Random Thoughts... [Photographic Edition]

[Ramseus]

1. If you accidentally set the exposure to 2 minutes and didn't want to your only options are to wait and let it drain battery power or take the battery out and risk fuxoring your memory card

2. similarly, with a remote if you decide partway through that no, you don't want to do that, you can stop the exposure

3. remotes are better for looooooong exposures than having to touch the camera anyways

4. majority of people don't want or need more than 30 seconds, under moonlight 30 seconds is plenty

5. expensive remotes are worth it for the features like intervalometers and stuff

 

[Dr_Q]

I think it's more to do with sensor performance with exposures much longer than 30 seconds. The end results can be pretty noisy no matter what the ISO. As far as I'm aware the noise is caused by the sensor heating up through the duration of the exposure.

 

[NecroJoe]

I think it's more to do with sensor performance with exposures much longer than 30 seconds. The end results can be pretty noisy no matter what the ISO. As far as I'm aware the noise is caused by the sensor heating up through the duration of the exposure.

Interesting...

My friend used to get some great lightning storm shots with 45 minute to 1.5 hour shots, where the frame would be filled with 10-15 lightning strikes with his old film SLRs. He shoots exclusively digital now...except for extended exposure shots (and the off chance he gets to shoot his 4x5.)

 

[Ramseus]

I think it's more to do with sensor performance with exposures much longer than 30 seconds. The end results can be pretty noisy no matter what the ISO. As far as I'm aware the noise is caused by the sensor heating up through the duration of the exposure.

Just shoot RAW. The funny thing about that is that my 300D suuucks at long exposures, there'll be a bagillion hot pixels, but as soon as I pop it into camera raw all (98%) the hot pixels disappear and the picture is nice looking. The longest I've done is 4 minutes, in jpg it would have been terrible but I shot it raw and it came out fine. Banding is a non-issue unless you overprocess the image. And this is a five-six year old camera, new cameras would perform much better.

Sensor heat is also why astrophotographers always take dark frames and the hardcore ones make their own peltier coolers.

 

[nomix]

I think it's more to do with sensor performance with exposures much longer than 30 seconds. The end results can be pretty noisy no matter what the ISO. As far as I'm aware the noise is caused by the sensor heating up through the duration of the exposure.

I use a relatively noisy brand, Olympus. I expose 60 seconds without a touch of noise in the image, shooting RAW.

 

[Top Geek]

Shoot in the dead of winter at -30C. No sensor heat noise problems here :lol:

https://pic.armedcats.net/e/ep/epp_b/2009/09/16/snowy_park_path_at_night.jpg

Top left crop:
https://pic.armedcats.net/e/ep/epp_b/2009/09/16/crop1.jpg

Bottom left crop:
https://pic.armedcats.net/e/ep/epp_b/2009/09/16/crop2.jpg

Bottom right crop:
https://pic.armedcats.net/e/ep/epp_b/2009/09/16/crop3.jpg


And that's after a considerable amount of processing on a JPEG.

 

[phuckingduck]

1. If you accidentally set the exposure to 2 minutes and didn't want to your only options are to wait and let it drain battery power or take the battery out and risk fuxoring your memory card

2. similarly, with a remote if you decide partway through that no, you don't want to do that, you can stop the exposure

3. remotes are better for looooooong exposures than having to touch the camera anyways

4. majority of people don't want or need more than 30 seconds, under moonlight 30 seconds is plenty

5. expensive remotes are worth it for the features like intervalometers and stuff

1) Just do what you do already, turn off the power. Works on my camera when you have a 30sec exposure and want to stop it.
2) See 1).
3) Yeah. I'm not saying we abandon the remote to trigger the shutter, I'm just saying I don't want to stand right near my camera every time I'm doing an 8minute exposure astutely studying my watch. Especially when it's cold, or raining. Or cold and raining.
4) 30seconds is not enough. I've had plenty of shots under full moons where it's 4+ minutes. Maybe if you shoot wide open on a f2.8 lens, but if you shoot stopped down at 100 then it's going to be more than 30seconds.
5) Again, not trying to get rid of intervalometers. Although, those would be easy enough to include too. See 3).

 

[Ramseus]

1. durr. i stupid
4. You're not most people though, Mr. goes out before the sun's up to shoot mountains

Uhh... yeah, my S3 has an intervalometer. Is that just too good for a dslr? And it also lets me set a custom time for the self timer instead of just 2 or 10 seconds. Is that too good for a dslr too? And speaking of custom times, that would probably be the bestest solution to loooooong exposures since nobody wants to put more than XX seconds as an option for whatever reason - just implement it as a clunky pain in the ass feature that you have to crawl through a bunch of menus to use and eventually if enough people say they like it and complain about how difficult they made it to use we'll get more than 30 seconds as an option.

 

[Top Geek]

You're not most people though, Mr. goes out before the sun's up to shoot mountains

So? What's three lines copied and pasted from already existing firmware code?

 

[Ramseus]

note: that wasn't actually my opinion, I was trying to think from the perspective of a stuffy japanese business man. "Most people only need 30 seconds, shut up you fat american" basically.

 

[nomix]

It's a point that a when you've got the shutter speed set in the camera, you can still use the remote.

 

[Dr_Q]

Weird, I could have sworn the major problem I encountered with my long exposure shots was noise. When I looked back at them it turns out that it wasn't noise at all but light leak. In my defence I did do this 9 months ago .

If you look at the top and bottom right on this photo you can kind of see what I mean:

https://pic.armedcats.net/d/dr/dr_q/2009/09/16/_DSC0008.jpg

 

[Top Geek]

Anyone ever notice this? :lol:

? 1973-2009 Ken Rockwell. Optimized for Mosaic 1.0 and 640x480 monitor.

Mosiac 1.0? 640x480? lolwut?

Rockwell Lecture in the Mountains

I and others will be teaching at the Sierra Club's annual Laguna Mountain Lodge Weekend next weekend, 26-27 September.

The good news is that we're all volunteers, so it only costs between $59 and $99 for the whole weekend, including a place to pitch a tent or sleeping bag for the night.

Space is limited, and I hope to see you there!

If you need details, don't ask me ? ask Corrine at (619) 322-6818.

RUN FOR THE HILLS, PEOPLE!! Actually... run away from the hills :lol:

Time-lapse photography is where a still camera is used to make a bunch of photos over a period of time, and later they are collected into a completed video or film clip.

The images play much faster as a video or movie, at which point the video greatly speeds up natural and other events which otherwise happen too slowly to be visible.

For instance, with time-laps you can make a video of a flower opening or of a home getting built, either of which plays over just a few seconds.

Most recent Nikon and some other cameras even include free intervalometer functions in their menus. With this, the camera can be set to click a photo automatically every few seconds as you wish.

This is swell, but you can't simply tell the camera for how long you want an eventual clip to run, and what period of real time you want to cover. You need instead to whip out a calculator and do some potentially confusing calculations the hard way, which also expect you to be fluent in hour-minute-second and frame rate calculations.

"Confusing" calculations? For who? A sixth-grader?

You can have any two of these numbers and easily calculate the third.

Want a 1-minute clip of some construction work over 10 hours? Just figure out what frame rate you need for the event -- say 1 frame a minute -- which gives you 600 frames. 60 (seconds) / 600 frames is a frame every 0.1 second, or 10 fps.

I didn't even need a calculator for that and it's 12:30 in the morning.

I just learned about a Timelapse Calculator app for the iPhone and iPod touch. With this in your pocket, you can tell it the length of the event, the frame rate of your film or video, and how long you want the eventual clip to run.

Given any two of Event Duration, Frame Interval and final Clip Playback Duration, it will calculate the remaining parameter.

With this app, it makes it a lot easier to program intervalometer!

Here's more info about it, or spend the three bucks and try it yourself.

Just wait... next he'll tell us that the iPhone can heal someone who had their rib-cage ripped out by a bear and also turn into a jet-pack... oh wait...

 

[hansvonaxion]

Three bucks.

Doesn't the iphone come with a calculator?

 

[Raparperi]

epp_b: While browsing the page, you didn't happen to look at the about page?

http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm

This site is purely my personal speech and opinion, and a way for me to goof around.

If you lack a good BS detector, please treat this entire site as a work of fiction.

I love a good hoax. Read The Museum of Hoaxes, or see their site. A hoax, like this site, is done as a goof simply for the heck of it by overactive minds as a practical joke.

 

[nomix]

Raparperi, we ARE talking about KEN ROCKWELL!

 

[Raparperi]

So?

 

[nomix]

Well, it's Ken Rockwell. Ken Rockwell is Ken Rockwell, or Ren Kockwell as I'd like to refer to him.

 

[Top Geek]

Raparperi, the problem is that, despite the warning, he is so adamant about many things that it's easy for the uninformed to believe his BS.

For example, if it's all a joke, why is he giving a lecture? Are people supposed to take that as fiction as well?

EDIT: Oh, great. We'll never hear the end of this one

http://1x.com/photobook/ (click on the first photo)

 

[hansvonaxion]

The images that show up are random, you'll have to link to the specific page.

Here's a thought... why the hell would I buy a 50D over a Kiss X3 (Rebel T1i?)?

I'm currently using a 20D (only DSLR I've ever owned) and want more resolution. Although I actually want a FF, I can't afford one and won't be able to for some time. I use Av, M and Tv most of the time, sometimes shoot bursts (sports) and rarely use ISO over 400.

From what I can tell, the X3 would be a step up from the 20D in all but weatherproofing, sturdiness and shutter - burst speed and (I'm guessing) longevity. It also seems to be on a par with the 50D in all but weatherproofing, sturdiness and shutter.

Seems like I get 90% of the 50D for nearly half the price. And what's the point in spending so much money protecting internals that are going to be obsolete in a few years anyway?

And the X3 can shoot HD movies to boot!

What am I missing?