On Feb 15, 2010, at 8:47 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
Larry,
As Paul mentioned, - I think this light is a problem no matter what.
AS you know, I've been shooting in similar settings (some tagueros
are even more sensitive to flash).
Yup. I pretty much don't use flash unless it's bright enough that I
could get a decent shot without it.
I am still experimenting myself, - but for most part, I find that
it's just impossible to get reasonable (and consistent) photos with
this
low light. The K-x vs K-7 difference wouldn't (doesn't) help either.
I was hoping it would help, I didn't even pretend that it would solve
the problem. On the ragged edge it seems that every small improvement
helps, going from 1/6 to 1/10 to 1/15 each makes a big difference in
the keeper ratio.
I haven't been keeping track, do you also shoot with a K-x?
With dances, - there are two fundamental limitations: the aperture
cannot be too large (as the DOF is too shallow), otherwise most
of the shots are not sharp, unless you hit the "static" moment;
and the exposure cannot be too long, - for the same reason.
For blues, I find that about 1/10 is the shutter speed that starts
making a lot of difference in my keeper ratio. I also found that a
monopod can really help, though my monopod wasn't really an option at
the crowded party.
DoF is one of the reasons that I used my 20/1.8, it gives me about the
same DoF as 2.8 with my 31. The physical aperture is the same anyways.
If I will get my hands on a FF Nikon for the Austin Spring Tango
Festival, I'll see how that one would do.
Short of that, I've been thinking if I can use some sort of
"continuous"
light, like videographers use, that I can mount on my camera, - so
it is not too bright and it is not a flash (hence, - no "spooky"
effect).
This would be along the same lines as Paul was suggesting, - to
sharpen
things up just a bit.
If I find something, - I'll share it. Any thoughts and suggestions
are welcome.
I think that the best thing would be to discuss with the organizers
the possibility of a photo corner that is a bit better lit, doesn't
have mirrors and such. I'm not talking very brightly lit, but enough
to shoot without a flash. That way folks that want pictures know
where to dance, and folks who don't want pictures know where to avoid.
Igor
Larry Colen wrote:
I was asked to take photos at a party last night. I shot everything
with the K20D at 3200 using my Sigma 20/1.8 wide open at 1/20. The
party was dimly lit with a few red bulbs, Scott calls his parties
"Blues in Red". This was a birthday party for one of the local blues
dancers who recently moved up to Seattle.
In the blues and swing dance communities, when someone has a
birthday,
they get a birthday jam, where the dancer(s) being jammed will be in
the middle of the circle and the other dancers will take turns
stealing them, and dancing until someone else steals them.
Most of the focusing was done by manually focusing on something at
about the right distance and relying on depth of field and luck,
mostly luck.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157623436322776/
While I'm getting better at understanding that a good photograph
doesn't always have to be sharp, it's usually best if the subject is
recognizable. It would sure be nice to have a bit more shutter speed,
a bit more depth of field, or a bit less noise.
Even so, it was a fun night of dancing, and I think a couple of these
shots are keepers. No special processing was done on most of them
apart from cropping and some slight exposure tweaking.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above
and follow the directions.
--
Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
