Re: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-12 Thread Boris Liberman
Hi! Fernando, you did really well... I have few points to make, so that you might want to consider them for your next shoot. 1. I concur with what Godfrey said about potential to b/w rendering... Also, if rendered b/w, the picture does not necessarily require to be noise-reduced... You can

Re: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-12 Thread Kostas Kavoussanakis
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Boris Liberman wrote: c. Use 2 sec mirror pre-fire feature. Handheld? Interesting; how does this work? Do people-subjects react to the delay? Kostas

Re: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-12 Thread Fernando Terrazzino
Hi Boris, I don't have the originals at work, I'll post a link to some unpostprocessed images once I upload them at home. Thanks for the ideas. PS: MikeRobert and the others were ppl are posing, were taken with the popup flash (with and awfull result as you can see... next time I'll bring the

Re: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-12 Thread Boris Liberman
Hi! c. Use 2 sec mirror pre-fire feature. Handheld? Interesting; how does this work? Do people-subjects react to the delay? Kostas, if people are posing, they don't necessarily know when the shot was actually taken. I doubt they will notice the 2 sec delay once you pronounce that the

Re: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-11 Thread Paul Stenquist
I'd say you did a rather good job on the technical side of things considering the conditions. You might pull up the midrange brightness on some of them. You can do that in PhotoShop curves with the rgb curve. Just push the middle up. You might also improve some of them slightly with an

Re: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-11 Thread Fernando Terrazzino
I guess that's why most of the low light photography I see is shot with BW (or BW in mind); makes sense, you can use blown highlights and darks, and the grainiy look actually looks good in BW. I'll give it try next time. thnks On 4/11/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not a

Re: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-11 Thread Fernando Terrazzino
Paul, reading your post I realized that if I had composed that way (I mean the right way) it would've been much better also for the post-process, right? I mean that way I could've avoid some backlight which was problematic to deal with during the shots and in the postprocessing. Didn't know about

RE: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-11 Thread Tim Øsleby
First: I think you did pretty well. The only thing striking me is that you could have tried using 1/30 at some shots. You might have done that, I only found data for the first shot. Perhaps even tried 1/15, adding some dynamic ;-) You don't _have_ to wear bunny ears to make blurred pictures you

Re: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-11 Thread Fernando Terrazzino
Thanks Tim, I thought I was pushing my luck with 1/45... Now that you mention it would be a good idea to get a larger memory card and experiment a little more next time. I'll give it a try, if I can gain an extra stop with that and avoid ISO1600 that would justify the cost... I thought about the

Re: Question for the low light shooters

2006-04-10 Thread Godfrey DiGiorgi
Not a disparagement of your effort, Fernando, but I'm not a fan of the Neat Image 'noise smoothed' look. It makes everything look somewhat plasticky and artificial to me. How to improve on the look ... well, I'm not sure. It depends upon what you're after. I tend to work such low-light