throw from Maplin, ample parking as well they say, that is unusual for Brizzle.
Nightnite, a pumpkin has just arrived > > >
Quote from: Mr Sprue on July 18, 2015, 08:58:46 PM
You know what I was going to give my old EOS 100 away but after seeing those films I'm tempted to buy a film and give it another go!
Just one thing though, do shops still sell 35mm? :hmmm:
You should! Supermarkets and simple photo places like Max Spielman will sell basic colour print film like Kodak Colourplus and Fujifilm Superia which will be overpriced at £4-5 a roll (superia 200 should be about £2.50 a roll). Jessops and high street independent camera shops may also carry a bit more of a selection and whereas Jessops might be overpriced, the local could be surprisingly reasonable. The big boy places for film like Calumet will price competitively and will be able to get stuff in with 24 hours notice, however, my local Calumet (Manchester) doesn't keep a full stock in. Online, you have Amazon, WEX and 7 day shop and they offer the best value but you may want to shop locally - where are you in the South East?
For both my professional and personal film developing, I use ds colour labs as I know their chemicals are kept fresh, their lab is clean as a whistle and the chap who I always speak with is very knowledgeable http://www.dscolourlabs.co.uk/film_neg_services.cfm (http://www.dscolourlabs.co.uk/film_neg_services.cfm) - post them your negs and for £7.50, they'll print and scan them to disc and return it to you first class.
I really think you guys are nuts over your hankering for film. While it may be that film can produce some effects that digital can't just as vinyl sound has some advantages over digital, but do you really want to return to the bad old days of expensive film and processing? Digital imaging has mostly superceded film for very compelling reasons.
Webbo
It's a tradition, digital gives quick results and easy photoshopping etc , but
film can give very high quality if used with skill. Film isn't dearer than digital,
a common misconception. With digital you need a computer, software,
memory cards,batteries, and if you make prints the cost of printer, paper
and ink.
For commercial and news photography digital beats film easy , but for hobbyists
it's doing what you like, and I use both.
An interesting comment, which to a certain extent I agree with. However, as with everything these days, it's the spontaneity.... you can just fire off a heap of frames and select the best one. Very useful for model railway photography.
Quote from: Webbo on July 19, 2015, 11:10:53 AM
I really think you guys are nuts over your hankering for film. While it may be that film can produce some effects that digital can't just as vinyl sound has some advantages over digital, but do you really want to return to the bad old days of expensive film and processing? Digital imaging has mostly superceded film for very compelling reasons.
Webbo
Why save all those dirty old expensive steam trains when we can have quiet, clean economical electric trains?
I get where you're coming from; digital has meant you can take a whole bunch of pictures, experiment more and improve as a photographer. I shoot digital for work because the inflexibility and insecurity of film would be unmanageable and quickly put me out of business, but there are many reasons beyond cost why you'd shoot film. For me it's about a break from working with digital photographs day in day out, it's the not spending a further 5 hours in front of a screen working on my photos instead of spending time with my family and friends, it's the opportunity to use wonderful old cameras that are solidly built with precision, it's the slowing down to meter and focus, it's the solace of the dark room, it's the contemplation of what you're going to use those 12/24/36 precious frames for, it's the moment of taking the photo and being sure you've set everything correctly, it's the satisfaction of getting an amazing print back, it's the conversations started with other enthusiasts which I wouldn't have if I were holding my Canon 5D3, it's the nostalgia and experience, it's the colour, dynamic range and sheer resolution film can have over even a full frame sensor.
Hopefully you'll see it's not totally irrational.
Not at all. I love the philosophy! :thumbsup:
I dont think anyone would want to "return" to them days, no, but I can see that it would sit alongside our modern hobbies for various reasons.
Also for those who have not done it it would be something new, interesting, to learn/play with ?
Film was only expensive if you shot off dozens to get one good one ! Only the news hounds did that. Processing was only expensive if you got someone else to do it for you. My Grandad was doing his own about 1900 +/-, Dad was doing his own colour '30s, so was I 50s till not long ago, and daughter similar including "Photography in the Arts" at Uni !
None of us made a penny at it, all had/have other careers.
Quote from: Agrippa on July 19, 2015, 11:27:42 AM
It's a tradition, digital gives quick results and easy photoshopping etc , but
film can give very high quality if used with skill. Film isn't dearer than digital,
a common misconception. With digital you need a computer, software,
memory cards,batteries, and if you make prints the cost of printer, paper
and ink.
So true.
You can just buy a digital compact or bridge and take some mediocre images but to really compare film to digital, you need to look at a high end enthusiast digital set up. This might be a Canon 7D2 with 17-55 lens and a 70-200 f/4 which would put you at about £2100 with cards and then a further expenditure of £500+ on a computer, £300+ on a decent monitor to edit with and £120 a year for adobe creative cloud editing software (well, you've spent all that cash on the camera, why skimp on what you need to get the very best from your images!) total expenditure is about £3260. After three years, the camera body is worth £400 and the lenses £750 so they've depreciated by around £950. The computer and monitor is now worth around £600 and due for an upgrade because the cloud based editing software has been updated and requires more RAM and processing power. The cloud based edit software was rented. You lost £360 there. So the total cost of three years of high-end enthusaist digital is about £1500. Without printing anything.
My 1970s Canon F-1 set up would cost about £600 as it's collectible and it will hold it's value but you could buy a similar Minolta set up for about £200. Optically, the FD lenses are not far behind the EOS lenses I use for work (I've used them on a 5D3 for comparison.) Last year, I spent £250 on film, developing and printing about 20 rolls of film. Over 3 years, that'd be a total expenditure of £1350. And the camera is still worth £600 so only a real cost of £750.
Quote from: MalcolmAL on July 19, 2015, 11:42:10 AM
I dont think anyone would want to "return" to them days, no, but I can see that it would sit alongside our modern hobbies for various reasons.
Also for those who have not done it it would be something new, interesting, to learn/play with ?
Film was only expensive if you shot off dozens to get one good one ! Only the news hounds did that. Processing was only expensive if you got someone else to do it for you. My Grandad was doing his own about 1900 +/-, Dad was doing his own colour '30s, so was I 50s till not long ago, and daughter similar including "Photography in the Arts" at Uni !
None of us made a penny at it, all had/have other careers.
The learning curve is a great point, you'll learn so much more about how to get a great photo if you shoot manual digital, think about what you're doing and develop the negatives (or even just inspect them) to see why it did/didn't work. A compact camera on idiot mode will mean you it keeps making the same mistakes for you, even if you shoot off a zillion frames hoping to choose the best one. With film, you draw on your experience to get it right in the first or second try without generating a digital rubbish heap which you need to spend ages trawling through.
In my experience, the 'bad old days of film' were experienced by people who didn't have much success with film.
PS.
Pinhole cameras can be played with in all sorts of boxes,
a pinhole on a DSLR is tame by comparison.
I once turned my whole house into a pinhole camera (with a ('focal') length of 30ft) and photographed sunspots with it :)
Try Solargraphs - Sun in a can
if you can do that with a digital you are a better man than I GungaDin :) Analemmas yes, solargraphs no.
eg. random off the interwebby :
http://www.chrismacan.com/gallery/solargraphy/solargraphy.htm (http://www.chrismacan.com/gallery/solargraphy/solargraphy.htm)
(http://www.chrismacan.com/gallery/solargraphy/solargraphy3.jpg)
http://xyzon.nl/solargraphy/ (http://xyzon.nl/solargraphy/)
(http://xyzon.nl/solargraphy/solargraph_20130621_klein_Giganotosaurus_Jip_Lambermont.jpg)
http://originalhamsters.com/photography/pinhole.php (http://originalhamsters.com/photography/pinhole.php)
(http://originalhamsters.com/images/photography/solargraphy.jpg)
Weird.....! I'm hoping to pinhole in the next few days...
Quote from: Agrippa on July 19, 2015, 12:37:06 PM
Weird.....! I'm hoping to pinhole in the next few days...
:) excellent,
as long as you dont do an 'Alice' and disappear down it :-)
On a dslr or in a coke-can ?
One thing that has not been mentioned, reciprocity failure, any other amateur astronomers here ?
I wouldnt want to go back to hypering film with hydrogen or nitrogen, nor freezing etc&etc to get long exposures, with all the consequent dificulties of an accurate drive mechanism.
Digital is brill for that, shoot off dozens or hundreds of relative short exposures then stack in software, amazing ! We can now do with our humble little telescopes what Mount Palomar had difficulty with.
By the way folks, I dont think we should get too elitist about all this, if it is a wee camera phone or a refurb plate with ginormous bellows, we all take our pleasures in our own fashion, n'est-ce pas ?
Quote from: d-a-n on July 19, 2015, 10:58:11 AM
Quote from: Mr Sprue on July 18, 2015, 08:58:46 PM
You know what I was going to give my old EOS 100 away but after seeing those films I'm tempted to buy a film and give it another go!
Just one thing though, do shops still sell 35mm? :hmmm:
You should! Supermarkets and simple photo places like Max Spielman will sell basic colour print film like Kodak Colourplus and Fujifilm Superia which will be overpriced at £4-5 a roll (superia 200 should be about £2.50 a roll). Jessops and high street independent camera shops may also carry a bit more of a selection and whereas Jessops might be overpriced, the local could be surprisingly reasonable. The big boy places for film like Calumet will price competitively and will be able to get stuff in with 24 hours notice, however, my local Calumet (Manchester) doesn't keep a full stock in. Online, you have Amazon, WEX and 7 day shop and they offer the best value but you may want to shop locally - where are you in the South East?
For both my professional and personal film developing, I use ds colour labs as I know their chemicals are kept fresh, their lab is clean as a whistle and the chap who I always speak with is very knowledgeable http://www.dscolourlabs.co.uk/film_neg_services.cfm (http://www.dscolourlabs.co.uk/film_neg_services.cfm) - post them your negs and for £7.50, they'll print and scan them to disc and return it to you first class.
Hi d-a-n many thanks for your advise, believe me I am really tempted now to rekindle the old 35mm, I don't know why but there is something unique in viewing photos through a magnifying glass to view the captured scene that almost appears to be in 3D!
Methinks I've landed in a nest of film aficionados on a photography forum.
Getting back to photographing model railways and the first post on this thread, it seems to me that all images posted on the NGF are in digital format whether they are taken by digital cameras (the vast majority I expect) or the few that are digital renditions of photographic prints or slides.
Webbo
Yep, I'm sure that the vast majority of pix posted on the forum are digital or
non digital images on historic websites converted to digital like pix of
of class xxxx at Clapham Junction in 1956 or whatever, but there are
still a few who like using film for personal use,not necessarily for
railway photography.
Quote from: Agrippa on July 20, 2015, 01:37:37 AM
Yep, I'm sure that the vast majority of pix posted on the forum are digital or
non digital images on historic websites converted to digital like pix of
of class xxxx at Clapham Junction in 1956 or whatever, but there are
still a few who like using film for personal use,not necessarily for
railway photography.
That's cool. I've been a film photographer too for many more years than I've been taking digital photos so I do appreciate why film photography continues. And yes, film does provide a somewhat different aspect than digital. One of the most magnificent photographers to me is a guy named Edward Sheriff Curtis who photographed indigenes in North America more than 100 years ago. I wonder though if such photos could be replicated in digital. I suspect the answer is yes, but I'm not certain.
Webbo